On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Soumyadip Modak wrote: > Isn't OpenBSD supposedly more secure than NetBSD ?
Similar codebase for kernel, different configurations and choices for applications. It is like saying that Debian is more secure than RedHat which is true, but isn't really what people are asking. The OpenBSD folks aren't as communicative which is why NetBSD was used for our routers. The company I am moving in with also has extensive NetBSD experience which was the most important deciding factor. > I'm thinking of trying out FreeBSD. Another thing. Acc. To an > extremetech article, BSD runs many apps developed primarily for Linux, > faster than Linux itself. Is this true? It is application and kernel version specific. The codebase is more similar than people might think. There was a memory allocation issue in 2.2 that I believe was solved partly by adopting the VM system from FreeBSD. I don't remember the specifics at this point. I tend to think more about the packaging than the kernel. > I'm not too fussy about using only GPL software. So all those who > hate BSDs for the license plz. do not flame me. I am one of those. I won't contribute code to a BSD project, but I will run existing code. If all else is equal, I will run the GPL application. In this case the NetBSD is being used because it isn't the Linux kernel and I wanted to be running the routers with something different (but still Free Software) --- Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses, VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen and not a third party. -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/ -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body "unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line. FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/node.php?id=3
