Re: Debian/GNU Freebsd (+binary compatablity?)
On Thu, Feb 18, 1999 at 10:26:57PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> >The explanation I have from a FreeBSD-fan guy I know is that
> >Linux switched to ELF to get better shared library support; FreeBSD had
> >just as good support on a.out, so there was no rush to switch.
>
> If I were to listen to my FreeBSD coworkers Linux is a complete and
> utter dog. The file system is slow, the virtual memory system is a joke,
> yadda, yadda, yadda. I'm not too keen on the technical opinions of FreeBSD
> fans. Just like us, they are biased.
For straight-record-setting:
ext2 is faster than ufs, but it is a little more error-prone. Still the
errors are becoming less and the speed difference is less noticable
today.
Linux memory management isn't THAT bad. It could be worse (it was worse,
it's gotten much better) and there are some lame bugs in FreeBSD's code
still too. => In both cases the bugs are being fixed as they're found,
naturally.
Yes, the average FreeBSD person will only reluctantly admit that Linux is
as good as FreeBSD. Yes the average Linux user will only reluctantly
admit that FreeBSD is as good as Linux.
No, ELF on FreeBSD didn't happen just because they wanted Linux
compatibility either. =p
--
"There are 3 things to remember about being a Starship Captain:
Keep your shirt tucked in, go down with the ship, and never,
ever abandon a member of your crew."
-- Kathryn Janeway, Star Trek: Voyager
Reply to: