Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th Sep 2010 20:27 UTC, submitted by Ed
Thread beginning with comment 443215
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
True enough about the kernel, but often different architectures in Linux have a different userland (uclib vs glibc, ipkg vs apt/dpkg/rpm, etc). The nice thing about NetBSD is that regardless of the architecture you run it on it's still NetBSD, no odd userland quirks to watch out for nor new package management facilities to learn. Linux is a kernel, *BSD are complete operating systems.




Member since:
2009-03-17
Honestly, linux seems to have no issue whatsoever being ported to newer stuff. However, most people I know who use NetBSD do so for (as I pointed out in my earlier post) the broad support current every new release of teh OS has for "legacy" systems.
In many cases NetBSB really is the only option for a relatively modern, current, and actively developed OS for lots and lots of old systems. Linux tends to support the newer stuff, and many old architecture/system have been dropped from the kernel tree altogether.