Port-i386 archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: NetBSD vs. FreeBSD [Was: Desktop NetBSD needs your help]

,--- You/Dima (Sun, 8 Feb 2009 07:41:11 +0300) ----*
| On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 09:57:13PM -0500, Alex Goncharov wrote:
| > | NetBSD is really designed for people, moved to NetBSD by their wise
| > | looking for really working things, proved for simplicity. If you
| > | can't understand some deeply technical things - don't even try and
| > | use FreeBSD or Linux.
| > 
| >    What are the most important advantages of NetBSD over FreeBSD?
| It is nice, but when your work is an administration of several
| server boxes via ssh - you are coming to hell with Free or Linux,
| you will blaim any developer included KDE instead of really simple
| and nice utilities. FreeBSD usually have them not in best state, and
| Linux usually don't have them at all.


| People looking for nice installer have questions how Gnome or KDE
| working on their platform, but I look for stable IPSEC package. You
| know - NetBSD have it and always in great working condition, but
| FreeBSD had problems choosing kame or racoon, making it slow. They
| rewrited ports architecture several times, their start-script system
| was awful and keeps to be ugly, their ata driver was rewritten 5
| times and is not a great thing today, their source-code tree is a
| mess. But they always had desktop system in default
| installation. Most people appreciate this, but in 90% of my server
| installations I never install or use X server. I am not against
| FreeBSD at all and used it as a desktop some period of time, it is
| just not for those, who use heavy trucks.


| Also, when you need something built from ports - you have to
| consider nobody keep thinking of ports lightening.

That seems to be true... Especially where X is concerned.

| Under user pressure and some developers work they have to hunt for
| more ports, instead of their quality. Try to compile some simple
| mixer application and get hundreds megabytes as a dependencies. This
| is really not a problem for desktop users.

Unfortunately it *is* a problem for desktop users.

Two weeks ago the "FreeBSD X people" put in the new X (xorg-server
plus libraries).  Many (> 10) people's systems where totally
incapacitated as a result, without any rollback path.  In the current
economic environment that's quite a troubling thing.  The details can
be found in the freebsd-ports%freebsd.org@localhost archives, in the threads:

    Xorg strange behavior
    Xorg disaster
    Xorg upgrade desaster
    Unhappy Xorg upgrade

Troubling and costly -- I am now spending hours and hours working out
my personal strategy (build / rollback infrastructure) to protect me
from anything of this nature in the future. This is on top of almost
two days that I tried to make the new X work, only to roll back in
despair. Roll back painfully.

So, guys, listen to a beaten man's advice: don't you joke with X.
Don't let the cute Gnome in your house.  And to hell with HAL. Or else
it's getting like Linux.  (I am biased here.)

| It's not like debian - once I tried to use Debian as a Dom0
| platform. Xen in debian stable don't even work and it is old. Last
| Xen don't run on most linuses. etch Xen is working, but with reduced
| performance. And I got a crash, when tried to power if off, because
| it tried to save domU states. When your XP would save a state you
| will say - oh, nice, they pushed a real feature! But I was running 8
| Windows Server 2003 as domU's and didn't needed that crazy bug. It
| did what I never asked and it was not able to accomplish simple
| task. This is the cause I can't rely on user-friendly
| technologies. They push a code, thinking it as a feature, it really
| helps users, but it mess up my work. This is like you get new car
| with a right steering-wheel, just because most of people said it's
| better.

Very interesting.

| So, NetBSD as a low-level system is for those, whos work is
| low-level, who thinks that way.

Yeah, nice,

| Pkgsrc is great advantage. Ideal core utilities, total system
| clearence, lightness are greatest advantages too.

Good.  I couldn't come to a conclusion, in my short time, how it
compares with FreeBSD ports and packages.

| > As a user with a three day's experience, I feel that `pkgsrc' may be
| > more worth improving than the installer.

| Pkgsrc is so much great, it's just an excellence. It's a diamond. It
| does anything, it have enough. Next week we would have to build up
| more than 40 Solaris servers, with pkgsrc it is a work for several
| scripts. Really, there is no other package system doing that. Using
| that technologies for years I don't see any defects in pkgsrc
| system.

Oh, thank you -- that's encouraging!
| Try using NetBSD more and you will find out.

Thank you very much for your detailed reply!  I'll probably spend
another two-three weeks of my off-time straightening out the mess that
the latest FreeBSD X upgrade left me in -- then I hope to return to my
learning NetBSD, for Xen and other reasons.

-- Alex -- alex-goncharov%comcast.net@localhost --

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index