On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 10:07:11AM +0200, Martin Baehr wrote: > On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 12:11:19AM +0100, Jim Cheetham wrote: > > FreeBSD is almost as flexible as a Linux, and "more stable" in a > > qualitative way. > which linux distribution are you comparing this with?
Mostly RedHat/Mandrake distributions. "Flexible" is not necessarily a positive term here ... I mean that there are lots and lots of rpm's around, and pre-compiled stuff in general for those Linuxes, but in a FreeBSD model you'd tend to wait for a port to be available, even though you could do your own installation from source. So ultimately you could run anything, but often you'd wait for a port to be available. A RH/MDK RPM would probably be available before a BSD port. Some commercial software will only be available for RH, or at least, only supported for RH. That's also a reflection on the stability question, too ... instead of trusting a random person to produce an RPM, you trust the BSD developers to produce a port that will fit itself into your system's preferences. -jim
