Index
> Unix > Why Linux != Unix ?Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next |
| Author |
|
|
drhowarddrfine
Quote: BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably higher performance than Linux. But this is not across the board. In many cases, there is little or no difference in performance. In some cases, Linux may perform better than FreeBSD. |
|||
23 Jul 2007, 02:02 |
|
|
OzzY
I think Arch Linux (which I'm using right now) may be faster, because it's optimized for i686 or x86_64, while FreeBSD is 386, I think.
But I like FreeBSD philosophy better, and I'd like to try it. Sadly, I think I won't be able to configure my PPPoE internet connection. On Ubuntu I have pppoeconf and on Arch Linux, after installing the base system I have pppoe-setup. Can anyone give me information on how to configure PPPoE connection on FreeBSD? Thanks |
|||
|
23 Jul 2007, 16:51 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly
Sure that there is no AMD64 version??
|
|||
|
23 Jul 2007, 16:58 |
|
|
OzzY
Yes, there is a AMD64 version. But like in linux, lots of apps are missing for 64-bits. (Flash plugin for example)
For 32 bits PC there's only 386. |
|||
|
23 Jul 2007, 17:21 |
|
|
f0dder
OzzY wrote: I think Arch Linux (which I'm using right now) may be faster, because it's optimized for i686 or x86_64, while FreeBSD is 386, I think. For the system as a whole, those compiler flag optimizations actually don't matter that much... there you're more bound by the scheduler, the disk I/O, and architectural choices like how the X windowing system is built. _________________  - carpe noctem |
|||
|
23 Jul 2007, 19:46 |
|
|
drhowarddrfine
OzzY wrote: Yes, there is a AMD64 version. But like in linux, lots of apps are missing for 64-bits. (Flash plugin for example) |
|||
|
23 Jul 2007, 22:23 |
|
|
OzzY
Has anyone used the Debian BSD project?
http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/ 
I'm going to try all these BSDs on a VM on Virtual Box. Arch Linux already suits me fine. i don't think BSD will have lots of advantages over it for desktop. |
|||
|
23 Jul 2007, 23:51 |
|
|
rugxulo
Wikipedia wrote:
NetBSD is very portable, OpenBSD is extra secure, but FreeBSD is the most popular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_BSD_operating_systems |
|||
|
25 Jul 2007, 03:57 |
|
|
pjd
OzzY wrote: Has anyone used the Debian BSD project? there's also the gentoo BSD project. Just a little warning to anyone installing a freebsd or derivative. Try not to install the X11R6.9.0 package that comes with them. If you want to use the latest programs that require X11R7.2 It's a nightmare to upgrade. I eventually had to install a FreeBSD without any X11 (forgetting to stop it installing one library is a pain as the easiest thing then is start again) then use portsnap to update the ports tree (using csup is very slow and forgetting this bit is the worst of all because you end up spending all afternoon compiling the old X) and then install the new X. Just don't do what I did (make all the above mistakes in the brackets) It took me days to sort it. |
|||
|
25 Jul 2007, 14:11 |
|
|
drhowarddrfine
I agree with pjd but I did find a way to upgrade to 7.2 that was easy and worked if anyone needs it.
|
|||
|
25 Jul 2007, 14:56 |
|
|
pjd
drhowarddrfine wrote: I agree with pjd but I did find a way to upgrade to 7.2 that was easy and worked if anyone needs it. Thats just the problem. I needed that last month |
|||
|
25 Jul 2007, 15:12 |
|
|
OzzY
I'm thinking about installing netBSD.
For me the docs look more clear than other BSDs. Can anyone comment on netBSD? Tell me your experiences. Thanks |
|||
|
27 Jul 2007, 01:52 |
|
|
drhowarddrfine
I'm not familiar enough with NetBSD to say but I have heard the best docs are with FreeBSD. Did you see The FreeBSD Handbook? It's pretty good.
|
|||
|
27 Jul 2007, 13:15 |
|
|
xanatose
The main BSD ones:
FreeBSD = Focus on speed OpenBSD = Focus on security NetBSD = Focus on portability The 3 of them share code from time to time, so properly configured they are all secure and fast enough. On Mac OS X = Focus on money + a nice user interface. Others: PC-BSD = FreeBSD with focus on desktop instead of server. Saves a lot of time installing for desktop and I mean a lot. FreeBSIE = CD based BSD. so you can try it without need of install So depends on what do you want to use the OS for. If its for desktop, try PCBSD (Which is a preconfigure FreeBSD). If its for servers FreeBSD, NetBSD or OpenBSD wil do, but for maximun security OpenBSD. FreeBSD 6.2 comes with Xorg 6.9 as it takes a long time to upgrade it. FreeBSD 7 is better, but the NVidia driver at this time does not work, so its useless to me for desktop. |
|||
|
12 Nov 2007, 04:01 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly
Something that I realized today was that FreeBSD for AMD64 lacks of official nVidia drivers. Imagine how happy I was after installing the system and checking that despite nVidia custumers were asking for this since many years ago, nVidia developers still not released such drivers
My video card is compatible with nv open-source driver but it is not the same... I hope nVidia release at least a beta driver soon! |
|||
|
12 Nov 2007, 04:40 |
|
|
Chewy509
LocoDelAssembly wrote: Something that I realized today was that FreeBSD for AMD64 lacks of official nVidia drivers. Imagine how happy I was after installing the system and checking that despite nVidia custumers were asking for this since many years ago, nVidia developers still not released such drivers The problem actually lays with the FreeBSD guys. nVidia are more than happy to support FreeBSD on AMD64, however the kernel is missing some features that are required to get it working. eg. extensions to mmap() to allow the driver to define caching technique. That's one of the reason's why I've switched from FreeBSD to Solaris. (nVidia have drivers for Solaris SPARC, i386 and AMD64). Solaris is now free, open and is available from: http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/solaris-express/get.jsp Heaps of docs are also at: www.opensolaris.org (if you want the latest Solaris 11 betas, but these lack the developer tools, that the Sun ISO gives you). PS. http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/2006/07/bsdtalk054-interview-with-andy-ritger.html |
|||
|
12 Nov 2007, 05:56 |
|
|
drhowarddrfine
I was just reading yesterday that Solaris, while good, is lacking in several areas, but I don't recall any details. It just seems strange to me that a board maker would blame an OS for their inability to create a driver; especially when they have existing nvidia drivers now and, iirc, they say drivers will be available later. (Haven't read the interview yet)
EDIT: Had time to listen to half of it. It's interesting they said they don't even use DRI and weren't aware that certain features had been available since 5.0 (FreeBSD 7.0 is due out any day now). It just sound like they put forth any effort on this. |
|||
|
12 Nov 2007, 13:18 |
|
|
Chewy509
drhowarddrfine wrote: I was just reading yesterday that Solaris, while good, is lacking in several areas, but I don't recall any details. Yes, it is lacking in some areas (I'll be the first to admit), the biggest IMHO being package management. (I do miss the ports collection from FreeBSD ). The next would be printing (having to manually install CUPS and remove the Sun lp* binaries), but then again that can be a pain for all the Linux/*BSDs/*nix in general. But for general peripheral support, it's pretty damn good. (eg auto detected my iRiver MP3 player, Fuji DSLR camera, Logitech Webcam, and all are usable without any problems).
Quote: FreeBSD 7.0 is due out any day now Wasn't 7.0 due out in late July/August? Even though I'm using Solaris now, I'm still a HUGE fan of FreeBSD and still recommend it over Linux and Solaris for a lot of tasks. |
|||
|
13 Nov 2007, 02:42 |
|
|
drhowarddrfine
[quote="Chewy509"]
drhowarddrfine wrote:
In any case, they're just tying the bows on now. |
|||
|
13 Nov 2007, 03:48 |
|
| Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|