> I use NetBSD as an internet server but more and more users
> (scientists)
> want Linux. I have two questions.

You might want to ask them why they want Linux?  What are their goals?   
 What platform do the want to run on? (i386, alpha, sparc, etc.)

>
> 1. Which Linux is most like Unix (BSD)?

None really, Linux is very non-Posix compliant.

There have been very few programs written for Linux that I have not been   
able to compile on NetBSD.  The NetBSD package system is 2nd to none.

>
> 2. Could NetBSD do anything Linux does? I assume that I would
> build the
> kernel with Linux and ELL32. Would I also need a
> compatibility package?

Sure, I use to literally populate an entire sub-directory with a Linux   
distribution, chroot to /emul/linux and act as if I was on a Linux   
system!  I could compile linux binaries with linux compilers and libs!   
 Keep running NetBSD and you can fool them into thinking they are on a   
Linux machine <hehe>!

Many of the SVR4 commands have crept into NetBSD, so NetBSD isn't   
strictly BSD.  However, staying strictly BSD isn't NetBSD's goal.  It is   
a research platform.  Without change, there is no progress...

The one thing NetBSD has going against it is it lack of kernel threads.   
 The GNU-pth is probably the best pthread user-space solution there is.   
 I personally prefer GNU-pth.  If something goes wrong, it's user-space,   
kill and it's gone!  Rouge kernel threads aren't so nice, sometimes.  I   
read mention of kernel threads in 1.5, I'm not sure this is correct   
though.

Multiple CPUs are not supported.  However, once kernel threads are in,   
multipule CPU support should be in NetBSD's near future.

>
> I hope that I will not offend anyone by this question. I have
> to support
> (read: really help) the users. They know about Linux (or have
> heard about
> it) but they do not know anything about NetBSD (I do try to
> tell them but
> need help to convince them).

Security is where NetBSD really out shines Linux.  Red Hat is probably   
the worst in this area, SUSE seems to be best (good Deutsche   
craftsmanship! :-)  I'm not an expert, but I know several Linuxers and   
this is the general feeling.

Linux machines are hacked too often for me to feel good about them.  you   
might say, that's because there are so many of them and they are bigger   
targets.  I've been on this list since NetBSD 0.8 and cannot remember the   
last "I've been hacked" message.

OpenBSD is a security monger!  From what I understand, they even encrypt   
the system  data structures!  FYI, OpenBSD is hosted and the "main"   
developer is in Canada and is a direct descendant of NetBSD!

FreeBSD has some awesome program support in their packages and there was   
a time when FreeBSD was the speed "daemon" of the free UNIX world, due to   
it's i386 optimized support.  I have not seen numbers on this for several   
years and I'm sure the gap has closed a lot.

One bonus of NetBSD is the Linix security hacks will not work with   
NetBSD!!!  I'm not sure what they are whining about, but I've been able   
to get on an UNIX flavor I've never seen and do just fine!  That is   
suppose to be the magic of UNIX!

NetBSD is not a release of the day!  NetBSD is only released after the   
developers feel that it is stable and secure.  I feel that NetBSD is   
treated more as a product than a hack fest as Liunx is often viewed.

Trust me, there is nothing magical about Linux...

John A. Maier
Kemper Military School and College
Director of MIS
Voice: 660-882-5623
Fax: 660-882-3778
Email: johnam@kemper.org
Web: www.kemper.org