Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!supernews.com!
newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!
News.Math.NCTU.edu.tw!news.dragon2.net!FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw!not-for-mail
From: assad.k...@usa.net (Assad Khan)
Newsgroups: mailing.freebsd.questions
Subject: FreeBSD-VS-Linux---Some Venting from Linux's side!
Date: 26 Jan 2001 04:17:49 +0800
Organization: NCTU CSIE FreeBSD Server
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <94q1ld$1ro3$1@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freebsd.csie.nctu.edu.tw
X-Trace: FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw 980453869 61188 140.113.209.200 
(25 Jan 2001 20:17:49 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Jan 2001 20:17:49 GMT

Hi,

    I have been seeing a FreeBSD-VS-Linux war on this mailing list and it has
disturbed me beyond tolerance. Which drove me to write this e-mail.

 First I want to tell everyone that I love everything thats opensource and
free, that includes FreeBSD,Linux,OpenBSD and NetBSD. But my most loved OS is
Linux for the following reasons.
  For its age Linux has gone farther than any other OS has, including *BSD's.
The BSD's have a history of 20+ years and you are trying to prove that its
superior as compared to Linux? Give me a break! If they werent superior even
now, then they did not deserve to be used at all. Plus Linux was written from
scratch, even though it was derived from Minix it did not contain any foreign
source code. While the BSD's contained actual AT&T code for quite some time
and then they built upon that when they 'migrated' to 4.4BSD. Linux has a more
open model of developement as compared to any of the BSD's. With the release
of kernel 2.4.0 for Linux, its now an official gladiator in the arena of
Enterprise computing (although it is already running one of the most heavily
visited sites namely google.com,freshmeat.net...). Microsoft hates Linux's
guts while it seems to embrace the BSD's, for this reason alone is Linux worth
using! 

This discussion could go on without an end, but my point is not to prove that
Linux is better than FreeBSD or any other BSD but to say that Linux has done
much to improve and its BETTER than NT (for some of you falmers kind info).
And watch out, Linux is fast improving and *very* soon the BSD's might seem
redundant with Linux around!

Regards,
Assad Khan.

____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!
logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!News.Math.NCTU.edu.tw!
ksvcs.kh!news.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw!nsysu-news!FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw!not-for-mail
From: culv...@wam.umd.edu (Kenneth Wayne Culver)
Newsgroups: mailing.freebsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-VS-Linux---Some Venting from Linux's side!
Date: 26 Jan 2001 04:58:25 +0800
Organization: NCTU CSIE FreeBSD Server
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <94q41h$1tqp$1@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freebsd.csie.nctu.edu.tw
X-Trace: FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw 980456305 63322 140.113.209.200 
(25 Jan 2001 20:58:25 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Jan 2001 20:58:25 GMT

>     I have been seeing a FreeBSD-VS-Linux war on this mailing list and
> it has disturbed me beyond tolerance. Which drove me to write this
> e-mail.
> 
>  First I want to tell everyone that I love everything thats opensource
> and free, that includes FreeBSD,Linux,OpenBSD and NetBSD. But my most
> loved OS is Linux for the following reasons.


>   For its age Linux has gone farther than any other OS has, including
> *BSD's. The BSD's have a history of 20+ years and you are trying to
> prove that its superior as compared to Linux? Give me a break! If they
> werent superior even now, then they did not deserve to be used at all.
> Plus Linux was written from scratch, even though it was derived from
> Minix it did not contain any foreign source code. While the BSD's
> contained actual AT&T code for quite some time and then they built
> upon that when they 'migrated' to 4.4BSD. Linux has a more open model
> of developement as compared to any of the BSD's. With the release of
> kernel 2.4.0 for Linux, its now an official gladiator in the arena of
> Enterprise computing (although it is already running one of the most
> heavily visited sites namely google.com,freshmeat.net...). Microsoft
> hates Linux's guts while it seems to embrace the BSD's, for this
> reason alone is Linux worth using!

Where do you think the 2.4 kernel got it's networking and vm
code? FreeBSD! OF course most linux zealots like yourself would not stop
to realize this. Linux's model of development is FAR from being more open
than FreeBSD's and it could be argued that FreeBSD's model is FAR more
open. The BSD License allows anyone do do anything with the code that they
want to do, without even disclosing it, as long as they include a notice
about the University of California, Berkley or something. However, the GPL
(what linux falls under) maintains that everything must remain open
source, and the source for all work and all changes to the code must be
published with the product. This isn't that open because while it forces
the source to be released, it limits it's usability to companies because
companies don't always want to release their intellectual property to the
masses. So FreeBSD's licence is more open and flexible. The reason that
FreeBSD is better than linux is because it's code is very mature. The main
reason for linux's relative instability and it's flakiness under large
loads is because it is so new. The ONLY reason that linux 2.4 is going to
be any better is because linus took most of the Tcp/ip stack and most of
the vm code from FreeBSD. Get your facts straight before you send
flamebait to lists.

> This discussion could go on without an end, but my point is not to
> prove that Linux is better than FreeBSD or any other BSD but to say
> that Linux has done much to improve and its BETTER than NT (for some
> of you falmers kind info). And watch out, Linux is fast improving and
> *very* soon the BSD's might seem redundant with Linux around. 

You are writing as if FreeBSD is not improving anymore. FreeBSD's
development is just as active as linux's and in some cases progressing at
a faster rate because of it's superior organization. In some places
linux's 2.4 kernel was being called vaporware because it took SOOO long to
come out. 

Ken



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!
ihug.co.nz!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
News.Math.NCTU.edu.tw!news.dragon2.net!FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw!not-for-mail
From: culv...@wam.umd.edu (Kenneth Wayne Culver)
Newsgroups: mailing.freebsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-VS-Linux---Some Venting from Linux's side!
Date: 26 Jan 2001 05:45:37 +0800
Organization: NCTU CSIE FreeBSD Server
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <94q6q1$20eb$1@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freebsd.csie.nctu.edu.tw
X-Trace: FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw 980459137 65996 140.113.209.200 
(25 Jan 2001 21:45:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Jan 2001 21:45:37 GMT

> i am on your side just wnated to know how much of FreeBSD networking
> code is in 2.4?

I'm not sure, but I think the BSD networking stuff has been in linux since
2.2, I think 2.4 got a lot of FreeBSD's VM stuff. I don't know how much of
either is there, but I remember reading about it, and I've worked in both
kernels before and have seen some pretty non-superficial similarities in
both.

Ken



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!
ihug.co.nz!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
News.Math.NCTU.edu.tw!news.dragon2.net!FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw!not-for-mail
From: ti...@umich.edu (Tim McMillen)
Newsgroups: mailing.freebsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-VS-Linux---Some Venting from Linux's side!
Date: 26 Jan 2001 05:55:31 +0800
Organization: NCTU CSIE FreeBSD Server
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <94q7cj$20sc$1@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freebsd.csie.nctu.edu.tw
X-Trace: FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw 980459731 66445 140.113.209.200 
(25 Jan 2001 21:55:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw
NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Jan 2001 21:55:31 GMT


You know, everybody says this, that Linux uses the FreeBSD tcp/ip stack 
and other things, but no one seems to verify it.  Has anyone actually 
looked into the code?  It shouldn't be very hard to grep through the 
code and see.  If they don't mention the copyright and they use the 
code, then that's illegal, and I can't picture them doing that, they're 
quite serious about their GPL, and it's implications.
	If they didn't actually use any of the code, but instead rewrote 
similiar stuff, then they didn't really steal it.  At that point that's 
no different from any other code that gets shared between the projects.

						Tim

On Thursday January 25, 2001 16:45, Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
> > i am on your side just wnated to know how much of FreeBSD
> > networking code is in 2.4?
>
> I'm not sure, but I think the BSD networking stuff has been in linux
> since 2.2, I think 2.4 got a lot of FreeBSD's VM stuff. I don't know
> how much of either is there, but I remember reading about it, and
> I've worked in both kernels before and have seen some pretty
> non-superficial similarities in both.
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!supernews.com!
xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!
News.Math.NCTU.edu.tw!news.dragon2.net!FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw!not-for-mail
From: g...@lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Newsgroups: mailing.freebsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-VS-Linux---Some Venting from Linux's side!
Date: 27 Jan 2001 09:40:43 +0800
Organization: NCTU CSIE FreeBSD Server
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <94t8ur$1cni$1@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freebsd.csie.nctu.edu.tw
X-Trace: FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw 980559643 45811 140.113.209.200 
(27 Jan 2001 01:40:43 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Jan 2001 01:40:43 GMT

On Thursday, 25 January 2001 at 15:57:54 -0500, Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
>>     I have been seeing a FreeBSD-VS-Linux war on this mailing list and
>> it has disturbed me beyond tolerance. Which drove me to write this
>> e-mail.
>>
>>  First I want to tell everyone that I love everything thats opensource
>> and free, that includes FreeBSD,Linux,OpenBSD and NetBSD. But my most
>> loved OS is Linux for the following reasons.
>
>>   For its age Linux has gone farther than any other OS has, including
>> *BSD's. The BSD's have a history of 20+ years and you are trying to
>> prove that its superior as compared to Linux? Give me a break! If they
>> werent superior even now, then they did not deserve to be used at all.
>> Plus Linux was written from scratch, even though it was derived from
>> Minix it did not contain any foreign source code. While the BSD's
>> contained actual AT&T code for quite some time and then they built
>> upon that when they 'migrated' to 4.4BSD. Linux has a more open model
>> of developement as compared to any of the BSD's. With the release of
>> kernel 2.4.0 for Linux, its now an official gladiator in the arena of
>> Enterprise computing (although it is already running one of the most
>> heavily visited sites namely google.com,freshmeat.net...). Microsoft
>> hates Linux's guts while it seems to embrace the BSD's, for this
>> reason alone is Linux worth using!
>
> Where do you think the 2.4 kernel got it's networking and vm
> code? FreeBSD!

No, that's not correct.  The VM system has borrowed a lot from
FreeBSD, but the networking code is still very different, though it's
true that they're borrowing individual features.

> OF course most linux zealots like yourself would not stop to realize
> this. Linux's model of development is FAR from being more open than
> FreeBSD's and it could be argued that FreeBSD's model is FAR more
> open.

These are all matters of opinion, of course.  FreeBSD-questions isn't
really the place to discuss opinions, especially when the danger
exists that they could escalate into a flame war.

> The ONLY reason that linux 2.4 is going to be any better is because
> linus took most of the Tcp/ip stack and most of the vm code from
> FreeBSD. Get your facts straight before you send flamebait to lists.

Indeed :-)

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
Finger g...@lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!
ihug.co.nz!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
News.Math.NCTU.edu.tw!news.dragon2.net!FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw!not-for-mail
From: g...@lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Newsgroups: mailing.freebsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD-VS-Linux---Some Venting from Linux's side!
Date: 27 Jan 2001 09:51:24 +0800
Organization: NCTU CSIE FreeBSD Server
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <94t9is$1d3b$1@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freebsd.csie.nctu.edu.tw
X-Trace: FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw 980560284 46188 140.113.209.200 
(27 Jan 2001 01:51:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@FreeBSD.csie.NCTU.edu.tw
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Jan 2001 01:51:24 GMT

On Thursday, 25 January 2001 at 16:58:28 -0500, Tim McMillen wrote:
> On Thursday January 25, 2001 16:45, Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
>>> i am on your side just wnated to know how much of FreeBSD
>>> networking code is in 2.4?
>>
>> I'm not sure, but I think the BSD networking stuff has been in linux
>> since 2.2, I think 2.4 got a lot of FreeBSD's VM stuff. I don't know
>> how much of either is there, but I remember reading about it, and
>> I've worked in both kernels before and have seen some pretty
>> non-superficial similarities in both.
>
> You know, everybody says this, that Linux uses the FreeBSD tcp/ip
> stack and other things, but no one seems to verify it.

It's the first time I've heard it.  It's wrong.

> 	If they didn't actually use any of the code, but instead
> rewrote similiar stuff, then they didn't really steal it.  At that
> point that's no different from any other code that gets shared
> between the projects.

Linux does borrow/import code from FreeBSD.  Nobody's calling it
stealing.  I was at a Linux conference last week where two different
developers (Dave Miller and Rik van Riel) presented work on the
network stack and the VM system.  Dave mentioned during his talk that
his work was derived from David Greenman's sendfile() stuff, but it
wasn't quite there yet.  While he was talking I looked at the
sendfile() sources on my laptop, and they're quite different from
FreeBSDs.  The differences in the underlying network implementation
make it impractical to just copy code from FreeBSD.

Rik mentioned FreeBSD in his summary at
http://linux.conf.au/papers/#P02:

Too Little, Too Slow: Linux 2.5 Memory Management
  Rik van Riel

     In Linux 2.5 virtual memory management will see some considerable
     changes. One of the main problems with the current Linux memory
     management is that sometimes we cannot make a proper distinction
     between pages which are in use and pages which can be evicted
     from memory to make room for new data.

     In order to improve that situation and make the VM subsystem more
     resilient against wildly variable VM loads, we will use ideas
     from various other operating systems to improve Linux memory
     management. The main page replacement routine will use the
     active, inactive and scavenge (cache) lists as found in
     FreeBSD. This mechanism maintains a balance between used and old
     memory pages so there will always be "proper" pages around to
     swap. In addition to this there will probably be things like
     dynamic and administrator settable RSS limits, anti hog code to
     prevent one user or process from hogging the machine and slowing
     down the rest of the machine and per-user memory accounting.

As you'll see, they haven't exactly imported the whole VM system.
That wouldn't be practical; even copying code from one BSD to another
is difficult, and Linux is so different under the skin that it would
extremely difficult.

Greg
--
Finger g...@lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/