Roy Vestal wrote:
My question is 2 fold. If you use BSD, which do you use and why?I use FreeBSD on a daily basis. I do not run it on the desktop, and I'm not sure I'd recommend it for that, but it is a fabulous server OS. As for "why" do I use FreeBSD, it was already in use at my employer - so that got me started, and from there I really have become enamored with it. The ports collection is easily the strongest advantage to FreeBSD (it's a collection of Makefiles and patches that allow you to download and install any of thousands of packages with as simple as a "cd /usr/ports/www/rt3/ && make install" - and it chases dependencies, allows you to specify compile time options, and compiles everything w/ optimizations for your processor (if you so choose)). The OS is quite straight-forward in it's layout, extremely stable, and quite fast even on limited hardware.
I'd like to see if I can use what I do under Linux on the BSD platform. <snip> I do need to use WINE or aYou can certainly do what ever it is you do under Linux (with a few exceptions) under any of the BSDs. The real differing factor comes in hardware support - Linux hardware support (due to a larger user and developer base) is significantly larger. Other than that, the skills you've acquired with Linux are very portable, there's only a few rules of thumb that need to be learned (which are specific to each BSD) and you'll be well on your way to being comfortable in your BSD of choice. I personally haven't used WINE under any of the BSDs, although I suspect it will be very similar to your experiences under Linux, as there's little difference between the OSes that's going to impact the WINE layer.
derivative to run a couple of programs that I still need.
As for a general comparison of the BSD's, you've probably already heard as much, but I'll attempt to rehash it for you. FreeBSD is the most linux-like of the crowd. Generally fast development cycle, more active developers than the other BSDs, probably the more all-purpose of the 3. It has the largest ports collection, and has generally better support for individual hardware devices (i.e. that new SCSI card or USB 2.0 or what-have-you). OpenBSD at the opposite end of the spectrum is the slowest-moving target in terms of new hardware acceptance, and in terms of newly-integrated general-desktop features. All that of course is turned on it's head by the fact that OpenBSD's focus is security, security, security. The lead developer Theo DeRaadt (yeah, that's his real name) is almost Stallman-like in his obsession over good security practices, and his firm believes that his ways are best (and rightly so, because often they are). So when it comes to security hardware, or new security features, they hit OpenBSD first, and then quickly trickle through the other BSDs, and then on to Linux. Some classic examples are OpenSSL, OpenSSH, PF, and CARP. Most people don't think about what the Open in OpenSSL and SSH stand for - but it's their OpenBSD heritage. The PF firewall is one of those features that's still mostly-exclusive to OpenBSD (it's in the new-ish developmental FreeBSD 5.x) that will hopefully, eventually, make it's way to all of the other *NIX flavors we know and love. CARP is another one of those fabulous improvements in the security / availability arena that is still only in OpenBSD, but hopefully will trickle out. You can think of OBSD as a security-tool incubator -- and if you requires those features then living in the incubator is a very comfy place to be. :) That leaves us with NetBSD. I personally haven't experimented with it, but their mantra is NetBSD runs on anything. Rumor has it that you can load NetBSD on your toaster, and by now it will probably boot on the doorknobs in my apartment, with sufficient soldering. Their goal is extreme portability, and so they are somewhere between FreeBSD and OpenBSD in terms of their rate of change. It's not as hard to port something to a Z80 as it is to make sure it's really secure. :)
Hopefully that's enough information to at least get you rolling. Do note that the one big differing factor between the Linux community and the *BSD community, is their choice of licensing scheme. The Linux crowd usually prefers the GPL, which some would argue is "more free", because it enforces the fact that all derivative works must be free. On the other hand, the BSD crowd insists that their license is "even more free" because it imposes no restriction other than attribution (give me credit, but modify it how ever you like). The BSD license allows you to fork off your own RoyBSD, close up the source, and just slap a sticker on the back saying "Based on code from NetBSD" - and then charge a million bucks for access to the binaries, and never give away the source. You must decide for yourself which is "more free", or at least which you prefer for your own use.
Good luck in the exploring!
Aaron S. Joyner -- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/ TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
