LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Other *NIX Forums > *BSD
User Name
Password
*BSD This forum is for the discussion of all BSD variants.
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, etc.

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 08-05-2004, 12:21 AM   #16
Stack
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Distribution: FreeBSD
Posts: 325

Rep: Reputation: 30

Quote:
Funny - I usually hear the argument that BSD is orderly and organized and all of a piece and Linux is a chaos of difference. And even *there* there's the assumption that homogeneity is somehow superior and diversity is somehow inferior - never argued; just assumed.
Yeah BSD is identical... Let me know how your transplant of the OpenBSD kernel goes when you try to shove it in FreeBSD. Heck how about you try transplanting just the userland? There is no point even talking to you about things you obviously do not understand.

Quote:
Slackware is more secure than most.
And we are still awaiting any form of proof that would indicate it is more secure than lets say debian, redhat, gentoo, turbolinux, college linux etc...

But heh wild unfounded claims are more fun! Dont let silly things like facts or evidence get in the way of blind zealotry!

Well heh at least this proves one thing some folks like to listen to the sound of their own voices.
 
Old 08-05-2004, 07:35 AM   #17
stickman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,552

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally posted by Stack
linux = everyone uses the same kernel
BSD = 3 different kernels
I'll avoid the "which is more secure" stuff and comment on the "same kernel" issue. Even though every Linux distribution typically gets their source from the same place, the developer usually ends up building a unique kernel. They roll in patches and modules that they like. For example, Redhat and SuSE backport some of the 2.6 patches into 2.4 kernels to give their kernels what they call "enterprise" features. All kernels based on 2.4.20 source are not the same. Even Redhat has several releases of this kernel. 2.4.20-8 is not the same as 2.4.20-31.9.
 
Old 08-06-2004, 12:21 PM   #18
dfowensby
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: OceanView Virginia, gem of the Southern Shore
Distribution: MATE 15.04
Posts: 194
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 30
kernels, whether linux, bsd, or ms, are operating system foundations. having the biggest ironclad barricade door on the front of your crack house does no good if the narco squad can climb in your wide-open bedroom window.
the OS, and it's construction, and how it is protected and utilized are totally up to the SA.

if you have personnal ego-centric opinions on any particular one, and not one that is crafted in regards to how an employer wants his enterprise run (read: keeping your job), then carry them to an irc.

i come here to get advice (thanks for the 0:root:user pointer on wheel), without having to scroll past flame-spam.
unix is hard enought for a noob as it is, without wondering about the maturity of those you seek advice from....
luck -O.
 
Old 08-06-2004, 01:09 PM   #19
Marble
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Distribution: FreeBSD 5.2
Posts: 113

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally posted by dfowensby
kernels, whether linux, bsd, or ms, are operating system foundations. having the biggest ironclad barricade door on the front of your crack house does no good if the narco squad can climb in your wide-open bedroom window.
the OS, and it's construction, and how it is protected and utilized are totally up to the SA.

if you have personnal ego-centric opinions on any particular one, and not one that is crafted in regards to how an employer wants his enterprise run (read: keeping your job), then carry them to an irc.

i come here to get advice (thanks for the 0:root:user pointer on wheel), without having to scroll past flame-spam.
unix is hard enought for a noob as it is, without wondering about the maturity of those you seek advice from....
luck -O.
Yeah the flame war gets annoying... but regarding your last post, BSD is not Unix, just to clarify that. It is BSD. Also the kernel is not seperable like it is in Linux. There is no FreeBSD kernel apart from FreeBSD the OS.
 
Old 08-06-2004, 03:00 PM   #20
frob23
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Roughly 29.467N / 81.206W
Distribution: OpenBSD, Debian, FreeBSD
Posts: 1,450

Rep: Reputation: 48
You _could_ seperate the kernel from the rest of the OS. You could port the GNU utils for a BSD kernel. It is possible and it could be done. It wouldn't be wise or easy but it is possible. For that matter -- porting the GNU utilities for the Linux kernel wasn't a one second thing either. There is just no good reason to port the GNU programs for a BSD kernel and ignore all the rest of the system. You would be ignoring the tight integration that is done and if you honestly need a certain behavior that only a GNU program provides you can download it.

That being said, the world utilities are not seperate and would be much harder to seperate than the kernel. They are made and maintained to work with the kernel provided. And they expect the other parts of the system to be from the same system. The kernel couldn't care less which program is calling it... but the BSD utilities are made to work with the one system. Again, there is no reason to seperate them because the benefits of having them part of the base system are huge.

It would be an interesting challenge though. Attempt to get a Linux kernel working with a BSD userland or vice-versa. As a practical system it would make no sense.

Yeah ignore the flame wars. It happens all the time in pretty much every group and isn't pleasant. It is true that BSD hasn't paid for the trademark Unix... but I don't think the intent was to say the system was Unix... rather that it is a system that performs in a manner similar to (and not distinct from) systems that are Unix. I use the term as a descriptor frequently because it is understood, just as Windows is understood to refer to a certain class of OSes.

Blah, blah, blah... I am a lot of talk with no content today.

Edit:
Take note that even if you got the FreeBSD kernel working in a GNU userland it would not be FreeBSD anymore. Likewise, a BSD userland with the Linux kernel would not be FreeBSD either. The OS FreeBSD refers to the kernel and userland together.

http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/

The above link points to an example similar to what I was talking about. In this case, they have ported all the GNU utilities to a NetBSD kernel. It is a complete GNU userland but the kernel is NetBSD. Obviously I am not the only person who thought it would be interesting to attempt.

Last edited by frob23; 08-06-2004 at 03:21 PM.
 
Old 08-06-2004, 03:28 PM   #21
Marble
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Distribution: FreeBSD 5.2
Posts: 113

Rep: Reputation: 15
That was a good reply. This comment is more what I was refering to...
Quote:
Take note that even if you got the FreeBSD kernel working in a GNU userland it would not be FreeBSD anymore. Likewise, a BSD userland with the Linux kernel would not be FreeBSD either. The OS FreeBSD refers to the kernel and userland together.
Which in my mind, is a huge difference between Linux and BSD.

Now as far as creating a cross breed Linux / BSD, now I will leave that to the psycho hackers who have a lot of spare time.... I not that smart =)
 
Old 08-06-2004, 07:36 PM   #22
chort
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Silicon Valley, USA
Distribution: OpenBSD 4.6, OS X 10.6.2, CentOS 4 & 5
Posts: 3,660

Rep: Reputation: 75
I wish you two would quit this stupid bickering. What's worse, you're both wrong. Digi refuses to post even a single shred of evidence that Slack is any more secure than any other Linux distro (it's certainly not as secure as Engarde, Adamantix, Tinfoil Hat, Hardened Gentoo, Trustix, etc).

On the other hand, Stack is being his usual self [edit: well more than one person complained, so you got another warning on your record] and refuses to acknowledge that each distro ships with it's own custom-patched kernel.

Maybe Slack is less kludged than most and has the smallest delta to Kernel.org kernel, but it's still Linux and every time there's a vulnerability with Kernel.org kernel it affects Slack kernel, too. In fact, very few Linux kernel vulnerabilities were specific to something that one distro did in a patch. Most of the kernel vulns affect all kernels (unless specially modified, but hey if Slack has so little modification, I guess it has very little chance of not being vulnerable).

Also digi, it's really not wise to walk into the BSD forum and fan the flames of a BSD vs. Linux flame war. You know that 90% of the posters on this part of the forum will disagree with you and it's just going to stir up passions. You should also bother to check your facts more closely before you start an argument next time, because all of your points were wrong (save the one about different distros patching their kernels differently).

Thread closed.

Last edited by chort; 08-07-2004 at 03:04 PM.
 
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
slackware or FreeBSD boolim Slackware 3 04-08-2004 06:26 PM
Understanding Linux goodies - II barelurker Linux - Newbie 16 03-25-2004 12:07 PM
Understanding Linux goodies barelurker Linux - Newbie 36 03-14-2004 06:10 PM
Linux Goodies joel112 General 3 08-01-2003 04:57 PM
Slackware or freeBSD BrianG Linux - Distributions 2 05-17-2001 08:44 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Other *NIX Forums > *BSD

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:35 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration