For an nfs file server on your LAN, I doubt there will ever be a perceivable performance difference. It's more important for your server to be running something you're familiar with troubleshooting.

Again, I'll note that the comparison table you linked is OLD. It's about a decade out of date.

Heard about it, tried it, loved it. Currently using Linux because it's what I currently need.

P.S. FreeBSD and OpenBSD are not the only *BSD operating systems.

"Everybody" used to(?) talk only about Windows.

It's just software, use what you need, if you need Windows, use Windows, if you need Red Hat Linux 7.2, use Red Hat Linux 7.2, if you need DragonFlyBSD, use it. It's not the end of the world if you pick one operating system over the other, nor does it mean the operating system you pick is generally better than all the alternatives.

P.S. (#2?): What kind of setup do you have going on around there? (i.e. why is your /home on a different computer ?)

Come on, dont tell me that no one export the /home of one machine, to server several clients : http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/hp12p...pts/ch05-3.gif

Well, Btrfs is sure to give ZFS a run for its money (once it is stable, of course...).

I think we're not understanding eachother. But I'm too lazy to try and make things work, let's just leave it at that. Thanks anyway :-)

"Everyone?" "Your friends?" How reliable is that? Answer: not very. That's hearsay, nothing more.

"Sweeping blanket statements," sorry, are just not useful for decision making. You may or may not be familiar with a system (yet), but that doesn't matter to that system.

Generally speaking, the choice of what operating system software to deploy is based simply on what application software is to be deployed. At some point in time, somebody started writing "a cool app," and they built it using a system that was available at that time and they may-or-may-not have gone back over the code to make it "portable" to other environments. People typically select the app first. Or, if their application is OS-agnostic, they might just have "picked the one with the best price." However, once they've made the decision, they're not as likely to change that decision.

Anybody should feel free to install and use any BSD system

NetBSD certainly supports more hardware, mostly models that are not even supported anymore by the manufacturers (does anyone have a lot of 16 MHz 68k Macs around or want to run a business on 386 chips?).

OpenBSD certainly is more secure by auditing every inch of source code - but even reading the install instructions needs expertise.

FreeBSD ... I don't know, I liked NetBSD and OpenBSD better, so I have used those.

Darwin is a tricky system - it is not even possible to build a new Darwin system on itself without Xcode and other tools that need a full MacOSX installation (prove me wrong, send detailed information on how you did it!)

As years went by I actually came to disabandon all BSD systems and rather use Linux exclusively now. Linux has a more vivid community and faster pace of changes. It did simply work better for me. This doesn't mean it's better for everyone.

If I would be a business entity, I would prefer BSD, because it would allow me to make changes to the system without sharing these modifications with others (including competitors).

But as a user and system administrator I'm glad to be on the other side.

Linux Archive