Re: Re: Debian BSD.. cool idea
On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
# Anyways, given this supposedly wonderful support for linux binaries,
It _is_ wonderful! Have you ever tried it?
# perhaps it could be built into something stable enough to support multiple
# bsd kernel versions?
I'm not sure what you mean here. The Linux binary compatibility
code works on all 3.x and 4.x versions of FreeBSD. It might even
work on earlier versions, but I haven't tried. The compatibility
is really tied to the consistency of the Linux internals that it
emulates. Since Linux changes so rapidly, FreeBSD has no more problems
than */Linux/* itself in its binary compatibility mode. FreeBSD doesn't
version its kernels because FreeBSD is a Un*x OS and not just a
kernel. This is no different than Debian 2.1 containing a 2.2.x
Linux kernel. Your really are comparing apples and oranges here.
# Or is that as realistic as expecting FreeBSD to be portable across
# multiple cpu architectures? [Did I mention I'm mystified that BSD folks
FreeBSD (and *BSD) is portable across multiple architectures! I use
FreeBSD on both x86 and AXP machines right now. There is a port for
m68k and I'm working on an UltraSparc port as I type this. Before
BSD became FreeBSD and NetBSD (and OpenBSD after the Theo blowup) it
ran on a number of architectures. The four distributions of BSD
doesn't even begin to add up to the 100+ different distributions of
*/Linux/*. The only reason FreeBSD doesn't have as many ports is
because of demand and the goals of the project. It is more concerned
about serving the majority of the planet with an OS that is the fastest
and most stable one it can provide. That it runs on your toaster or
microwave is something FreeBSD has left up to NetBSD (and Linux to a
lesser extent).
# criticize the design of the Linux kernel when NetBSD isn't as fast as
# Linux and FreeBSD isn't as portable?]
Please qualify your remarks since you seem intent on slinging FUD.
NetBSD is intended to work on every architecture. NetBSD is
concerned with portability first and speed later. FreeBSD is pre-
dominantly tuned to run on the Intel architecture, though recent
ports to other archs have proven to be just as stable and fast. It
doesn't matter to me if FreeBSD runs on my grandfathers stopwatch.
What matters to me is that it is fast, secure, and stable on the
architecture that better than 3/4 of the world runs on - Intel.
The comments you see about the design of the Linux kernel from the
BSD community are undoubtedly not because of its speed or
portability. Rather it is because the BSD kernel is ~30 years in
the making and Linux has about 9. The BSD kernel was and contiues
to be the basis for a number of commercial (including realtime) OSs.
Linux is seeing more and more uses, but please don't discredit the
decades of hard work that went into designing what is the BSD kernel.
You are definitely entitled to your opinion, but please don't do it
with baseless comments like this. Provide facts and real numbers
and we'll all believe you. Otherwise you are just spitting in the
wind.
-steve
Reply to: