Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 07:32:20 -0800 (PST), Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >> NetBSD needs a *very* minimal set of POSIX tools to build, e.g. you can >> get away with an sh(1) utility and a pretty basic make(1) tool. They >> have really done a magnificent job at constructing a build system that >> can bootstrap itself from a tiny set of build tools. >> >> FreeBSD also has _some_ of the necessary build glue to do similar sort >> of stuff, but AFAIK we only support cross-building from one FreeBSD >> architecture to another FreeBSD architecture. So you need to have at >> least *some* version of FreeBSD to build another. > > How about these bench vs FreeBSD?! > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img11.html > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img13.html > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html NetBSD 5.0 is indeed a major step forward for NetBSD. This presentation was what convinced me to give NetBSD a try back when 5.0 came out. I have been running it at home for a while now. The only systems I have at home right now are FreeBSD and NetBSD. There are both nice systems; I like both of them and it's very nice to see how BSD is definitely *not* dying by using the various BSDs and seeing how they keep moving forward :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Mark Shroyer wrote: > On 2/18/2010 10:32 AM, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote: >> How about these bench vs FreeBSD?! >> >> http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img11.html >> >> http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img13.html >> >> http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html > > If those numbers are characteristic of the operating system's overall > performance, then that's a really impressive leap forward for NetBSD. > > That said, I use FreeBSD mainly on small, individual servers; as we all > know, there's a lot more that goes into selecting a server OS than raw > performance numbers. Stability, security features (like the ability to > run Apache jailed with whatever random, potentially insecure CGI or PHP > applications one must install), and ease of software installation and > maintenance are important too, and for me FreeBSD excels at these things. > > But between these massive performance improvements, and its mature Xen > compatibility, and the fact that they evicted Sendmail from the base > system in favor of Postfix, NetBSD really has my attention. (In fact > I'm setting up a VM right now so I can get a feel for how NetBSD + > pkgsrc handles as a server.) Now if only it had jails... Mature xen dom0 support is a REALLY BIG plus for me, I wish FreeBSD had Xen Dom0 support :/ I also wish that NetBSD had mature ZFS support (or at least working snapshots). I have taken a look at NetBSD 5 and I have to say it isn't too bad, I was surprised. Sam Fourman Jr. Fourman Networks ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Mark Shroyer wrote: > > On 2/18/2010 10:32 AM, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote: > > How about these bench vs FreeBSD?! > > > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img11.html > > > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img13.html > > > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html > > If those numbers are characteristic of the operating system's overall > performance, then that's a really impressive leap forward for NetBSD. > > That said, I use FreeBSD mainly on small, individual servers; as we all > know, there's a lot more that goes into selecting a server OS than raw > performance numbers. Stability, security features (like the ability to > run Apache jailed with whatever random, potentially insecure CGI or PHP > applications one must install), and ease of software installation and > maintenance are important too, and for me FreeBSD excels at these things. > > But between these massive performance improvements, and its mature Xen > compatibility, and the fact that they evicted Sendmail from the base > system in favor of Postfix, NetBSD really has my attention. (In fact > I'm setting up a VM right now so I can get a feel for how NetBSD + > pkgsrc handles as a server.) Now if only it had jails... > > -- > Mark Shroyer > http://markshroyer.com/contact/ > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" bullets on this slide are particluarly interesting http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img6.html 20 secs from boot loader to GDM prompt 4th bullet is quite not clear what "Unified kernel image for x86" means ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
On 2/18/2010 10:32 AM, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote: > How about these bench vs FreeBSD?! > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img11.html > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img13.html > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html If those numbers are characteristic of the operating system's overall performance, then that's a really impressive leap forward for NetBSD. That said, I use FreeBSD mainly on small, individual servers; as we all know, there's a lot more that goes into selecting a server OS than raw performance numbers. Stability, security features (like the ability to run Apache jailed with whatever random, potentially insecure CGI or PHP applications one must install), and ease of software installation and maintenance are important too, and for me FreeBSD excels at these things. But between these massive performance improvements, and its mature Xen compatibility, and the fact that they evicted Sendmail from the base system in favor of Postfix, NetBSD really has my attention. (In fact I'm setting up a VM right now so I can get a feel for how NetBSD + pkgsrc handles as a server.) Now if only it had jails... -- Mark Shroyer http://markshroyer.com/contact/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
Hi, - Original Message > From: Giorgos Keramidas > To: Masoom Shaikh > Cc: freebsd-questions > Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 1:36:30 PM > Subject: Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool > > On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:09:54 +0530, Masoom Shaikh > wrote: > > here is excellant intoduction to NetBSD-5.0 > > > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img0.html > > > > certain statements are very impressive in those slides like "Build any > > NetBSD platform from any POSIX environment" > > $ uname -s -m > > Linux i686 > > $ cd netbsd-src > > $ ./build.sh -m sparc64 release > > > > develop and test 32 bits apps on 64 bit env > > cc -m 32 > > > > does FreeBSD has those two features ? > > NetBSD needs a *very* minimal set of POSIX tools to build, e.g. you can > get away with an sh(1) utility and a pretty basic make(1) tool. They > have really done a magnificent job at constructing a build system that > can bootstrap itself from a tiny set of build tools. > > FreeBSD also has _some_ of the necessary build glue to do similar sort > of stuff, but AFAIK we only support cross-building from one FreeBSD > architecture to another FreeBSD architecture. So you need to have at > least *some* version of FreeBSD to build another. How about these bench vs FreeBSD?! http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img11.html http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img13.html http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img15.html Regards, -Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri Arab Portal http://www.WeArab.Net/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:09:54 +0530, Masoom Shaikh wrote: > here is excellant intoduction to NetBSD-5.0 > > http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img0.html > > certain statements are very impressive in those slides like "Build any > NetBSD platform from any POSIX environment" > $ uname -s -m > Linux i686 > $ cd netbsd-src > $ ./build.sh -m sparc64 release > > develop and test 32 bits apps on 64 bit env > cc -m 32 > > does FreeBSD has those two features ? NetBSD needs a *very* minimal set of POSIX tools to build, e.g. you can get away with an sh(1) utility and a pretty basic make(1) tool. They have really done a magnificent job at constructing a build system that can bootstrap itself from a tiny set of build tools. FreeBSD also has _some_ of the necessary build glue to do similar sort of stuff, but AFAIK we only support cross-building from one FreeBSD architecture to another FreeBSD architecture. So you need to have at least *some* version of FreeBSD to build another. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
NetBSD 5.0 looks cool
here is excellant intoduction to NetBSD-5.0 http://www.netbsd.org/~ad/50/img0.html certain statements are very impressive in those slides like "Build any NetBSD platform from any POSIX environment" $ uname -s -m Linux i686 $ cd netbsd-src $ ./build.sh -m sparc64 release develop and test 32 bits apps on 64 bit env cc -m 32 does FreeBSD has those two features ? also can anyone comment about locking granularity in FreeBSD kernel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
