Linked by David Adams on Thu 4th Aug 2011 19:21 UTC
Debian and its clones Debian developer Robert Millan talks about recent improvements with Debian GNU/kFreeBSD in the past few weeks.
Thread beginning with comment 483793
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Why FreeBSD kernel?
by static666 on Fri 5th Aug 2011 08:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Why FreeBSD kernel?"
static666
Member since:
2006-06-09

OMG, this link is so 2003. I even remember FreeBSD was 'the real hackers choice' of 2000. ;) But..

- Standardized kernel interfaces: Single /dev implementation, OSS as the default sound system, OpenBSD Packet Filter (pf).

This one mostly refers to major holy wars in the community which are long gone and forgotten. IIRC, on Linux it's udev all the way; pretty sure ALSA improved a lot, as did netfilter both feature/performance wise.

It's up to individual OSes to choose standards to implement, and since OSS came first, no wonder it might be better represented. But why whine about ALSA? What is wrong with it? And since its the size of the user base of the particular OS/interface that matters, rather than number of venerable Unix-like platforms implementing OSS, doesn't ALSA look good to a potential developer?

- Security features, like jails.

Linux has, and already had, plenty.

- Support for NDIS drivers in the mainline kernel.

Since it is just one step with 'apt-get install', why should one care?

- Support for ZFS in the mainline kernel.
- kFreeBSD may have better performance and/or stability especially in disk/filesystem areas with ZFS.

That 'may have' is hilarious. And btrfs is doing well. I think the only real ZFS feature that could matter for an average/power user is easy snapshots, but there's a way to handle this with Linux, albeit with a couple more commands.

- kFreeBSD is less vulnerable to legal issues.
- kFreeBSD developers often have more..
- FreeBSD kernel might support some..

Yeah, yeah, yeah. We need more FUD and probably reference to that bizarre Linus guy. Don't know about you, but I'm totally not convinced why kFreeBSD at all.

Reply Parent Score: -2

RE[3]: Why FreeBSD kernel?
by antik on Fri 5th Aug 2011 12:20 in reply to "RE[2]: Why FreeBSD kernel?"
antik Member since:
2006-05-19

"Yeah, yeah, yeah. We need more FUD and probably reference to that bizarre Linus guy. Don't know about you, but I'm totally not convinced why kFreeBSD at all."

Thank GOD you are not with FreeBSD. About spreading FUD- what you did just now?

FreeBSD got jails for ages but I never saw any jail real-life use in Linux and I am LPIC certified specialist.

About ZFS you are totally wrong- ZFS main feature is partitionless usage, self-healing and deduplication.

FreeBSD is alternative to Linux and get used to it. Every work should be done with right tools and sometimes Linux won't cut it. I see lots of five or more year old Linux installations and noone will update them because nobody can be sure it will survice any upgrade at all... You can do it with FreeBSD any time.

YMMW

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Why FreeBSD kernel?
by talaf on Fri 5th Aug 2011 13:44 in reply to "RE[3]: Why FreeBSD kernel?"
talaf Member since:
2008-11-19

And why wouldn't you want to do that? Why another OS? Why another distribution of Linux? Why a fork of this or that?

You post a comment on a site that is (at least partly) dedicated to post news about the myriad of operating systems in the history of computers, and you question why would anyone want to port a specific userland to another operating system? It's what people do! ;)

Alot of people chose FreeBSD over Linux, me included. It's called personal preference and one should always respect that in the end. The more choice in the world the better!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Why FreeBSD kernel?
by static666 on Fri 5th Aug 2011 13:58 in reply to "RE[3]: Why FreeBSD kernel?"
static666 Member since:
2006-06-09

Thank GOD you are not with FreeBSD. About spreading FUD- what you did just now?

Please don't take my comment out of context. I was referring to particular lines in the original file. I am perfectly fine with FreeBSD as it is, and I would be glad to see Debian/kFreeBSD project develop further since someone is motivated enough to do it.

FreeBSD got jails for ages but I never saw any jail real-life use in Linux and I am LPIC certified specialist.

Linux-vserver comes to mind and openvz. And from security only point, AppArmor.

About ZFS you are totally wrong- ZFS main feature is partitionless usage, self-healing and deduplication.

ZFS is good. But I'm not so sure these enterprise-oriented features provide substantial improvements in performance/stability for an average user. The original file promised this.

FreeBSD is alternative to Linux and get used to it. Every work should be done with right tools and sometimes Linux won't cut it.

That's true.

I see lots of five or more year old Linux installations and noone will update them because nobody can be sure it will survice any upgrade at all... You can do it with FreeBSD any time.

What kind of upgrade are you referring to? Do you mean an LTS (long term support) Ubuntu won't be able to dist-upgrade during its' support life cycle? I seriously doubt it - it is kept stable. I'm not even talking RHEL or SLES here.

Now, if we're about upgrading to a newer release version, then, of course, it might break if you skip a couple of versions. All version upgrades are meant to happen incrementally one by one and normally this is the only supported way to do it.

How come you 'can do it any time' when if there's a new version of a particular package, there's always a chance for breakage of your specific configuration. No way I would believe FreeBSD devs and pkg maintainers or upgrade system are that perfect. One should always test before upgrading anything, especially if it is on an important system.

Please, I'm not trying to bash FreeBSD in any way. I was just curious whether there's really something big enough to kFreeBSD to motivate people to work in that way. And since someone is motivated, let it be.

Personally, I'm not holding my breath.

Reply Parent Score: 1