FreeBSD Might Get A Linux Kernel API Wrapper To Help Porting Linux Drivers

[JX8p]

You've just shown how mindless typical BSD zealots like as you are for this post that you have written through your pathetic MacBook Pro. You've ignore the fact that Linux has got far more drivers due to the better design interfaces in Linux and also benckmarks have proven that Linux has faster and more efficient then any crap BSD. Opening Firefox on Linux takes 1 sec. Opening Firefox on FreeBSD takes 30 secs.

Anyway back on topic, Linux has ftrace, ltrace and strace which together are far more useful then dtrace. Also, Oracle is porting dtrace to Linux:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTrace

Linux has got sysstat. No need for some obsolete monitoring crap that only works on VAX.

http://sebastien.godard.pagesperso-orange.fr/

That rumor was proven false, the actual comments from the facebook developer is that the FreeBSD stack is terribly written code and inferior to Linux.

http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?107785-Changes-Coming-For-OpenBSD-5-6&p=447270#post447270

Ever heard of LXC and OpenVZ? They beat the crap out of BSD jails and Solaris zones.



Linux already had docker for a long time. So suck on that.



Er.. Wrong. The Mach virtual memory system is far inferior to Linux's. It's the main reason why FreeBSD is far slower then Linux. Remember the 30 sec waiting time to open Firefox? that's the Mach virtual at work. Linus' virtual mem system as of today has no equal.



Linux's iptables are way more flexible and useful in real life situations that OpenBSD's pf crap and also, Linus has netmap (https://code.google.com/p/netmap/) and Linux also has ZFS but that is irrelevant as Linux also has BTRFS.



Linux can also use ZFS as rootfs and it is more suited to handling Sun's bloated piece of crap then FreeBSD is due to more efficiency and the better virtual memory system in Linux. But as I said, ZFS is bull crap and BTRFS is now here and it's going to be Linux only. I won't be surprised if BSD devs try to create a BSD licensed work-a-like to BTRFS once they realized how crap ZFS is a how got BTRFS is.



FreeBSD has iXsystems behind it and yet that is no contribution to BSD development from it. Why? Because of the BSD license. For Linux Redhat nows no one will steal their code (only improve it) due to the GPL license. But for iXsystems, BSD license offers them no protection except the one in which weaker prisoners get in exchange for dropping the soap for stronger prisoners.

Everything you've said is pure opinion with no fact to back it up. By the way, ryao is a Linux kernel developer, so you may wish to consider his words. I certainly consider them more authoritative than these outlandish claims of yours.

Particularly with regard to your only concrete claim ("iXSystems doesn't contribute to BSD"), I suggest you look better - PC-BSD work has filtered down into FreeBSD a lot, they give financial support to FreeBSD projects & events and the Foundation, and more.

[gugus]

FreeBSD has iXsystems behind it and yet that is no contribution to BSD development from it. Why? Because of the BSD license. For Linux Redhat nows no one will steal their code (only improve it) due to the GPL license. But for iXsystems, BSD license offers them no protection except the one in which weaker prisoners get in exchange for dropping the soap for stronger prisoners.

I will not argue with your other points because I don't have the technical skills for comparing Linux to FreeBSD, but the specific points about iXsystems not contributing back is wrong and searching commits with "Sponsored by: iXsystems" of FreeBSD will prove it. iXsystems manage project FreeNAS and PC-BSD and both thes projects are their full code available too.
Regarding all other known FreeBSD heavy users: They are all contributing back to a BSD licensed project! Just search for "Sponsored by:" for finding reference to Netflix, Nginx, Yandex, EMC, Intel, Mellanox, Citrix, ScaleEngine, etc?

[drSeehas]

If it means better/faster graphics support then I'd be all for it.

Better/faster graphics support than NVIDIA proprietary?

[phrx_reader]

what about the rump kernel?

Isn't that used or usable for driver support. Why do you need linux drivers?

[Guest]

The FreeBSD kernel is very well designed and in many respects is superior to the Linux kernel. FreeBSD has while Linux has nothing close to it.

Nice try, troll. It's so well designed that soft updates turned out to be dead end. Does FreeBSD supports kernel preemption or serializing tokens?

dtrace

Pipeline stall analysis is possible on FreeBSD through Pmcstat while it is not clear if Linux offers a way to do it yet

And yet it didn't help *BSD to improve performance over Linux

Facebook considers FreeBSD's TCP/IP stack to be superior

Great, but guess what? They're using LINUX, genius. Facebook employee explained Linux has superior performance to FreeBSD in EVERY area.

FreeBSD has jails that are secure unlike the chroot command that Linux users often think of being for making jails. It pioneered the concept and is still far ahead in this area even today.

FreeBSD has an excellent sandboxing framework that Google ported to Linux for Chrome OS

I wonder why do you compare jails to chroot rather to LXC? Oh, you're a troll. You just said Linux has this "excellent" sandboxing, too! Does FreeBSD have CGROUPS?

FreeBSD's kernel virtual memory is based on Mach and is far superior to Linux's. To be fair, Linux's kernel virtual memory was intentionally crippled as a design decision by Linux et al.

That's why it scales better. Or wait..

ZFS, yeah. Memory hungry cow which is perfect example of anti-Unix philosophy. You forget to add Linux has ZFS support as well and you didn't mention it comes from Solaris not from BSD. The rest of your comment isn't even worth to reply. FreeBSD kernel is legacy one and it's years behind Linux in most areas. Even DragonflyBSD is superior to FreeBSD. Its developers made a file system on their own and they don't have to choose between bloated cow and legacy UFS.

[Guest]

The Linux fanboyism is so apparent here. BSD has superior networking, filesystem, security and works better as a router appliance. No amount of shitposting or shitflinging will change that. Deal with it.

Then explain why BSD is nearly dead? Servers? Nope. HPC? Not a chance. Mainframes? Wishful thinking. Linux offers superior networking performance, superior file systems and better security. Tell me, where's BSD? No shit, just numbers:

http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-unix/all/all

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/11/05/most-reliable-hosting-company-sites-in-october-2014.html

It seems BSD fanboys are people who have lost contact with reality.

[reCAPTCHA]

Regarding arguments against BSD license, which goes like, it encourages stealing of code etc, this is quite wrong. First everyone who releases his code under BSD license is ok with people 'stealing' his code. Another thing is that BSD licensed projects are more interesting for companies to invest in, for obvious reason. It is simply a great way for them to outsource a good part of their work, for much less money, while developers could still get decent salaries, because lot of different companies can have common interest.

I feel like an idiot posting this in a thread where one can mostly read posts from BSD/Linux fans and Trolls, but than I hope there are at least few 'normal' young (or new in this area) people, who are not, or don'T want ot be biased...

[Guest]

Another thing is that BSD licensed projects are more interesting for companies to invest in, for obvious reason. It is simply a great way for them to outsource a good part of their work, for much less money, while developers could still get decent salaries, because lot of different companies can have common interest.

That's not true at all. Just take a look how many companies support Linux in comparison to BSD. While BSD developers do like when some company 'steals' their code, companies do not. And this is not about being biased. Just check this if you want.

[reCAPTCHA]

That's not true at all. Just take a look how many companies support Linux in comparison to BSD. While BSD developers do like when some company 'steals' their code, companies do not. And this is not about being biased. Just check this if you want.

You mean companies don't like when someone steals their code? They don't have to release their code as far as you already know? If you think about the part which is BSD licensed, no they are perfectly fine with it, it works same as with GPL, multiple companies cowork on common base and invest together in it.

Further, why do you thing you have an idea about how many companies support BSD licensed projects? You have no tucking clue about it.

Linux is definitely getting more work, and evolves quicker (what is not always an advantage.), and is more popular than BSD operating systems, but that has different reasons than here presented. At the time Linux started getting support and being popular, BSD OS was very expensive and not free.

Still BSD distributions have their own niche, especially OpenBSD, which is used on routers / and firewalls of governmental agencies, different companies (IIRC apple is using it internally as a part of their infrastructure.), secret societies, like Dis fetish and bro etc. The thing is no one wants OpenBSD to become popular. There are even rumors about people being paid for anti OpenBSD propaganda. The 'problem' is they don't look really good in it. I could do it much better for money.

I just stopped feeling my leg here on the toilet... Have to do something about it.

[anda_skoa]

That's not true at all. Just take a look how many companies support Linux in comparison to BSD. While BSD developers do like when some company 'steals' their code, companies do not. And this is not about being biased. Just check this if you want.

It depends a lot on the type of the shared product and the type of the product the company is creating.

When the shared component is something that everyone uses as-is or with trivial modifications then companies prefer Copyleft licenses. It prevents competitors from proprietarization of the shared component.

When the shared component is basically part of the company's product, potentially heavily modified in a unique way, then companies prefer BSD style licenses, since they don't have to let competitors see and use their modifications.

Cheers,
_