[linux-elitists] OpenBSD or Debian?

Adam Sampson azz@gnu.org
Wed Sep 12 18:17:39 PDT 2001


Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> writes:

> begin Adam Sampson quotation:

Two spaces after "begin", surely? :)

> If that was the sole cause of instability, it would suggest an obvious
> remedy:  Don't use FreeBSD's implementation of ext2.  That would seem
> easy enough.  

I didn't make it sufficiently clear that these were mostly the reasons
I didn't like it _at the time_; if I recall correctly, there's been at
least one new BSD implementation of ext2fs in the meantime. "Don't use
ext2" isn't really an option if, like me, you were moving from a Linux
system and don't have the disk space sitting around to move 60 gigs of
files between filesystems.

> (And I would have thought that the SMP argument was a better one
> then the bunch you cobbled together -- not that I run multiprocessor
> machines, myself.)

Likewise. I didn't include it because it wasn't a problem for me; at
that point I had a number of non-i386 machines around, but no SMP
machines. FreeBSD-using friends tell me that its SMP support is quite
acceptable now...

Another argument in favour of Debian is that it's much easier to
automatically upgrade software. cvsup works beautifully for keeping
the core FreeBSD source up-to-date, but for anything in ports, last
time I looked, you needed to track down what needed upgrading and do
the "make install" dance yourself for each package.

> Of course, FreeBSD likewise uses at least most of the GNU toolchain --
> possibly all.  (I can't recall.)

It uses the GNU development toolchain---it ships with GCC, binutils,
gdb etc., with the notable exception of GNU make---but not the GNU
fileutils, textutils, libc etc.

-- 
Adam Sampson <azz@gnu.org>                  <URL:http://azz.us-lot.org/>



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list