April 20th, 2003, 08:49 PM
free BSD vs Linux
hi guys iam new to the linux world
i read a sort of books about *nix
and i noticed that they nearly run the same commands!
so now let's go to the point
what's the real difference between FreeBSD and linux??
let's say linux redhat 9 and the latest version of FreeBSD
i wonder is the shell of Free BSD has the same commands for linux
or there's a kinda of restrictions??
thank u for help
April 20th, 2003, 10:14 PM
FreeBSD and Linux commands are realativly similar due to the fact that they are both based of the original UNIX. Linux internally however is closely releated to System Five Release Four UNIX and the network stack is based largely off of BSD network software.
FreeBSD is based off of BSD 4.4 lite. BSD was orignally distributed by the University of Californian Research Group (BSRG).
Linux is actually an operating system kernel which can not function alone. FreeBSD is a complete operating system along with a kernel and common utilites.
FreeBSD and GNU/Linux distributions commonly run the same shells such as bash, csh, etc...
Truthfully on the outside FreeBSD and common Linux distributions are extreamly similar including the commands on both systems, which are inherited from their common ancestor UNIX.
- peace out...
April 20th, 2003, 10:25 PM
Try it out. I'm no expert but, after experiencing Red Hat's rpm first hand to me it makes
sense to build everything from source. It's excellent to have the kernel & world always in sync and from a single source.
Most Linux newbies install RedHat and have services running that they don't know were running now that bad from a security stand point. At least this way I have full control on what's running an knowlegde of it's purpose.
#egrep "Linux" | rm -rf *
# 8-O just my 2cents┐
April 21st, 2003, 01:28 PM
I'll throw in my take on BSD/Linux. . .They are very similar. . .the main difference that I have heard is the compilation of the code. . .new software/code/kernel changes ect in Linux are ultimatley accepted or rejected by Linus, whereas BSD has a group/board of people responsible for reviewing changes/additions. Some people say that BSD is more secure, which isn't really true. . .BSD ships w/ the default installation having all services turned off, during the install if you enable some of the services you are warned about possibly being at risk, while different versions of Linux vary as to what services are immedately configured and 'turned on'.
It all comes down to what you get comfortable w/, for me the BSD ports/packages seems to make sense over RPM's or other methods, but if you secure your box, it's pretty much going to be all the same.
Every now and then, one of you won't annoy me.