Linux vs. BSD = No real difference?

Have some non-FreeBSD related questions, or want just to chit-chat about anything that is not related to FreeBSD? This is the forum for you.

Linux vs. BSD = No real difference?

Postby fiftyone » 02 Sep 2009, 19:56

I hear a lot of people talking about Linux vs BSD but having been using BSD exclusively for a while now I can't honestly say that I have seen a WHOLE lot of difference compared to the various Linux distros.

99% of all the commands are the same, the interface is nothing shocking that a Linux user would run away from...

It would seem to me that any Linux user should be able to jump into BSD feet first and start running. (& vise-versa)
Other than the ports system and Linux method of spitting out a million & 6 distros I don't see whats so different about BSD that would scare people away from it? Am I missing something?
fiftyone
Junior Member
 
Posts: 15
Joined: 29 Aug 2009, 22:30

Postby vivek » 02 Sep 2009, 20:01

Key differences:
  1. FreeBSD full os. Linux is kernel. Linux distribution is os (100+ majro disrtos).
  2. FreeBSD everything comes form a single source. Linux is like mix of lot of stuff.
  3. BSD License vs GPL
  4. FreeBSD Installer
  5. BSD commands (ls file -l will not work) vs GPL command (ls file -l will work)
  6. FreeBSD better and updated man pages.
  7. BSD rc.d style booting vs Linux SysV style init.d booting


However, most commands act and work like any other UNIX variant. Keep in mind FreeBSD is not Linux.
Neither in this world nor elsewhere is there any happiness in store for him who always doubts. If you enjoyed my answer please consider donating some money to FreeBSD foundation @ http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/
User avatar
vivek
Member
 
Posts: 809
Joined: 17 Nov 2008, 08:19
Location: Hyper Space

Postby Carpetsmoker » 02 Sep 2009, 20:16

I assume that with ``BSD`` you mean ``FreeBSD``? As there is also OpenBSD, NetBSD, and DragonFlyBSD (And a wealth of historic BSD's).

I guess FreeBSD and Linux are kind of the same. Just as Windows NT4 and Windows XP are also kind of the same.
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
User avatar
Carpetsmoker
Member
 
Posts: 904
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 19:07
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands

Postby fiftyone » 02 Sep 2009, 20:21

vivek wrote:Key differences:

    I ment like REAL major differences that maybe I didn't come across yet. like Windows is REALLY different than MacOSX and their differences are very obvious.

  1. FreeBSD full os. Linux is kernel. Linux distribution is os (100+ majro disrtos).

    >> This is true, but honestly when I think of Ubuntu, for example I don't think "Hey this is the the linux Kernel wrapped in gnome and a whole bunch of GPL software" I think, "This is Linux"
    I guess this is the problem that the GUN guys have with the whole GNU/Linux thing...

  2. FreeBSD everything comes form a single source. Linux is like mix of lot of stuff.

    >> I understand, but this is only something that geeks would know. if Gramma learned Liunx I am pretty sure she could survive on a BSD machine.
  3. BSD License vs GPL

    >> BSD licence FTW!
  4. FreeBSD Installer

    >> both = loads of flying text...
  5. BSD commands (ls file -l will not work) vs GPL command (ls file -l will work)

    >> ok, but this is hardly a major difference.
  6. FreeBSD better and updated man pages.

    >> I agree, but I still think most of the man pages were written by Republicans.
  7. BSD rc.d style booting vs Linux SysV style init.d booting

However, most commands act and work like any other UNIX variant. Keep in mind FreeBSD is not Linux.


>>I know and I prefer BSD, I really like the "Weather" BSD brings with it, that might not make any sence but in Arabic it sounds good :D I guess I kinda missed the point of my own question. I guess what I was getting at is that the Os's are SO very similar it is strange that there is any seperation at all.
fiftyone
Junior Member
 
Posts: 15
Joined: 29 Aug 2009, 22:30

Postby CodeBlock » 02 Sep 2009, 20:37

No, they aren't that similar, mainly for the reasons vivek pointed out plus some other things (the bsd community is better than any linux community I've seen... ports, in my opinion, are better than any package manager, etc)..

Might want to read http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/bsd4linux1.php which summarizes the differences of both OS's.. Really though - they are quite different in quite a few areas. BSD (as far as I know) has a better security standpoint (especially OpenBSD), etc.

I have nothing against Linux, but I very much prefer BSD now that I've been using it for a few months.
Proud FreeBSD 8-RELEASE user.

CodeBlock on irc.freenode.net and irc.eighthbit.net.
User avatar
CodeBlock
Member
 
Posts: 218
Joined: 12 Jul 2009, 18:22
Location: United States

Postby roddierod » 02 Sep 2009, 20:58

One of the biggest differences is the file system layout. When I've tried Linuxes over they last few years and dropped to the command line, I can't find anything!

I used Debian 12 or 13 years ago for 10 months or so until I found FreeBSD the switch to FreeBSD was much easier than trying to go back because the Linux file system are just a mess. Look up old post by Vermaden on this topic, he pretty much sums it all up.
User avatar
roddierod
Member
 
Posts: 697
Joined: 17 Nov 2008, 12:36
Location: On my Slingerlands!

Postby fonz » 02 Sep 2009, 21:13

roddierod wrote:When I've tried Linuxes over they last few years and dropped to the command line, I can't find anything!


Second that. Even when I was using Slackware (which is one of the Linux distros closest to BSD-style UNIX) about a year ago, it was still a lot of "where's that file" or "what file is that in" type of searching.

@OP: There's SysV-style UNIX and there's BSD-style UNIX. From a casual (non-admin) user's point of view it's all pretty much the same but under the hood there are differences.

Alphons

Edit: It's like comparing Ferraris and Porsches. Different styling, handling and brand image but they're both high-performance sports cars (whereas Windows is a moped by comparison) :)
ΔS>0 ⇒ Entropy is here to stay.

"Lawyer" is just "liar" pronounced in a regional accent.
User avatar
fonz
Giant Locked
 
Posts: 2236
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 16:32
Location: in dreamland, swooning over a woman I can't have

Postby ckester » 02 Sep 2009, 22:54

fonz wrote:It's like comparing Ferraris and Porsches. Different styling, handling and brand image but they're both high-performance sports cars (whereas Windows is a moped by comparison) :)


I've always thought Neal Stephenson got this analogy right when he compared Windows to an old Soviet-style sedan: big, clunky, prone to breakdowns, and you're lucky if you can get the radio to work (not to mention the heater).

Of course, his idea of a sleek, sports car OS was a Mac. So he wasn't totally enlightened. :)
User avatar
ckester
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: 30 Nov 2008, 01:18
Location: near Seattle, WA (USA)

Postby DutchDaemon » 02 Sep 2009, 23:18

In both cases, the hood is welded shut ..
User avatar
DutchDaemon
Old Fart
 
Posts: 10463
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 20:17
Location: The Netherlands

Postby sand_man » 03 Sep 2009, 00:06

Not all Linuxes use SysV init.
I come from Arch which uses the BSD style rc.d

Also, I am very new to FreeBSD and I have trouble finding things in the filesystem. Not to say that it's a mess, I'm just not used to it. In Arch, I just know where everything is. The problem is that each distro organises their hierarchy differently.
sand_man
Junior Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 21 Aug 2009, 02:22

Postby anomie » 03 Sep 2009, 00:48

CodeBlock wrote:the bsd community is better than any linux community I've seen...


Apart from the more obvious points -- license, development model, philosophy and implementation -- the end-user community is by far the biggest difference that I've observed between FreeBSD and GNU/Linux communities. (Not quite fair, since all distros are being lumped together, but hear me out.)

Take this forum, for instance... and a couple FreeBSD forums I belonged to that preceded it. Compare them with some of the more prominent GNU/Linux forums. The signal-to-noise ratio here is much better. I frequently see intelligent questions and technically correct answers here. On certain other (non-FreeBSD) forums, I see a lot of intelligent discussion too, but it's often drowned out by 3,000 questions a day of the calibre:
  • "how to install firefox?"
  • "how to increase logical volume?"
  • "my log has entries like sshd: invalid user andre. what do i do?"


You get the idea. This place (and this community) is definitely a thing to appreciate.
"Do Not Engage in Useless Activity" --Miyamoto Musashi
User avatar
anomie
Member
 
Posts: 783
Joined: 17 Nov 2008, 04:37
Location: Texas

Postby jb_fvwm2 » 03 Sep 2009, 00:59

Code: Select all
!ncftp...audio[tab] [get port[tab]] {logoff}
pkg_create -b /var/db/pkg/audio_port && pkg_delete -f /var/db/pkg/audio_port && pkg_add audio_port.tbz && yell
..................

Does linux do those one-liners after package "get", say if a
port wont build?
jb_fvwm2
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1502
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 19:19

Postby phospher » 03 Sep 2009, 04:11

anomie wrote:You get the idea. This place (and this community) is definitely a thing to appreciate.



i'll second that.
phospher
Junior Member
 
Posts: 75
Joined: 14 May 2009, 13:28
Location: Milwaukee, Wi

Postby graudeejs » 03 Sep 2009, 04:11

he he he We got ZFS, linux don't
mua ha ha ha
User avatar
graudeejs
Style(9) Addict
 
Posts: 4591
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 23:23
Location: Riga, Latvia

Postby Eponasoft » 03 Sep 2009, 04:21

FreeBSD is largely POSIX-compliant...Linux distros aren't. That alone can create massive headaches when doing ports, especially things deemed "cross-platform" but are really just entrenched in "Linuxisms". On the surface, Linux and FreeBSD appear similar, and a casual user is unlikely to ever notice the difference. But the two are VERY different "under the hood".
OS fanaticism is for the cranially disadvantaged. I use FreeBSD because I like FreeBSD, not because I dislike Linux or Windows... although the latter is still true...
User avatar
Eponasoft
Member
 
Posts: 218
Joined: 23 Nov 2008, 07:16

Postby Alt » 03 Sep 2009, 04:55

fiftyone: I think i know FreeBSD well (especially network part). When i searched for job as network sysadmin, i put into my resume word that says i know Linux too=) I thought its same but when i get a job and look Slackware Linux... Now i tell everyone i dont know Linux)))
So, if we talk about userland, they are completely different in firewalling(i talk about firewall manipulating and philosophy). There is major differences in network stats commands such as netstat/systat/sockstat etc. Modern linux users set up network using `ip` tool, bsd users make ifconfig.. There is many caveats, so dot just say 'i know linux' or 'i know freebsd' when you know other one =)
User avatar
Alt
Member
 
Posts: 726
Joined: 18 Nov 2008, 12:22
Location: Mother Russia

Postby SirDice » 03 Sep 2009, 07:32

Carpetsmoker wrote:I guess FreeBSD and Linux are kind of the same. Just as Windows NT4 and Windows XP are also kind of the same.


From a user standpoint the different versions of Windows (NT, 2000, XP etc) have bigger differences than the different 'styles' of unix (solaris, bsd, linux etc) :e
Senior UNIX Engineer at Unix Support Nederland
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.
User avatar
SirDice
Old Fart
 
Posts: 16161
Joined: 17 Nov 2008, 16:50
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands

Postby Henu » 03 Sep 2009, 08:17

As a Linux user who has done work with FreeBSD for two months now, I've found one of the most confusing thing the three "package managers."

I can install software using distribution sets from sysinstall, I can use pkg_add and I can use Ports but I'm still not sure which is the best alternative or are some of them the same thing.

Overall, I think FreeBSD is pretty nice. In my opinion fonz had the best point, especially the Windows part of it :D
Henu
Junior Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: 30 Jun 2009, 11:42
Location: Tampere, Finland

Postby ephemera » 03 Sep 2009, 08:41

I use Linux as my primary desktop OS (due to non-availability of some apps.). If you are running a desktop env. there is practically no difference b/w Linux & BSD. Most of the apps. are available for both Linux and BSD and they look & work the same way.

But every time I open a terminal window I am painfully aware of the Linux presence. You can't escape the feeling that Linux is a hackers job. No matter how good Linux gets in performance and scalability or some other metric, IMO it will still kinda suck.

One thing I really like about fbsd is the dev. team - very professional & pragmatic minus the usual OSS BS and it shows in their work. :)
User avatar
ephemera
Junior Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 19:50
Location: 28N 77E

Postby aragon » 03 Sep 2009, 14:21

ephemera wrote:I use Linux as my primary desktop OS (due to non-availability of some apps.).

Out of interest, which apps?
aragon
Giant Locked
 
Posts: 2031
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 17:04
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Postby ephemera » 03 Sep 2009, 14:55

aragon wrote:Out of interest, which apps?

The most important one for me is Vmware for running Windows XP.
User avatar
ephemera
Junior Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 19:50
Location: 28N 77E

Postby vermaden » 03 Sep 2009, 16:12

fiftyone wrote:Linux vs. BSD = No real difference?


No difference?

Then start using BSD, you will notice the differences after some time ...
Religions, worst damnation of mankind.
"FreeBSD has always been the operating system that GNU/Linux should have been." Frank Pohlmann, IBM
[FILE][color="DarkSlateBlue"]http://vermaden.blogspot.com[/color][/FILE]
User avatar
vermaden
Giant Locked
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 19:37
Location: pl_PL.lodz

Postby Beastie » 03 Sep 2009, 16:22

ephemera, why don't you just dual-boot? Is Vmware's emulation performance as good as running Windows "natively"?
May the source be with you!
Beastie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 11:27
Location: /dev/earth0

Postby fonz » 03 Sep 2009, 17:29

ephemera wrote:The most important one for me is Vmware for running Windows XP.

Yeah, it's a pity that FreeBSD isn't available as a host OS. But rumour has it that this is in the works, so who knows...

Alphons

P.S. Would it help if we ask for a native FreeBSD version of Maple? I'm currently running Maple 12 through Linux emulation but it's kinda sluggish.
ΔS>0 ⇒ Entropy is here to stay.

"Lawyer" is just "liar" pronounced in a regional accent.
User avatar
fonz
Giant Locked
 
Posts: 2236
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 16:32
Location: in dreamland, swooning over a woman I can't have

Postby ephemera » 03 Sep 2009, 17:31

Beastie wrote:ephemera, why don't you just dual-boot? Is Vmware's emulation performance as good as running Windows "natively"?
I do have to reboot for playing games :) But for everything else Vmware is perfect for me. I have been dual booting since the time i started using fbsd (4.8 i think) but for me rebooting is not a practical option anymore. Besides, it's not just Windows i also have Solaris installed to try out some things from time to time.
If Vmware made a fbsd version that would be just fanstastic but i can only wish. I heard VirtualBox is being ported to fbsd, we will have to wait and see how that turns out.
User avatar
ephemera
Junior Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 19:50
Location: 28N 77E

Next

Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests