POLL: Linux preferences from FreeBSD users

[Richard Mahlerwein]

My preferences for Linux:

I have used FreeBSD fairly regularly since 2.x and various flavors of Linux since around that time as well.  

As I was writing the first pass at this, I realized that many or most of the problems I have with Linuxes are endemic to "Linux" (whatever that is) and not to particular distributions.  My main problems with most of the them are that they are just so inconsistent. Directory structures, documentation, even just where they install packages to by default - the standardization inside FreeBSD and that which is supplied by the ports system just makes for so much more of a sane and predictable experience.

Secondarily, apart from *some* of the source ones and the debian-based ones, I always end up with broken dependencies or some weird circular inconsistencies.  I'm sure I could fix them if I were a rpm guru, but I am not.  FreeBSD just [generally] makes it so much easier and makes me not want to become an "rpm guru".

Servers:

As you have probably guessed by this point, the only Linux that I feel suits my needs well enough to have used it long term (on my own, that is, not when I've been required to use it) is Debian and some of its progeny (including, in fact, Progeny itself! :).  

I usually end up with Ubuntu server. And it's OK.  

Desktops:

Now, on desktops I flit around like a jack rabbit on crack.  My desktop needs are completely different from my server needs.  I'm usually XP (for games at home, work at work), so it's always the second and third OS on my boxes, so I try 'em all.  PCLinux is actually been very good to me recently (Surprise!  It's rpm based, too! How weird is that!).  Kbuntu and some variants are decent enough.  None of these last long enough to need more than a few patches, so I don't have the problem of dependency issues.

Rich Mahlerwein

Mobile: [phone]



     
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@..."

[Fred C!]

On Jul 3, 2009, at 6:01 AM, Polytropon wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 08:28:01 -0600, Modulok <modulok@...> wrote:
>> That and Linux seems to only ever get the abridged version of manual
>> pages. When you compare manual pages for an equivalent commands
>> between FreeBSD and most Linux flavors, it really shows. I noticed
>> this when I went from Debian to FreeBSD. "Finally! Real
>> documentation!"
>
> There ware two things that I found to be solved better in FreeBSD than
> in various Linusi:
>
> 1. Amount of manual pages: FreeBSD does not only document commands,
> it documents configuration files, kerlen interfaces, library functions
> and maintenance procedures. The tradition of manual pages furthermore
> is carried by third party software (ports), e. g. "man opera" - you
> would not guess that it existed. In the opposite, try to find a
> manpage of some KDE program (as if anyone would read manpages for
> KDE things).
>
> 2. Quality of documentation: The manpages are excellently written.
> No "look at our Wiki" or "this page intentionally left free" there.
> furthermore, the OS's source is very tidy, uses good names for
> functions, variables and datatypes, and has lots of useful comments.
>
> As a developer, documentation is a MUST HAVE for me. Having all
> the documentation avaliable "off line" right after installation
> is very good.
>
> Sadly, Linux didn't (doesn't?) offer this.

I agree, the linux documentation is very scarce. Having good man pages  
is very convenient, specially when you are in a data center with just  
a console on a cart. Having to go online to check some badly organised  
wiki is not always convenient or possible.

I also have my share of frustration with the logs. The messages in the  
log files are often inconsistent and unhelpful. In this following  
example the kernel is reporting a disk error but forgot to specify the  
most important information, the disk.

Jul  3 00:07:53 locdata204 kernel: [5706229.550000]     res  
41/40:00:52:4a:73/83:02:27:00:00/00 Emask 0x9 (media error)


-fred-

_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@..."

[Daniel Underwood]

Are most of these shortcomings primarily due to the fact that FreeBSD
has a single structured line of development?
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@..."

[Polytropon]

On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:59:26 -0400, Daniel Underwood <djuatdelta@...> wrote:
> Are most of these shortcomings primarily due to the fact that FreeBSD
> has a single structured line of development?

In opposite to Linux, FreeBSD has the concept of a centrally maintained
operating system ("the OS") and additional applications ("everything
else") which means packages, ports, and 3rd party software. You can
see this even through the directory hierarchy: Everything inside
the /usr/local subtree is not needed for the OS (and can be removed
with leaving you with a completely intact OS). The distributors of
Linux choose what belongs to their distribution which does not have
such a separation. Basal software, as well as additional stuff, is
incorporated via some kind of packages, even the kernel can be
handled that way. Of course, as you said, most Linux distribution
has its own concept and line of development, separated from those
of the other distributions. That creates incompatibilities and
differences between the distributions. FreeBSD, on the other hand,
manages to keep even binary compatibility between major OS changes.
Those who develop and control the OS are programmers who put a lot
emphasize on quality - and that's very important to me.


--
Polytropon
>From Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@... mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@..."

[Chad Perrin]

On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 03:30:30AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 18:58:15 -0400, Daniel Underwood <djuatdelta@...> wrote:
> > QUESTION: Of the various modern Linux distributions, which do you
> > prefer? and why?
> >
> > I'm very interested to see the spread of opinion about Linux
> > distributions from FreeBSD fans.
>
> Debian is the one I can almost tolerate.

Ditto.  I've been through dozens of Linux distributions, and Debian is
still my favorite.  I am *not* talking about Ubuntu, mind you -- that's
not really Debian any longer.  Much of what I like most about Debian was
screwed gently with a chainsaw by the Ubuntu team.

Of course, that's only "almost tolerate", as you said.  Even Debian
annoys the crap out of me, now that I've gotten familiar enough with
FreeBSD to realize what I was missing.

--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
Quoth Olin Shivers: "I object to doing things that computers can do."