Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: FInally, FreeBSD 8.0 Released

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    They were/are using Linux emulation layer for some reasons.

    You've got to be kidding. I don't buy their propaganda like some infamous benchmarks. LOTR[2], Shrek and some other films were rendered using Linux. Linux is not mentioned in link you gave, so you base on what saying they chose Freebsd over Linux, because Freebsd was faster? About this emulation (ok, compatibility) being faster it's mentioned in Freebsd documentation and there's something like: some people report Q3 is faster using emulation... Such crap.



    Disney, DreamWorks, Pixar use Linux over Freebsd, so it must be faster.

    Oh, are you sure about Matrix:

    http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9951
    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Holly...ux-45571.shtml

    Marketing bull - version.
    The story is better with Shrek3, where they used 1,000 Linux desktops and more than 3,000 server CPUs.
    http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9653

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apopas View Post
    ... blah blah skipped ...
    But ofcourse they know nothing, someone should tell the how fast FreeBSD is. It has been proven after all during all these years and benchmarks...
    Who really cares that much about performance these days. Of course it does matter, but differences are so small almost nobody will notice. I have Linux and FreeBSD servers and I'm talking about 100+ and I will always perfer FreeBSD over linux. A LOT better structured system. lot easier to manage, everything is in it's place. Base system is separated from the software that user installs. And You actually know where to find config and files (libs, data etc.) of the program You just installed. In linux it's a total mess. Every package have it's own mind where to put files, every distro have it's own structure. 10+ sites with packages and no single repository You spend sometimes hours to find where exactly that package that You need is and how to import the N-th package site You happen to find that package on. Compared to freebsd ports and package systems which contains 20 000+ programs and You find & install what You need in matter of seconds. Not to mention tuning every port to You exact requirement and not installing 100+ Xorg (or whatever) packages just to have some sound manipulation library.
    IMO, linux is easier to work with if You don't need to much personalization (without breaking 'distros way' of doing things) and You stick with what's provided. FreeBSD in the other hand robust and easier to manipulate system and You can do It without breaking the way it's originaly ment to work and be upgraded. It feels like a glove or even extension of your own hand opposed to linux which feels like a wrench - it works, but not much more ...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,610

    Default

    I do not fully understand your config problem. Usually when you install the most common server apps under linux the config files are in /etc. There might be a /etc/default/packagename override with some small settings, but why do you see different configs when the apps are basically the same. I do not talk about manually compiled apps but installed via default package manager. Things that you could really annoy are security features like selinux which break some things (like quake live) on Fedora.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Things that you could really annoy are security features like selinux which break some things (like quake live) on Fedora.
    If you use a bleeding edge testing ground like Fedora, you've got to expect lots of niggling frustrations.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,610

    Default

    I only use that live to test r600/intel drivers. I have got my own debian stable + u kernel + backports based distro.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    /dev/random
    Posts
    218

    Default

    How did this turn into a FreeBSD vs. Linux thread?

    Congrats to the FreeBSD devs.

    Archlinux FTW!
    *runs away*

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    985

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by some-guy View Post
    How did this turn into a FreeBSD vs. Linux thread?
    Because there are a lot of zealots here.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tbyte View Post
    Who really cares that much about performance these days. Of course it does matter, but differences are so small almost nobody will notice. I have Linux and FreeBSD servers and I'm talking about 100+ and I will always perfer FreeBSD over linux. A LOT better structured system. lot easier to manage, everything is in it's place. Base system is separated from the software that user installs. And You actually know where to find config and files (libs, data etc.) of the program You just installed. In linux it's a total mess. Every package have it's own mind where to put files, every distro have it's own structure. 10+ sites with packages and no single repository You spend sometimes hours to find where exactly that package that You need is and how to import the N-th package site You happen to find that package on. Compared to freebsd ports and package systems which contains 20 000+ programs and You find & install what You need in matter of seconds. Not to mention tuning every port to You exact requirement and not installing 100+ Xorg (or whatever) packages just to have some sound manipulation library.
    IMO, linux is easier to work with if You don't need to much personalization (without breaking 'distros way' of doing things) and You stick with what's provided. FreeBSD in the other hand robust and easier to manipulate system and You can do It without breaking the way it's originaly ment to work and be upgraded. It feels like a glove or even extension of your own hand opposed to linux which feels like a wrench - it works, but not much more ...
    What a bull Gentoo is Freebsd killer. Robust? Even Ubuntu kick its ass and not only in Phoronix benchmarks and Freebsd is not more solid then Debian.
    Last edited by kraftman; 11-25-2009 at 04:11 AM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tbyte View Post
    bla blah blah and more blah...
    Not to mention tuning every port to You exact requirement and not installing 100+ Xorg (or whatever) packages just to have some sound manipulation library.
    IMO, linux is easier to work with if You don't need to much personalization (without breaking 'distros way' of doing things) and You stick with what's provided. FreeBSD in the other hand robust and easier to manipulate system and You can do It without breaking the way it's originaly ment to work and be upgraded. It feels like a glove or even extension of your own hand opposed to linux which feels like a wrench - it works, but not much more ...
    Hmmm the same as Gentoo does but with Gentoo you get and speed as well in combination with extreme personalization and broader hardware support as well.
    You know what's your fault? You compare FreeBSD with every Linux distro. That's unfair because the distros have differnet goals and ways. The matter is just one. With Linux you can have whatever FreeBSD has to offer plus bette performance, wider hardware detection and easy of use because Linux, not Ubuntu or OpenSUSE or Fedora etc etc, but Linux in general is as configurable as you want it to be.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Apopas View Post
    Hmmm the same as Gentoo does but with Gentoo you get and speed as well in combination with extreme personalization and broader hardware support as well.
    You know what's your fault? You compare FreeBSD with every Linux distro. That's unfair because the distros have differnet goals and ways. The matter is just one. With Linux you can have whatever FreeBSD has to offer plus bette performance, wider hardware detection and easy of use because Linux, not Ubuntu or OpenSUSE or Fedora etc etc, but Linux in general is as configurable as you want it to be.

    Ah, cool! How do I configure ZFS in Ubuntu to boot from a raidz pool?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •