Re:One evil company *can* make a better BSD... BUT
on
AOL teams up with NCI
·
· Score: 1
As a BSD zealot, I claim it would be next to impossible to find software better than BSD. I use BSD first because of sheer and overwhealming technical superiority. License is seconday.
This is not a problem. The license specifically allows for anyone to create a proprietary fork. This is one of the reasons I use FreeBSD and have contributed back code to it. It is also one of the reasons companies make more money from BSD than they do from Linux.
Reading the BSD lists, I have seen many say that it is not about a vision or freedom or even anti-Microsoft behaviour. It is simply about writing the best software possible and allowing anyone to use it however they want. And the license is targetted as such.
I admit to being very anti-Linux, but it is well founded. I have worked with it for three years and ran away screaming to more reasonable Unices.
Anyway, as for this problem, it used to be a problem with 2.0.x kernels, it would never unmount all partitions correctly for a reboot. Since then, I replaced the drives, motherboard, and controller, and it didn't help. When we upgraded the box to 2.2.4, it only happens during a CTRL-ALT-DEL reboot. It has always seemed to be pretty random which partition doesn't unmount correctly. It (now) always works correctly when using the reboot(8) or shutdown(8) commands.
The recent reinstall included reformatting all partitions.
The problem is that Linux is indeed inferior to most operating systems. Look at BSD/OS and FreeBSD. Look at OpenVMS. Look at Digital UNIX.
I rarely see a Linux uptime greater than a month whereas with the systems listed above, it is just expected.
To call Linux better than Unix is simply wrong. Linux, specifically GNU, utilities redefine bloat. There is no reason to have four different command line operations that do the same thing. I have never seen a Linux distribution that came with full source that could be rebuilt with one command, something all the BSDs support.
On my Linux 2.2.x systems, it fails to properly unmount its drives. I have replaced all the hardware, reinstalled several different versions of Linux, upgraded and downgraded kernels, my only conclusion is that Linux is simply broken. I also enjoy it when it simply quits responding to IP packets for a while. I never see BSD systems broken into. And why do so many of the Linux commands ship without documentation or manpages?
Linux does have a place though. Being as open as it is, and with many people using it, it makes for a great research system. It is also a great system for people new to Unix to work with.
It is a reference to the "Slashdot Effect". When a site is referenced on Slashdot, so many readers go to the site that it crashes or is otherwise unresponsive. Only seems to happen to servers running Linux.
You can, but it costs too much compared to the current set up. I think I heard that previous machines were donated (I have not heard about the current).
Sometimes you have to work with what you have, and usually FreeBSD can kick penguin ass if "what you have" has to do a lot.
Linux servers tend to die under that kind of load. Matthew Dillon (I think) wrote an article about how while the Linux VM implementation is simpler, it just cannot handle serious loads.
Slashdot Mirror
As a BSD zealot, I claim it would be next to impossible to find software better than BSD. I use BSD first because of sheer and overwhealming technical superiority. License is seconday.
How can a company lead you down the dark path?
This is not a problem. The license specifically allows for anyone to create a proprietary fork. This is one of the reasons I use FreeBSD and have contributed back code to it. It is also one of the reasons companies make more money from BSD than they do from Linux.
Reading the BSD lists, I have seen many say that it is not about a vision or freedom or even anti-Microsoft behaviour. It is simply about writing the best software possible and allowing anyone to use it however they want. And the license is targetted as such.
I admit to being very anti-Linux, but it is well founded. I have worked with it for three years and ran away screaming to more reasonable Unices.
Anyway, as for this problem, it used to be a problem with 2.0.x kernels, it would never unmount all partitions correctly for a reboot. Since then, I replaced the drives, motherboard, and controller, and it didn't help. When we upgraded the box to 2.2.4, it only happens during a CTRL-ALT-DEL reboot. It has always seemed to be pretty random which partition doesn't unmount correctly. It (now) always works correctly when using the reboot(8) or shutdown(8) commands.
The recent reinstall included reformatting all partitions.
The problem is that Linux is indeed inferior to
most operating systems. Look at BSD/OS and FreeBSD. Look at OpenVMS. Look at Digital UNIX.
I rarely see a Linux uptime greater than a month whereas with the systems listed above, it is just expected.
To call Linux better than Unix is simply wrong. Linux, specifically GNU, utilities redefine bloat. There is no reason to have four different command line operations that do the same thing. I have never seen a Linux distribution that came with full source that could be rebuilt with one command, something all the BSDs support.
On my Linux 2.2.x systems, it fails to properly unmount its drives. I have replaced all the hardware, reinstalled several different versions of Linux, upgraded and downgraded kernels, my only conclusion is that Linux is simply broken. I also enjoy it when it simply quits responding to IP packets for a while. I never see BSD systems broken into. And why do so many of the Linux commands ship without documentation or manpages?
Linux does have a place though. Being as open as it is, and with many people using it, it makes for a great research system. It is also a great system for people new to Unix to work with.
Duh.
Ya, I checked, this was it.
Actually, I think this is the only one where
I lied through my teeth. Let me reread my other
responses to be sure.
It is a reference to the "Slashdot Effect". When
a site is referenced on Slashdot, so many readers
go to the site that it crashes or is otherwise
unresponsive. Only seems to happen to servers
running Linux.
It is also interesting to note that you suggest
multiple Linux machines are required to match
the performance of one FreeBSD machine.
You can, but it costs too much compared to the
current set up. I think I heard that previous
machines were donated (I have not heard about
the current).
Sometimes you have to work with what you have,
and usually FreeBSD can kick penguin ass if
"what you have" has to do a lot.
Linux servers tend to die under that kind of
load. Matthew Dillon (I think) wrote an article
about how while the Linux VM implementation is
simpler, it just cannot handle serious loads.