Re: [TCLUG:17303] FreeBSD

["Andrew S. Zbikowski" <andyzib@ringworld.org>]

BSD != Linux, Linux != BSD. BSD is similar to UNIX, Linux is similar to BSD,
BSD is similar to Linux.

First thing to consider, Caldera OpenLinux (as well as Corel Linux) are
desined to be desktop distributions, not server distributions. RedHat does a
semi-decent job of being both. Debian does an excelent job of being a sever
operating system "out of the box" do to the extremely strict security
policies and stale but rock solid distributions. As far as the future goes,
I think all servers I set up will be of Debian's Stable distribution (or
frozen.) with distribution corss compiled (ie, compiling woody (v2.3) source
under potato(v2.2)) packages if the newer version has something I absoutely
have to have.

As a desktop Linux goes, Corel, OpenLinux, RetHat, and Turbo should be ok in
an office type setting.

If your looking to run applications and services that are developed under
and for Linux specifically, you probally won't be pleased with a BSD system
as it would suffer the same flaws as Slink (Debian 2.1) Stale software.
Check the development cycles for the critical software under BSD and compare
to Linux before you completely decide on BSD.

You'll encounter some "strangness" when you go to BSD, as in things under
/dev won't be familar to you (ethX is something completely different under
BSD.) Also your hard drive assignment will be quite different.

Example: Under linux, /dev/sda has a scsi ID of 5, under BSD it would be
/deb/sde, even if it is your primiary hard drive (I at least think I'm
right, I'm not that familiar with BSD so PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong
here.) But I'm rather sure that devices are given their sdX by their scsi ID
instead of by primiary and seconday hard drives.

I'm also farily certen the BSD requires you to boot from a primiary
partition even if you're doing fun lilo tricks. Linux is pretty happy to
boot from and drive, and wilt a few lilo tricks (or bios tricks) you can
boot Windows from your slave drive. BSD is pricky about that.

Also know BSD is NOT derived from Linux in any way. BSD is Berkly's
implementation of UNIX, and the current BSD distributions (FreeBSD, OpenBSD,
I think there are at least to more xxxBSDs...) are in some way based on
Berkly's BSD, hence the BSD in the name.

Anyway, the information I've typed out is only slightly more than you know
about BSD. I know just slightly more than you're next to nothing about BSD
and the history of, and I'm completely willing to admit that and learn from
those who have actually used BSD.

Pleas, those wilt more knowelge than me, politely correct my mistakes and
teache me more. Teache me the benifits of BSD over Linux, xontinue teaching
me the benifits on Linux over BSD. Continue teaching me the benifites of and
OS over another OS over any other. Continue teaching me the benifits of any
of (even a MS OS), but please, please, please, don't flame me and turn me
off from your OS of choice as so many try to do. Be open about what your OS
of choice does well as wll as be open about what it doesn't do so well. Give
me the pros, but don't leave me to discover the cons on my own.

We're all here to learn and share what we have learned, so unless I'm
completely missing the ideals behaind an open discussin UG (even if it is
supposed to be a Linux specific users group.) don't flame me. I don't see
any harm in discussing the merits of any other operating system over Linux.

I'm now very tired and in no shape to continue this debate (with myself) any
further.

Happy trails, Andy.