Linked by Samuel J. Greear on Sun 31st Oct 2010 19:10 UTC
BSD and Darwin derivatives The 2.8.2 release of DragonFly BSD is now available, featuring significant advances in multi-processor performance based on DragonFly's signature soft token locks. It also includes many feature advancements including: pf from OpenBSD 4.2, the Wifi stack from FreeBSD and DataMapper from NetBSD (with significant enhancements). This release also marks the return of the GUI image. See the release notes for full details.
Thread beginning with comment 447889
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The Crowd
by vodoomoth on Sun 31st Oct 2010 22:01 UTC
vodoomoth
Member since:
2010-03-30

At reading the teaser in Opera's feeds reader, I thought "how many BSD variants are there?". Why? Because of this:


DragonFly BSD is now available [...] includes many feature advancements including: pf from OpenBSD 4.2, the Wifi stack from FreeBSD and DataMapper from NetBSD

The landscape seems crowded to me and since as I'm not into BSD systems, I thought I'd better ask the question here.

Reply Score: 2

RE: The Crowd
by foldingstock on Sun 31st Oct 2010 22:12 in reply to "The Crowd"
foldingstock Member since:
2008-10-30

At reading the teaser in Opera's feeds reader, I thought "how many BSD variants are there?". Why? Because of this:
"
DragonFly BSD is now available [...] includes many feature advancements including: pf from OpenBSD 4.2, the Wifi stack from FreeBSD and DataMapper from NetBSD

The landscape seems crowded to me and since as I'm not into BSD systems, I thought I'd better ask the question here.
"

FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and DragonflyBSD are the most popular "flavors." There are other flavors, but you'll find that these four make up the bulk of *BSD systems.

These flavors are commonly confused with Linux distributions. Unlike Linux distributions, which all use the same kernel and really only differ in the userland tools they provide, each "flavor" of *BSD has its own kernel, own base system, own userland tools, and own package management system. Each *BSD flavor its its own full-featured OS.

All of the current *BSD's are based on the original 4.4-BSD operating system. FreeBSD and NetBSD are direct ports, while OpenBSD and DragonflyBSD are forks of NetBSD and FreeBSD respectively. Since they share the same heritage, they also share a lot of code which makes porting tools easy. This is why you see DragonflyBSD using tools from other flavors and visa versa.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: The Crowd
by Radio on Sun 31st Oct 2010 22:40 in reply to "The Crowd"
Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

It is far less crowded than the linux variants (and better segmented), and there is far more code reuse.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: The Crowd
by phoenix on Sun 31st Oct 2010 22:54 in reply to "The Crowd"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

There are 4 major BSD OSes (listed alphabetically):
* DragonflyBSD
* FreeBSD
* NetBSD
* OpenBSD

There are various permutations to each of these OSes (pfSense, FreeNAS, EchoBSD, PC-BSD, etc). However, these tend to build upon one of the 4 BSDs, with specific things added or removed to make it work in particular niche.

The BSDs tend to co-operate a lot and share code around (PF, wifi, and NIC drivers are great examples).

There are also commercial forks of BSD systems. For example, JunOS, used in Juniper routers, is a fork of FreeBSD.

And MacOS X uses a lot of FreeBSD and NetBSD code.

There's also the original commercial BSD/OS, which is no longer available.

So, while there's more than one BSD OS out there, the environment is nowhere near as crowded as the Linux distro environment.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: The Crowd
by vodoomoth on Sun 31st Oct 2010 23:55 in reply to "RE: The Crowd"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

Thanks to all for the information. The "crowded" qualification was due to ignorance on my end and hasty judgment I must confess. In fact, in the light of foldingstock's comment, the differences are more fundamental compared to Linux distributions yet there are less "variants"/"flavors"...

Is there binary compatibility? Between DragonflyBSD and FreeBSD for instance? Or some sort of "acceptance" in the sense of one system accepting packages built for an ancestor?
I guess these four flavors are desktop OSes? Is the user base significant? At what level should BSD as a whole be placed? The same as Linux? or somewhere between Linux and the likes of AROS, MorphOS, Haiku, etc.?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: The Crowd
by fithisux on Mon 1st Nov 2010 20:07 in reply to "RE: The Crowd"
fithisux Member since:
2006-01-22

I wish PureDarwin had taken off. It could be a very good member of the team.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: The Crowd
by reez on Mon 1st Nov 2010 23:31 in reply to "RE: The Crowd"
reez Member since:
2006-06-28

There are various permutations to each of these OSes (pfSense, FreeNAS, EchoBSD, PC-BSD, etc). However, these tend to build upon one of the 4 BSDs, with specific things added or removed to make it work in particular niche.


Just a quick note. These ones are sometimes called distributions, because they are BSDs with different software and settings.

While DragonFly, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD are usually called derivatives, because they are forks of each other but in reality different operating systems. I'd consider MacOSX a of that family.

Reply Parent Score: 2