[259] in resnet
Re: ["James H. Haynes" : Re: See It, Try It, etc.]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brian D. Carlstrom)
Wed Mar 30 22:05:03 1994
From: bdc@ai.mit.edu (Brian D. Carlstrom)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 94 22:04:13 EST
To: warlord@MIT.EDU
Cc: resnet@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9403302301.AA08477@toxicwaste.media.mit.edu> (message from Derek Atkins on Wed, 30 Mar 94 18:01:41 EST)
>>>>> Derek Atkins writes:
Derek> Come on, brian, we all know that that doesn't leave you a
Derek> very usable machine. I can get linux "up and running" with
Derek> one disk. Two if I decide to go the boot/root disk method.
Derek> Three more disks get me a basic install.
Derek> But using two disks I can get the kernel loaded and running,
Derek> and then get myself on the net, so I can install from there.
Derek> Let's not talk about minimal disksets, ok?
i was just saying. all i really need is one to bootstrap, but i was
speaking of the official distribution.
Derek> If you want to get into religious crusades of Linux
Derek> vs. NetBSD, take it to Flaming_Thoughts.
i dont really care for religious crusades. i just wish that more
alternatives than linux would be mentioned
Derek> BTW: People are so Linux-happy because its smaller, faster,
Derek> and improving at a greater rate than NetBSD. Come on, why
Derek> did NetBSD only get shared libraries last month? Linux has
Derek> had them for over a year! It's a religious decision. SIPB
Derek> chose Linux. You didn't.
smaller? both kernels seem about ~400k. and doing a quick df on my
friends linux system, he seems to have more stuff than i do (and yes i
have X and emacs and latex and MIT scheme and...) faster? well i dont
know if either of us would trust the others benchmarks, but they are
both fine to me. improving at a greater rate? i would argue that that is
becuase it needs to improve more to begin with. i've been using shlibs
for a long time now, and they have existed for those interested since
the 386bsd days. just because you had them first doesnt mean they by any
means better either...
the only way i think that NetBSD is any any way better than linux is
with regard to portabilty, and that is only because it is BSD. linux may
havebetter system v support, but most things i want to run are more
academic and therefore bsdish anyway...
oh, and netbsd works (at least somewhat, if not totally usable) on the
following ten platforms:
da30/ i386/ mac68k/ pmax/ sun3/
amiga/ hp300/ m68k/ pc532/ sparc/
-bri
