🚀 go-pugleaf

gavin@acci.COM.AU (Gavin Cameron) writes:

>cas@taz.net.au (Craig Sanders) writes:

>>To summarize: linux is stable.  

> > In my experience, linux is more stable than any commercial unix, and
> > more stable than freebsd (haven't had heaps of freebsd experience -
> > just starting to work with it seriously over the last few weeks -
> > enough to think that its so-called 'greater stability' is a crock of
> > shit)

> Care to elaborate on which version of FreeBSD you were comparing with,
> if you are running -current then you can expect problems as you're on
> the bleeding edge. -stable is quite stable and hasn't crashed on me yet.

-stable is the version i've been using.

FreeBSD 2.1-STABLE (CYRANGER) #0: Sun May 26 20:06:45 EST 1996


as far as i am concerned, bsd is OK....not great, just OK.

i don't think it's as stable as linux, it's certainly not as dynamic
(in terms of evolution of features), and while bsd *did* have better
networking code than linux 2 years ago, that hasn't been true for a long
while...it's a bit ridiculous of bsd fans to keep on coming out with
that line.

bsd also has a few annoying problems (in particular comms processes -
kermit mostly - seem to have a habit of getting stuck in kernel calls,
and are impossible to kill without rebooting).  It also seems less
stable under a heavy load - and sluggish.

On the whole, however, my main objections to bsd are more aesthetic
than technical:  I *like* sysV. i don't particularly like the bsd way
of doing things (file system layout, /etc/ttys, and other stuff).  I
also really like the linux file system standard - there's been a lot of
thought put into fs layout, and it "feels" right to me.

Some of my dislike for the "bsd way" (as i call it) is undoubtedly
discomfort at having to do things in annoyingly different ways.  In a few
weeks i'll probably be just as comfortable on bsd as i am on linux.

for the most part, it comes down to personal preference.



> Comparing Linux 2.0.0 to FreeBSD 2.0.5 and maybe even 2.1.0-release
> isn't fair as quite a lot has changed since their initial release.

would you consider comparing it to -stable fair?  that's what i'm using,
so i guess that's what i was comparing it to.



> I've run FreeBSD 2.0.5, 2.1.0-release and 2.1.0-stable, linux kernel
> 1.2.13 and 1.3.35->1.3.39, as well as solaris and netbsd. So I am
> quite capable of making informed comments here.

> I'll summarise: It comes down to what you are happiest using, 

agreed.

> but if you are looking for stability you can't go past one of the
> BSDs.

if you can't get a good distribution of linux, then *bsd is a good choice.
otherwise, linux has the edge.

Craig