Gentoo vs FreeBSD

[SubTexel]

Oh man, have times changed...

Earlier in this thread someone commented on how Linux is not just newbies use it... Back when I first started (1996), no one wanted anyone new using it, and it was very hard to get any type of help without constant RTFM answers.. I remember hearing about how hard it was to setup, it's lack of hardware support, etc.. It's nice to see the 180


Now as to FreeBSD I have seen many people (a couple in this thread) state how hard it is to set it up, and use. ? I never have gotten that, maybe back in the Mid nineties and farther back, but not anymore. It's a very easy system to setup and I use it on all of my servers, and desktops (minus the Dual PIII, it's running Gentoo..). That Gentoo/FreeBSD hybrid sounds VERY appealing, and I think I'm going to take one of my systems down to mess with it.

[stoker]

Gotta remember that *BSD usually are more stable than linux..

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html


You wont see linux in there at all...

true... but I've read reports that those uptimes are statistics, and to that end, there are also lies and damned lies.

see http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html#linux26:

The Linux kernel switched to a higher internal timer rate at kernel version 2.5.26. Linux 2.4 used a rate of 100Hz. Linux 2.6 uses a timer at 1000Hz. (An explanation of the HZ setting in Linux.)

The above applies to Linux on 32-bit Intel-compatible systems (which is the most common case). Linux on other platforms uses different timer rates: the Alpha and Intel ia-64 ports already used 1000Hz, while the ports for sparc, m68k and other less common processors continue to use 100Hz.

The Linux TCP code only uses the low 32 bits of the timer. Due to the faster rate of the timer, the value wraps around every 49.7 days (whereas it used to wrap after 497 days). Because there are large numbers of Linux systems which have a higher uptime than this, it is no longer possible to report accurate uptimes for these systems.

sooo... while I'm not saying that Linux is or is not more stable than any of the *BSDs, it would be foolish to rely solely on one particular view (e.g., Netcraft's, mine, or yours for that matter) when trying to measure something like stability.

[stoker]

I wonder what's the best *BSD is to start with. FreeBSD has good documentation, but OpenBSD's POV on security really appeals me.

FreeBSD is the best if you're interested in setting it up on an x86 system, has excellent stability and security, even though security is OpenBSD's hallmark. FWIR, I don't think I'd install OpenBSD on anything except a dedicated firewall / proxy server, sounds like some of the added security comes at a cost of functionality, but this is a pretty standard paradigm. NetBSD is what you want to use if you want to install an OS on your toaster or GameBoy; it's focus is portability (i.e., works on the most architectures of any OS, IIRC).

Gentoo and FreeBSD are my choices, after playing around with various Linux distros. must admit I've never messed with any BSD other than Free.

[Sanome]

As an arbitrary example, I personally find KDE on Gentoo a little snappier than KDE on FreeBSD - and KDE on Arch Linux seems to be a little snappier than both - mind you, everything on Arch Linux seems to run like the wind - but I am, and will continue to enjoy elements within desktop *BSD

/* says that typing this from my FreeBSD system with a slow, edgy, jittery mouse */

[Lechium]

I dont get people who are willing to change their running OS just because there is one 'slightly better'.
I am comfortable on Gentoo. It may be not the best OS out there, but everything works well, I know how to handle it, I have no real problems with it.
Now say some new BSD runs tiny bit faster and handle dependancies somewhat better. Now migrating there will take at least a week, because I need to install system, learn its tricks and trades, install packages I need, deal with problems (that always arise), tweak everything to one's liking. Is it really worth sending a chunk of your life just to get minor performance usage/easier maintanance?

P.S. Grass is always greener on the other side, no?

[jlc]

I dont get people who are willing to change their running OS just because there is one 'slightly better'.
I am comfortable on Gentoo. It may be not the best OS out there, but everything works well, I know how to handle it, I have no real problems with it.
Now say some new BSD runs tiny bit faster and handle dependancies somewhat better. Now migrating there will take at least a week, because I need to install system, learn its tricks and trades, install packages I need, deal with problems (that always arise), tweak everything to one's liking. Is it really worth sending a chunk of your life just to get minor performance usage/easier maintanance?

P.S. Grass is always greener on the other side, no?

I largely agree with you. The performace improvements are largely negligible (depending on what you're doing, of course). The main reason I like to try out other unices is to, as you say, learn its tricks and trades. Every distro/OS tried teaches me a little more about that Platonic ideal--Unix.

Cheers,

[zcomp]

I wouldn't change distro's every time new improvements were adopted for another distro. I have installed mandriva, SUSE, Knoppix and my last stop gentoo. I will support change if the one your using is not working for you. Mandriva SUSE and knoppix all were gui from begining to end(not good for "learning" linux). Portage (with the correct make.conf file!!!) is by far the best i've ever used. Gentoo is hands-down the best for desktops. This system i'm on now was compiled from a stage 1 tarball. The whole process is very well documented. I simply went through there online guide printing only what was relative to my system and presto. Not to mention the invaluable(and forced) experience with the linux console.
I haven't tried BSD but it sounds like I would get thrown deeper into 01101Land, I thought that we were in 2006? And I do own a mouse.
ofcourse, I'm not running a server so I wouldnt' know the demands on that kind of system.
I jumped the windows ship in 2000 and haven't looked back. But it does leave me a yearning for combo-boxes. I've done my share of dos admin and written a few BASIC games. I like a mixture of console and GUI and thats why I went with gentoo.
Loving it.

[petrjanda]

Now say some new BSD runs tiny bit faster and handle dependancies somewhat better. Now migrating there will take at least a week, because I need to install system, learn its tricks and trades, install packages I need, deal with problems (that always arise), tweak everything to one's liking. Is it really worth sending a chunk of your life just to get minor performance usage/easier maintanance?

P.S. Grass is always greener on the other side, no?

Most sensible people dont "migrate" systems untill they are comfortable in using the new system, by learning it.

[Kenji Miyamoto]

Now say some new BSD runs tiny bit faster and handle dependancies somewhat better. Now migrating there will take at least a week, because I need to install system, learn its tricks and trades, install packages I need, deal with problems (that always arise), tweak everything to one's liking. Is it really worth sending a chunk of your life just to get minor performance usage/easier maintanance?

P.S. Grass is always greener on the other side, no?

Most sensible people dont "migrate" systems untill they are comfortable in using the new system, by learning it.

Are you calling people like me insensible?

[W3BMAST3R101]

Has there been much more development on the Gentoo/FreeBSD project? It seems from their page that it has slowed...

the w3b