Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Originally posted by frankprogramer Which is better and why?
This type of question is akin to asking which Linux distro is better. The answer really depends on the comfort level and skills of the admin. Personally, I like using OpenBSD for servers; however, there are some situations (ie CPU intensive apps requiring multiple processors) where I'd go with something else.
here's a nice little piece about the BSD family.
,----[ http://discuss.extremetech.com/n/mai...tart&msg=19561 ]
| In contrast, BSD is certified under a truly free license which leaves
| anyone free to do whatever he or she wishes with the code, including
| make money by licensing it or use it as part of another work. The
| minor restrictions imposed by the BSD license apply not to what may be
| done with the code, but rather what may be done to the developer. (The
| previous developer may not be held liable for errors, or -- under some
| versions of the license -- be deprived of credit for his or her work.)
`----
however the BSD licence also allows people to take your code, change it a bit, then redistribute it as closed source binaries and make a packet off of it.
edit - you did just say this but i meant that the GPL allows people to retain the ownership and control over even open source stuff.
surely this question is really GPL vs BSD licence, which is as moot as BSD vs Linux...
I haven't used BSD yet so I don't know which one is better but I heard that Mac OS X is BSD at the core so it must be good in its use. I have heard that Mac OS X is the way to go and when I saw a screenshot of it I noticed that the top of the Window said /usr/sbin I as like whoa Linux then I discoverd that it was BSD, so how much similarity is there between Linux & BSD?
I have even heard that at its core even LiNUX uses some code from BSD now that makes BSD still more better (if what I have read is true). Since immitation is best form of flattery
Code goes both ways between the two, I think. For example, FreeBSD uses Linux's floating point emulation in its kernel, and I think some of its drivers have been developed from Linux code.
As for which is best, I personally prefer BSD because of the ports system, and because the source of the base operating system is managed by a single group of people. This makes it very easy to install and upgrade stuff. Linux has made a lot more advances in the ease of use department, however (although I find FreeBSD a very logical and tidy system - more so than Linux).
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.