[ale] BSD(s) vs Linux

Sun Jun 1 11:02:59 EDT 2003

This is part of the problem.  It's not just Linux versus BSD.  It's the
Linux Kernel with GNU+ apps versus the BSD Kernel with GNU+ apps.

BSD and Linux both run alot of the same utilities once they're ported
from one to the other and vice versa.

The 3 different BSD kernels are very different amongst themselves
offering very different levels of security and portability.

The different distributions of Linux all run pretty much the same kernel
source but compiled and distributed very differently and controlled very
differently.  Redhat is a great Linux Desktop but is known to have
issues with security.  Mandrake is a derivative (or used to be) of
RedHat and is an even better desktop but with similar issues of
prefering Pretty over Stable.  Debian and Suse can both be very good
desktops but are made to be good servers.  Debian makes a very good,
very stable server platform that can easily add the desktop
functionality.

You can't really pick BSD versus Linux.  It's mostly become more of a:
  NetBSD vs OpenBSD
  OpenBSD vs Debian
  Debian vs RedHat
  RedHat vs NetBSd

 or such...

Robert

Thus spake Greg (runman at speedfactory.net):

> I would say you are correct.  I see Linux as several things:
> 	* most user friendly user desktop for home users
> 	* can also do server or "special one purpose box" functions, but with 2
> caveats:
> 		+ not as good as OpenBSD in security
> 		+ not as good as NetBSD in networking or in ability to install on many
> systems
> 	* best chances to challenge MS in desktop wars
> 
> 	The BSD's are more focused and less commercial, so they don't go off trying
> to get USB or scanners to work.  This is good if you are a sysadmin, but not
> so much if you want USB or have a scanner.  Having said all of this, it is
> irrelevant whenever you factor in the user skill level.  Several folks have
> used OpenBSD /KDE /whatever desktop to make desktop systems for their
> parents & etc... and I know that a stripped down and properly secured Linux
> box is better than an OpenBSD box without the latest security updates.
> 
> 	Personally, I tend to use Linux for desktops and internal network servers
> and OpenBSD for my one of my firewalls and all public servers.  OpenBSD has
> code audited versions of Apache (in a chroot), Sendmail, and BIND that have
> all been re-written from their buggy/insecure popular versions, though I
> have been running qmail on my mail server.  If I had to run a critical 24/7
> super-secure system and didn't need the latest and greatest stuff, I would
> choose OpenBSD - and nothing is stopping you from using the most current
> version of Apache or whatever - it just depends on your requirements.
> 
> 	I think that one needs to see what you are most comfortable and competent
> with and use that.  I have never seen one system that does it all perfectly,
> though I think that Linux (Suse specifically) comes the closest, but like I
> said, it depends on the user.
> 
> 	Greg
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ale-admin at ale.org [mailto:ale-admin at ale.org]On Behalf Of Jeff
> > Hubbs
> > Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 9:25 PM
> > To: ale at ale.org
> > Subject: Re: [ale] BSD(s) vs Linux
> >
> >
> > My take, for what it's worth...
> >
> > The BSDs differ from Linux the most starkly in their developmental and
> > maintenance models.  The BSDs seem to be mostly team efforts with
> > outside contributions to produce a single distribution, whereas Linux
> > comes together in a more complex way and comes to you in the form of a
> > number of different distributions with the caveat that the process of
> > creating a distribution is itself open (i.e. I can decide I'm going to
> > package and put out "Jeff Hubbs Linux" {God help us all}).
> >
> > Linux development tends to go like Ouija board players' fingers guiding
> > the heart-shaped thingie around the board, expect there are a lot of
> > hands.  It tends to follow where the people who contribute to it want it
> > to go.  There is a lot of desire for gaming and audio and video and
> > filesystems, etc, etc. and this support comes into existence as a
> > result.
> >
> > On the other hand, the BSDs are focused on minutiae like disk I/O, SMP
> > improvements, networking, memory usage.  They want to make the best
> > *computer* they can out of the available hardware.  They are not focused
> > on USB scanners, audio streaming, etc.
> >
> > Having said this, if your goal in life is to create boxes that do
> > principally one thing very, very well, like file or database serving or
> > a network firewall, then there is a lot to be said for using one or the
> > other of the BSDs.  Now, there is no reason that one can't pursue the
> > same kind of path forward under Linux; you can, and I know I will be.
> > In fact, there is a lot to be said for having the ability to yank down
> > some development Linux kernel version with a modification that might
> > help your particular application out and beat on it, but, on the other
> > hand, if you want your application to get its kicks from more generally
> > applied and slower-changing design principles, then BSD calls your
> > name.
> >
> > Am I right or am I pulling stuff out of my butt, people?
> >
> > - Jeff
> >
> > On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 20:45, Murali Raju | 4SecureNet wrote:
> > > Ok, I have read several "google-articles" on the BSD vs Linux wars. That
> > > said, I am curious what the users in the ale list think about this
> > > subject. Why would you choose Linux over BSD(s) for both server and as a
> > > desktop? I personally like OpenBSD and FreeBSD (security and stability
> > > respectively + I am a person with an interest in security^infinity ;-)).
> > >
> > > --Regards
> > >
> > > Raju
> > >
> > >  P.S. At this moment I am installing Gentoo to see if I like it:-)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ale mailing list
> > > Ale at ale.org
> > > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale

:wq!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert L. Harris                     | GPG Key ID: E344DA3B
                                         @ x-hkp://pgp.mit.edu 
DISCLAIMER:
      These are MY OPINIONS ALONE.  I speak for no-one else.

Diagnosis: witzelsucht  	

IPv6 = robert at ipv6.rdlg.net	http://ipv6.rdlg.net
IPv4 = robert at mail.rdlg.net	http://www.rdlg.net

 PGP signature