Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Any BSD users about?


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 bisquit maker

bisquit maker

  • Banned
  • 43 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:54 AM

Posted 04 November 2009 - 07:35 PM

I'd like to have a friendly and informative comparative discussion on BSD and Linux if anyone is willing to join.
The purpose is to increase knowledge and general chit chat.

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 DaffyKantReed

DaffyKantReed

  • Members
  • 190 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Vancouver, BC
  • Local time:01:54 AM

Posted 06 November 2009 - 12:20 PM

I'd like to have a friendly and informative comparative discussion on BSD and Linux if anyone is willing to join.
The purpose is to increase knowledge and general chit chat.



I use Ubuntu, Debian, FreeBSD 7.x, and Windows on several different pieces of hardware.

IMO, Linux installers are more user friendly than those of *BSD. That is not to say sysinstall is hard to use. Support for new hardware can be touch and go with Linux/*BSD. BSDs can use Linux binaries, where the reverse is not true.

#3 bisquit maker

bisquit maker
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 43 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:54 AM

Posted 06 November 2009 - 06:34 PM

By design, the BSD releases are more stable being that the kernel and userland are as a single unit. Linux has the advantage being more user friendly and configurable.
I've used Fedora, Suse, Debian, Redhat, Vector Linux and Knoppix as Desktops.
Sysinstall does take some getting used to.
Years back, there was a program to use BSD binaries on redhat. It went though.

#4 skyking1

skyking1

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:54 AM

Posted 10 November 2009 - 10:42 PM

I started out with freebsd2.x, and I've installed up to 6.x
The last few years I have been installing debian almost exclusively, but I still remember running mergemaster and make && make install && make clean, and a host of other freebsd-isms.
I still look in the wrong directory from time to time for certain things. :thumbsup:

#5 bisquit maker

bisquit maker
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 43 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:54 AM

Posted 11 November 2009 - 12:35 AM

i run Debian also on this machine.
You should try using FreeBSD again. It's improved.

#6 skyking1

skyking1

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:54 AM

Posted 11 November 2009 - 09:11 AM

i run Debian also on this machine.
You should try using FreeBSD again. It's improved.

I build servers for small office environments, so I tend to stick with the (now)familiar debian for simplicity <read that as laziness>.
I might give it a go again after studying software raid and journaling filesystems on freebsd.

#7 bisquit maker

bisquit maker
  • Topic Starter

  • Banned
  • 43 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:54 AM

Posted 11 November 2009 - 08:55 PM

Debian deserves a little credit: It can run stable on more than one kernel.
You can run a desktop with it using just 64M.
And it will run on almost anything.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users