Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[arief_mulya]

Dear all,


I Apologize, If this thread has existed before, and so if
this is very offtopic and tiredsome for most of you here.

I'm a newbie, and just about to get my feet wet into the
kernel-code, been using (GNU/)Linux (or whatever the name
is, I personally don't really care, I caremost at the
technical excellence) for the last two years, I personally
think it's a toupper(great); system.

But after recently reviewing some BSD based systems, I began
to wonder. And these are my questions (I'm trying to avoid 
flame and being a troll here, so if there's any of my 
questions is not on technical basis, or are being such a 
jerk troll please just trash filter my name and email address):

1. In what technical area of the kernel are Linux and *BSD 
differ?
2. How does it differ? What are the technical reasoning 
behind the decisions?

3. Is there any group of developer from each project that 
review each other changes, and tries to make the best code 
out, or is the issues very system specific (something that 
work best on Linux might not be so on FreeBSD or NetBSD or 
OpenBSD)?

4. Any chance of merging the very best part of each kernel?
5. Or is it possible to do so?


Anything else that matters, are welcome.

Please answer technically, I don't wanna be a troll here, 
and I hope so do everyone that answers this. I really like 
to learn, not to read some flame of who's the best.

To freebsd and openbsd list, please CC the answer to me 
directly, as I don't get response from the majordomo of my 
subscription requests, yet.


Best Regards,

arief_mulya
-- 

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Theo de Raadt]

Dear Arief,


I Apologize, If this thread has existed before, and so if
this is very offtopic and tiredsome for most of you here.

I'm a newbie, and just about to get my feet wet into the
world, been living in (ASIA/)Indonesia (or whatever the name
is, I personally don't really care, I caremost at the
nationalist excellence) for the last two years, I personally
think it's a toupper(great); country.

But after recently reviewing some Malaysian based systems, I began
to wonder. And these are my questions (I'm trying to avoid 
flame and being a troll here, so if there's any of my 
questions is not on technical basis, or are being such a 
jerk troll please just trash filter my name and email address):

1. In what technical area of the countries are Indonesia and Malayasian 
differ?
2. How are they different countries? What are the technical reasoning 
behind the decisions?

3. Is there any group of ruler from each country that 
review each other policies, and tries to make the best civil life 
out, or is the issues very country specific (something that 
work best in Indonesia might not be so on Malaysia or Phillipines or 
Singapore)?

4. Any chance of merging the very best part of each country?
5. Or is it possible to do so?


Anything else that matters, are welcome.

Please answer technically, I don't wanna be a troll here, 
and I hope so do everyone that answers this. I really like 
to learn, not to read some flame of who's the best.

To freebsd and openbsd list, please CC the answer to me 
directly, as I don't get response from the majordomo of my 
subscription requests, yet.


Best Regards,

arief_mulya
-- 

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Greg Black]

arief_mulya wrote:

| I Apologize, If this thread has existed before, and so if
| this is very offtopic and tiredsome for most of you here.

Have you considered Windows?

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Bill Studenmund]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, arief_mulya wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
> I Apologize, If this thread has existed before, and so if
> this is very offtopic and tiredsome for most of you here.
>
> I'm a newbie, and just about to get my feet wet into the
> kernel-code, been using (GNU/)Linux (or whatever the name
> is, I personally don't really care, I caremost at the
> technical excellence) for the last two years, I personally
> think it's a toupper(great); system.
>
> But after recently reviewing some BSD based systems, I began
> to wonder. And these are my questions (I'm trying to avoid
> flame and being a troll here, so if there's any of my
> questions is not on technical basis, or are being such a
> jerk troll please just trash filter my name and email address):

Evidently others opted to not pursue that option.

> 1. In what technical area of the kernel are Linux and *BSD
> differ?
> 2. How does it differ? What are the technical reasoning
> behind the decisions?

They differ in most technical areas. Mainly as the *BSD kernels were
derived from 4.4-Lite, and Linux was derived, I believe, from Minux. The
difference grew since they were developed by differing groups of people.

Within the BSDs, the main focus of each one is different. To put it in
terms of sound bites, FreeBSD wants to make kick-ass servers, NetBSD wants
to support lots & lots of hardware, and OpenBSD is concerned all about
security. That doesn't mean that the others ignore those areas; all three
are interested in security, and being servers, and they all run on more
than just one platform.

There also is a lot of polination between BSDs. Things will show up in one
and then get ported to another.

> 3. Is there any group of developer from each project that
> review each other changes, and tries to make the best code
> out, or is the issues very system specific (something that
> work best on Linux might not be so on FreeBSD or NetBSD or
> OpenBSD)?

Sometimes changes will apply to all, and a comparable fix will happen to
each. This usually shows up in dealing with security advisories, but
happens in other places too. For the most part though, what the BSDs need
is different from what Linux needs, or at least the expertise doesn't
overlap.

> 4. Any chance of merging the very best part of each kernel?
> 5. Or is it possible to do so?

No, I don't forsee merging. der Mouse pointed out the GPL issue, which is
one where I think the BSD and Linux folks will just agree to disagree.

Take care,

Bill

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Mike Bristow]

[ Reply-To set to me:  This is probably off topic for all of the lists:
  all of the ones I read, anyway. ]

On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 10:03:53AM -0800, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > 2. How does it differ? What are the technical reasoning
> > behind the decisions?
> 
> They differ in most technical areas. Mainly as the *BSD kernels were
> derived from 4.4-Lite, and Linux was derived, I believe, from Minux. 

Point of order:  Linux was a cleanroom implementation, using IIRC Minux
as the host OS until such time as it became self-hosting. 

-- 
You can't do maths without e
	-- David Walters

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On 2003-01-24 22:56, Mike Bristow <mike@urgle.com> wrote:
> [ Reply-To set to me:  This is probably off topic for all of the lists:
>   all of the ones I read, anyway. ]
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 10:03:53AM -0800, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > > 2. How does it differ? What are the technical reasoning
> > > behind the decisions?
> >
> > They differ in most technical areas. Mainly as the *BSD kernels were
> > derived from 4.4-Lite, and Linux was derived, I believe, from Minux. 
>
> Point of order:  Linux was a cleanroom implementation, using IIRC Minux
> as the host OS until such time as it became self-hosting.

It was "Minix", not Minux.  And Linux started as a clean room
implementation that was free from any Minix code, to avoid problems
with the license of Minix.  See the thread where Linus Torvalds
announced the creation of Linux in comp.os.minix below (if the URL
wraps, cut n' paste it to one line before checking it out):

http://groups.google.com/groups?amp;th=d161e94858c4c0b9&amp;rnum=6

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Josef El-Rayes]

Dear Arief,

as you can see your questions are not very welcome on the mailinglists, therefore i advice you to have a look at this book if you are interested in BSD's technical background

Title: The Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System

Authors: McKusick, Bostic, Karels and Quarterman
Publisher: Addison-Wesley

4.4BSD is what NetBSD, OpenBSD and FreeBSD are basing on.

For Linux i cant help you.

Take this approach to read about technicals issues yourself, by finding the differences yourself you learn much more than being told.

greets, josef 

Re: Technical Differences of *BSD and Linux

[Rik van Riel]

[follow-ups to kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org, please]

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Josef El-Rayes wrote:

> as you can see your questions are not very welcome on the mailinglists,
> therefore i advice you to have a look at this book if you are interested
> in BSD's technical background

There is one mailing list where this kind of discussion probably
would be welcome, the kernelnewbies mailing list. Personally I'd
really like more things related to BSD, Hurd and other freely
available systems on the kernelnewbies mailing list, irc channel,
etc.  I might have founded #kernelnewbies to help people with Linux
questions, but it was never my intention to limit it to Linux
kernel stuff only.

> Title: The Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System
>
> Authors: McKusick, Bostic, Karels and Quarterman
> Publisher: Addison-Wesley
>
> 4.4BSD is what NetBSD, OpenBSD and FreeBSD are basing on.
>
> For Linux i cant help you.

I can recommend Understanding the Linux Kernel, 2nd edition.

Other people have recommended various other kernel related
books, you can find a small list on:

	http://kernelnewbies.org/books.php3

cheers,

Rik
-- 
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/		http://guru.conectiva.com/
Current spamtrap:  <a href=mailto:"october@surriel.com">october@surriel.com</a>