kfb2@lehigh.edu (Keenan Brock) wrote:

>>
>>So what IS the point of porting linux to the mac.. NetBSD
>>is a much better implimentation of unix than linux...
>>
>
>That has always boggled me.  It is alwasy said that bsd is one of the more
>portable forms of unix.  Why don't people for the intel like freebsd or
>netbsd or 86bsd... Why is there such a hype on linux?
>
>I guess the point of linux's source being totally their own really has them
>psyched.
>
>Could anyone enlighten me on what exactly makes Linux that much better than
>bsd?

One thing that I've really liked about Linux is the UMSDOS filesystem.
Having UMSDOS available has allowed me to install Linux without
repartitioning my disk.  This is especially nice for me because I have it
installed on a laptop with limited disk space.  Since I haven't
repartitioned, I'm not locked into any particular DOS/Linux space
allocation.

I haven't tried NetBSD, yet.  Perhaps it has a similar filesystem; however,
I have not heard of such.  If not, I think this would be a really nice
addition.

For what (little) it is worth, I would think UHFS would be simpler than
UMSDOS, given that HFS already supports long names and soft links.

Coty Rosenblath
coty@netcom.com