home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!news.u.washington.edu!serval!hlu
- From: hlu@eecs.wsu.edu (H.J. Lu)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
- Subject: Re: 386BSD or LINUX?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov6.184556.11843@serval.net.wsu.edu>
- Date: 6 Nov 92 18:45:56 GMT
- Article-I.D.: serval.1992Nov6.184556.11843
- References: <1992Nov4.205620.8184@colorado.edu> <1992Nov5.060658.639@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
- Sender: news@serval.net.wsu.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: School of EECS, Washington State University
- Lines: 72
-
- In article <1992Nov5.060658.639@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>, eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes:
- |> Drew Eckhardt (drew@kinglear.cs.colorado.edu) wrote:
- |> :
- |> : Linux +'s :
- |> :
- |> : Shared libraries. This results in a significant disk space savings,
- |> : especially in the case of 'X' applications that can shrink by
- |> : an order of magnitude when compiled with shared libraries.
- |>
- |> Let us compare sizes:
- |>
-
- I have a simple X11 program which just prints out "Hello world!".
- It takes about 300K with static libs. With shared libs, it only takes
- 9K. I can even make it less than 3K.
-
- [...]
-
- |> :
- |> : Many kernel structures, such as pty's, are dynamically allocated. This
- |> : increases the amount of pageable memory that is available.
- |>
- |> How do we change its number? CAn we add pty indefinitely`?
-
- You know the answer for `indefinitely'.
-
- [...]
-
- |> :
- |> : I'd say that if you want BSD, because it's BSD, or if you want
- |> : stable NFS NOW, and not in two weeks, that it might be worthwhile.
- |>
- |> Have you forgotten that it has the VFS(?), which is the Posix complient file
-
- VFS? Without it, how can Linux support Minix, Ext, MSDOS, Xenix, NFS ...?
-
- |> system. Or has linux used it already? What it does is to have long file names,
- |> faster throughput because of large block sizes(4K),without much fragmentation
- |> becaue it can go down to 1K block size as well,or am I mistaken?
- |>
- |> It also uses standard BSD library, which makes it easy to port
- |> software written in BSD systems which is widely used in Academic circles.
-
- I am responsible for the Linux C library. It is not that hard to port code
- to Linux since the Linux C library is POSIX compliant with lots of SYSV,
- BSD and GNU extentions. For most of PD stuff, you can chose POSIX, which
- is the safest, BSD (I did it for compress.) or SYSV. I bet porting code
- to Linux is easier than to 386bsd in general.
-
- |> This is the other reason why I choose 386bsd over linux. However it is
- |> not completely true because 4.3 BSD is slightly different from 4.2 BSD. Use
- |> of GNU utilities make it slightly incompatible with full blown mainframe
- |> BSD or those used in ultrix and Sun workstations.
-
- You mean GNU utilities have lots of new switches? I just happen to like that.
- They can do you want them to do.
-
- |> The other reason is that linux is more for hackers. Lynne goes to
- |> great lengths to make 386bsd installation easy for "idiots"/beginners.
-
- That is true. Now the FSF is planning distribute Linux. We are trying to
- make it idiot-proof. But noone can 100% guarantee it.
-
- |>
- |> How about performance comparisons? I've posted the results of iozone 1 to
- |> comp.unix.bsd .
- |>
-
- I think that depends on the applications.
-
-
- H.J.
-