Question

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 08:49:33AM -0500, Paul King wrote:
> Well, for one thing, FreeBSD is a kind of BSD, not Linux. THe only similarity 
> they share is that they both come from the UNIX lineage.

Well BSD started from UNIX source.  Linux never had unix source, it was
from scratch.  Same design philosophy for the base system though.

> I must admit, that I have downloaded BSD before, and have never been able to 
> successfully install it on any hardware yet. That being said, I have used Linux 
> since Slackware and the 1.0.6 kernel. Comparing it to what I now run Linux on, 
> I recall that I was able to run it successfully on truly degenerate hardware 
> (to begin with, a 486 SX-33 (no math co-pro) with 4 megs of RAM). These days on 
> current hardware, you should have no trouble installing a recent linux.

Well I have installed Linux and BSD on both MIPS 3000 machines and x86
and even sparc.  Hasn't been a problem so far (NetBSD being my choice
for BSD that runs on anything, although I much prefer running Debian on
everything).

> A distribution I have worked with recently that I would recommend to a 
> beginner: Mandrake 9.2, which I had to install on a school server. Best use of 
> framebuffers I have seen, although I don't use framebuffers myself.

Is that the one that messed with the kernel to put the boot messages
inside a small pretty box ala win2k boot?  What a waste of development
time. :)

Lennart Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml