Hi! I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems THX!
On 6/11/06, Hámorszky Balázs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: > Hi! > > I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems > THX! > What kind of help are you looking for? -- -- BSD Podcasts <at> : http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/ http://freebsdforall.blogspot.com/
On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/11/06, Hámorszky Balázs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems > > THX! > > > > What kind of help are you looking for? > > For starters... * FreeBSD runs on more platforms then listed on that page. http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/ * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD, OpenBSD was a fork of NetBSD. * 4.10 is the oldest non EOL'd release of FreeBSD, although FreeBSD 2.2.9 was released Apr. 01 of this year so techinally it's the oldest non EOL'd release of FreeBSD. http://www.freebsd.org/releng/ http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-announce/2006-April/001055.html * you need another cat. for UFS2, you only have UFS. You also don't list HFS, HFS+, and nullfs support. *FreeBSD supports Ext3 fs, IIRC read only.(Continue reading)
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Mipam >Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 1:45 AM >To: Nikolas Britton >Cc: vmt <at> menuetos.net; discuss <at> opendarwin.org; >opensolaris-discuss <at> opensolaris.org; misc <at> openbsd.org; >digulla <at> aros.org; Hamorszky Balazs; >freedos-user <at> lists.sourceforge.net; netbsd-users <at> NetBSD.org; >users-request <at> crater.dragonflybsd.org; geist <at> newos.org; >l4ka <at> ira.uka.de; freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org >Subject: Re: wikipedia article > > >On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote: > >[SNIP] >> * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD, OpenBSD was a fork of NetBSD. > >Eeh? I believe NetBSD was there half a year before FreeBSD. Eh? http://www.netbsd.org/Misc/history.html "...Frustration at getting patches integrated and releases of 386BSD led to FreeBSD, which concentrated the i386 platform, while NetBSD formed to focus on multi-platform support..." Now, for the references, see:(Continue reading)
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Mipam wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote: > > [SNIP] >> * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD, OpenBSD was a fork of NetBSD. > > Eeh? I believe NetBSD was there half a year before FreeBSD. > Bye, > > Mipam. >From what I remember, I thought it was 386BSD split off into FreeBSD and NetBSD somewhere in the early 90's, then OpenBSD came from NetBSD in the early to mid 90's. -Garrett _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"
On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:18:55PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote: > On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > > >* IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD > > that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd > release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release. > However, NetBSD was a fork of 386BSD0.1+patchkit, where the group developing the patchkit became FreeBSD. Dale Rahn drahn <at> dalerahn.com
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:23:06AM -0400, Dale Rahn wrote: > On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:18:55PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote: > > On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >* IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD > > > > that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd > > release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release. > > > > However, NetBSD was a fork of 386BSD0.1+patchkit, where the group > developing the patchkit became FreeBSD. ITYM "some of" the group; I don't know where things would end up by total lines of code contributed, but I'd say NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD might well end up about even. If you really want to pick nits, I could point out that the patchkit maintainers received a pre-release snapshot of NetBSD 0.8 well before the FreeBSD release, portions of which were incorporated into FreeBSD without proper credit; so it would be wholly reasonable to call FreeBSD a "fork" of NetBSD 0.8. Does it really matter? This whole discussion seems like a deliberate effort to dredge up old rivalries and create bad feeling. It is all ancient, ancient history now. Thor
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Thor >Lancelot Simon >Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:48 AM >To: Dale Rahn >Cc: misc <at> openbsd.org; freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org; >netbsd-users <at> netbsd.org >Subject: Re: wikipedia article > > >On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:23:06AM -0400, Dale Rahn wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:18:55PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote: >> > On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >* IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD >> > >> > that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd >> > release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release. >> > >> >> However, NetBSD was a fork of 386BSD0.1+patchkit, where the group >> developing the patchkit became FreeBSD. > >ITYM "some of" the group; I don't know where things would end >up by total >lines of code contributed, but I'd say NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD might >well end up about even. If you really want to pick nits, I could point >out that the patchkit maintainers received a pre-release(Continue reading)
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 02:48:07PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > Does it really matter? This whole discussion seems like a deliberate > effort to dredge up old rivalries and create bad feeling. It is all > ancient, ancient history now. I doubt this was the original intention, but it looks like it's headed that way... At this point in time it seems like there's a fair amount of porting, backpatching, and code sharing between the BSDs. Who came first has less to do with anything than the philosophy and focus of each project today, and how well it fits with a particular application. If the wikipedia article helps people determine suitability for a purpose then it's worthwhile. The history is already out there, and can be included or merely linked to. -- -- Darrin Chandler | Phoenix BSD Users Group dwchandler <at> stilyagin.com | http://bsd.phoenix.az.us/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ |
On 6/12/06, Ted Unangst <ted.unangst <at> gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > > > * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD > > that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd > release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release. > Yes as many others have noted, I cleary did not have my thinking cap on. Let me correct myself: NetBSD and FreeBSD both have deep roots in 4.3BSD NET/2, 386BSD, and 4.4BSD Lite. NetBSD is not a fork of FreeBSD but OpenBSD is a fork of NetBSD. DragonFly BSD is a fork of FreeBSD 4.x, etc. etc. With all the inbreeding it's hard to remember who's your daddy.http://www.levenez.com/unix/history.html#08 http://www.svbug.com/historybsd2.html http://cisx1.uma.maine.edu/~wbackman/bsdtalk/bsdtalk018.mp3 http://cisx1.uma.maine.edu/~wbackman/bsdtalk/bsdtalk029.mp3 http://www.netbsd.org/Misc/history.html http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/history.html
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Nikolas Britton >Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:46 PM >To: Ted Unangst >Cc: Hámorszky Balázs; misc <at> openbsd.org; freebsd-questions <at> freebsd.org; >netbsd-users <at> netbsd.org >Subject: Re: wikipedia article > > >On 6/12/06, Ted Unangst <ted.unangst <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD >> >> that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd >> release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release. >> > >Yes as many others have noted, I cleary did not have my thinking cap >on. Let me correct myself: > >NetBSD and FreeBSD both have deep roots in 4.3BSD NET/2, 386BSD, and >4.4BSD Lite. NetBSD is not a fork of FreeBSD but OpenBSD is a fork of >NetBSD. DragonFly BSD is a fork of FreeBSD 4.x, etc. etc. > >With all the inbreeding it's hard to remember who's your daddy.(Continue reading)
On 11/06/06, Hámorszky Balázs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: > I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems Whilst there, what about another important article that seems to have a Linux POV? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Open_Source_Wireless_Drivers ;)
* Constantine A. Murenin <mureninc <at> gmail.com> [2006-06-12 15:07]: > On 11/06/06, Hamorszky Balazs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: > >I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems > > Whilst there, what about another important article that seems to have > a Linux POV? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Open_Source_Wireless_Drivers > ;) No just expand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blob to add a proper definition for "Binary Blob" as that last entry on the page there. -Bob
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 07:21:34PM +0200, Hámorszky Balázs wrote: > Hi! > > I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems Even if there are work in progress in this area, I don't think we can say NetBSD supports IA64 yet. SMP is supported on sparc and powerPC. NetBSD also has "other browsers" such as konqueror, links, lynx, dillo, etc It also has koffice and abiword It also has xine and xmms It also has other instant messengers (although I don't know the complete list) It has other httpd (I don't have the complete list, but there's at last tfttpd) -- -- Manuel Bouyer <bouyer <at> antioche.eu.org> NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
> NetBSD also has "other browsers" such as konqueror, links, lynx, dillo, > etc > > It also has koffice and abiword > It also has xine and xmms > It also has other instant messengers.... That's new to me - I always use pkgsrc for this kind of applicationsBut seriously, NetBSD and pkgsrc are separeted projects (or not??) Greetings, Mark Weinem
Mark Weinem wrote: >> NetBSD also has "other browsers" such as konqueror, links, lynx, dillo, >> etc >> >> It also has koffice and abiword >> It also has xine and xmms >> It also has other instant messengers.... > > That's new to me - I always use pkgsrc for this kind of applications
--- Jan Danielsson <jan.danielsson <at> gmail.com> wrote: > IMHO, pkgsrc is a part of NetBSD (as yum/rpm is part of Fedora, .deb > part of Debian, etc). The difference is that pkgsrc is built to be > non-platform specific. I would consider applications available for > NetBSD through pkgsrc to be "available to NetBSD". IMHO, any application that installs cleanly on NetBSD is "available to NetBSD". As long as it is open source and it's written in a language for which NetBSD has a compiler for, it usually "just works". NetBSD is not limited to just what's in pkgsrc, just as Linux is not limited to what's available in rpm/yum/deb and so on. How about a database category? While MySQL will run just about everywhere, I'd be curious about availability of Oracle and Sybase on open-source platforms. How about network management and monitoring tools like OpenView and Tivoli? Backup tools like NetBackup and Legato? -- Ed Wensell III "A heap of soil next to a trench is a sign of the archaeologist" - Unknown source __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: > Hi! > > I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems > THX! where can i download openbsd ia-64? lighttpd is the only other web server that runs on openbsd? is there a reason rtl8139 support is more important than gigabit ethernet?
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: > I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems I think this is an exercise in futility, for staying up-to-date, for trying to be unbiased and non-arbitrary. what qualifies a driver to be called "official"? i'd say, it should _at least_ be supportable by the system developers. also there are other companies who produce binary blobs, which aren't listened. and there is a multitude of drivers for most of the os' which aren't listed. what entitles an architecture to deserve a "row" in the table? e.g. "cell" clearly qualifies as "other" in my book, being only supported by linux, but "vax" should deserve a row, both because more than one os support it and there exist quite some instllations around, more than a few dev-kits. the same with file systems (e.g. zfs, reiser4) (...rest of rant deleted, it's already off topic...) oh, and don't tell me i shall participate. --knitti
ok. i won't tell you :) but i'm pleased to hear your opinion. Thanks! knitti wrote: > On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <balihb <at> ogyi.hu> wrote: >> I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems > > I think this is an exercise in futility, for staying up-to-date, for > trying to be > unbiased and non-arbitrary. > what qualifies a driver to be called "official"? i'd say, it should > _at least_ be > supportable by the system developers. also there are other companies > who produce binary blobs, which aren't listened. and there is a multitude > of drivers for most of the os' which aren't listed. > what entitles an architecture to deserve a "row" in the table? e.g. "cell" > clearly qualifies as "other" in my book, being only supported by linux, but > "vax" should deserve a row, both because more than one os support it > and there exist quite some instllations around, more than a few dev-kits. > the same with file systems (e.g. zfs, reiser4) > > (...rest of rant deleted, it's already off topic...) > > oh, and don't tell me i shall participate. > > > --knitti(Continue reading)
RSS Feed