Index: head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml =================================================================== --- head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml (revision 51863) +++ head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml (revision 51864) @@ -1,558 +1,601 @@ -
- Explaining BSD - +
+ + Explaining BSD GregLehey
grog@FreeBSD.org
 &tm-attrib.freebsd; &tm-attrib.amd; &tm-attrib.apple; &tm-attrib.intel; &tm-attrib.linux; &tm-attrib.opengroup; &tm-attrib.sparc; &tm-attrib.sun; &tm-attrib.unix; &tm-attrib.general; $FreeBSD$ $FreeBSD$ - In the open source world, the word Linux is almost - synonymous with Operating System, but it is not the only - open source &unix; operating system. + In the open source world, the word Linux is + almost synonymous with Operating System, but it + is not the only open source &unix; operating system. - So what is the secret? Why is BSD not better known? This white - paper addresses these and other questions. + So what is the secret? Why is BSD not better known? This + white paper addresses these and other questions. - Throughout this paper, differences between BSD and Linux will be - noted like this. + Throughout this paper, differences between BSD and Linux + will be noted like this. What is BSD? - BSD stands for Berkeley Software Distribution. It is - the name of distributions of source code from the University of - California, Berkeley, which were originally extensions to AT&T's - Research &unix; operating system. Several open source operating system - projects are based on a release of this source code known as - 4.4BSD-Lite. In addition, they comprise a number of packages from other - Open Source projects, including notably the GNU project. The overall + BSD stands for Berkeley Software + Distribution. It is the name of distributions of + source code from the University of California, Berkeley, which + were originally extensions to AT&T's Research &unix; + operating system. Several open source operating system projects + are based on a release of this source code known as 4.4BSD-Lite. + In addition, they comprise a number of packages from other Open + Source projects, including notably the GNU project. The overall operating system comprises: The BSD kernel, which handles process scheduling, memory - management, symmetric multi-processing (SMP), device drivers, - etc. + management, symmetric multi-processing (SMP), device + drivers, etc. The C library, the base API for the system. - The BSD C library is based on code from Berkeley, not - the GNU project. + The BSD C library is based on code from + Berkeley, not the GNU project. Utilities such as shells, file utilities, compilers and linkers. Some of the utilities are derived from the GNU project, others are not. - The X Window system, which handles graphical display. + The X Window system, which handles graphical + display. - The X Window system used in most versions of BSD is maintained - by the - X.Org project. - &os; allows the user to choose from a variety of desktop - environments, such as Gnome, - KDE, or Xfce; - and lightweight window managers like - Openbox, + The X Window system used in most versions of BSD is + maintained by the X.Org + project. &os; allows the user to choose from a + variety of desktop environments, such as + Gnome, + KDE, or + Xfce; and lightweight window + managers like Openbox, Fluxbox, or Awesome. Many other programs and utilities. What, a real &unix;? The BSD operating systems are not clones, but open source - derivatives of AT&T's Research &unix; operating system, which is also - the ancestor of the modern &unix; System V. This may surprise you. How - could that happen when AT&T has never released its code as open - source? + derivatives of AT&T's Research &unix; operating system, + which is also the ancestor of the modern &unix; System V. This + may surprise you. How could that happen when AT&T has never + released its code as open source? - It is true that AT&T &unix; is not open source, and in a copyright - sense BSD is very definitely not &unix;, but on the - other hand, AT&T has imported sources from other projects, - noticeably the Computer Sciences Research Group (CSRG) of the University of - California in Berkeley, CA. Starting in 1976, the CSRG started - releasing tapes of their software, calling them Berkeley - Software Distribution or BSD. + It is true that AT&T &unix; is not open source, and in a + copyright sense BSD is very definitely not + &unix;, but on the other hand, AT&T has imported sources + from other projects, noticeably the Computer Sciences Research + Group (CSRG) of the University of California in Berkeley, CA. + Starting in 1976, the CSRG started releasing tapes of their + software, calling them Berkeley Software + Distribution or BSD. - Initial BSD releases consisted mainly of user programs, but that - changed dramatically when the CSRG landed a contract with the Defense - Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to upgrade the communications - protocols on their network, ARPANET. The new protocols were known as - the Internet Protocols, later - TCP/IP after the most important protocols. The - first widely distributed implementation was part of 4.2BSD, in - 1982. + Initial BSD releases consisted mainly of user programs, but + that changed dramatically when the CSRG landed a contract with + the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to upgrade + the communications protocols on their network, ARPANET. The new + protocols were known as the Internet + Protocols, later TCP/IP after + the most important protocols. The first widely distributed + implementation was part of 4.2BSD, in 1982. - In the course of the 1980s, a number of new workstation companies - sprang up. Many preferred to license &unix; rather than developing - operating systems for themselves. In particular, Sun Microsystems - licensed &unix; and implemented a version of 4.2BSD, which they called - &sunos;. When AT&T themselves were allowed to sell &unix; commercially, - they started with a somewhat bare-bones implementation called System - III, to be quickly followed by System V. The System V code base did not - include networking, so all implementations included additional software - from the BSD, including the TCP/IP software, but also utilities such as - the csh shell and the vi - editor. Collectively, these enhancements were known as the - Berkeley Extensions. + In the course of the 1980s, a number of new workstation + companies sprang up. Many preferred to license &unix; rather + than developing operating systems for themselves. In + particular, Sun Microsystems licensed &unix; and implemented a + version of 4.2BSD, which they called &sunos;. When AT&T + themselves were allowed to sell &unix; commercially, they + started with a somewhat bare-bones implementation called System + III, to be quickly followed by System V. The System V code base + did not include networking, so all implementations included + additional software from the BSD, including the TCP/IP software, + but also utilities such as the csh shell + and the vi editor. Collectively, these + enhancements were known as the Berkeley + Extensions. - The BSD tapes contained AT&T source code and thus required a - &unix; source license. By 1990, the CSRG's funding was running out, and - it faced closure. Some members of the group decided to release the BSD - code, which was Open Source, without the AT&T proprietary code. - This finally happened with the Networking Tape 2, - usually known as Net/2. Net/2 was not a complete - operating system: about 20% of the kernel code was missing. One of the - CSRG members, William F. Jolitz, wrote the remaining code and released - it in early 1992 as 386BSD. At the same time, - another group of ex-CSRG members formed a commercial company called - Berkeley Software Design Inc. - and released a beta version of an operating system called - BSD/386, which was based on - the same sources. The name of the operating system was later changed - to BSD/OS. + The BSD tapes contained AT&T source code and thus + required a &unix; source license. By 1990, the CSRG's funding + was running out, and it faced closure. Some members of the + group decided to release the BSD code, which was Open Source, + without the AT&T proprietary code. This finally happened + with the Networking Tape 2, usually known + as Net/2. Net/2 was not a complete + operating system: about 20% of the kernel code was missing. One + of the CSRG members, William F. Jolitz, wrote the remaining code + and released it in early 1992 as 386BSD. + At the same time, another group of ex-CSRG members formed a + commercial company called Berkeley Software Design + Inc. and released a beta version of an operating system + called BSD/386, + which was based on the same sources. The name of the operating + system was later changed to BSD/OS. - 386BSD never became a stable operating system. Instead, two other - projects split off from it in 1993: - NetBSD and - FreeBSD. The two projects - originally diverged due to differences in patience waiting for - improvements to 386BSD: the NetBSD people started early in the year, - and the first version of FreeBSD was not ready until the end of the - year. In the meantime, the code base had diverged sufficiently to - make it difficult to merge. In addition, the projects had different - aims, as we will see below. In 1996, - OpenBSD split off from - NetBSD, and in 2003, - DragonFlyBSD split - off from FreeBSD. + 386BSD never became a stable operating system. Instead, two + other projects split off from it in 1993: NetBSD and FreeBSD. The two + projects originally diverged due to differences in patience + waiting for improvements to 386BSD: the NetBSD people started + early in the year, and the first version of FreeBSD was not + ready until the end of the year. In the meantime, the code base + had diverged sufficiently to make it difficult to merge. In + addition, the projects had different aims, as we will see below. + In 1996, OpenBSD split off + from NetBSD, and in 2003, DragonFlyBSD + split off from FreeBSD. Why is BSD not better known? For a number of reasons, BSD is relatively unknown: - The BSD developers are often more interested in polishing their - code than marketing it. + The BSD developers are often more interested in + polishing their code than marketing it. - Much of Linux's popularity is due to factors external to the - Linux projects, such as the press, and to companies formed to - provide Linux services. Until recently, the open source BSDs had no - such proponents. + Much of Linux's popularity is due to factors external to + the Linux projects, such as the press, and to companies + formed to provide Linux services. Until recently, the open + source BSDs had no such proponents. BSD developers tend to be more experienced than Linux - developers, and have less interest in making the system easy to use. - Newcomers tend to feel more comfortable with Linux. + developers, and have less interest in making the system easy + to use. Newcomers tend to feel more comfortable with + Linux. - In 1992, AT&T sued - BSDI, - the vendor of BSD/386, alleging that the product contained - AT&T-copyrighted code. The case was settled out of court in - 1994, but the spectre of the litigation continues to haunt people. - In March 2000 an article published on the web claimed - that the court case had been recently settled. + In 1992, AT&T sued BSDI, the vendor + of BSD/386, alleging that the product contained + AT&T-copyrighted code. The case was settled out of + court in 1994, but the spectre of the litigation continues + to haunt people. In March 2000 an article published on the + web claimed that the court case had been recently + settled. - One detail that the lawsuit did clarify is the naming: in the - 1980s, BSD was known as BSD &unix;. With the - elimination of the last vestige of AT&T code from BSD, it - also lost the right to the name &unix;. Thus you will see - references in book titles to the 4.3BSD &unix; operating - system and the 4.4BSD operating - system. + One detail that the lawsuit did clarify is the naming: + in the 1980s, BSD was known as BSD &unix;. + With the elimination of the last vestige of AT&T code + from BSD, it also lost the right to the name &unix;. Thus + you will see references in book titles to the 4.3BSD + &unix; operating system and the 4.4BSD + operating system. Comparing BSD and Linux - So what is really the difference between, say, Debian Linux and - FreeBSD? For the average user, the difference is surprisingly small: - Both are &unix; like operating systems. Both are developed by - non-commercial projects (this does not apply to many other Linux - distributions, of course). In the following section, we will look at BSD - and compare it to Linux. The description applies most closely to - FreeBSD, which accounts for an estimated 80% of the BSD installations, - but the differences from NetBSD, OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD are small. - + So what is really the difference between, say, Debian Linux + and FreeBSD? For the average user, the difference is + surprisingly small: Both are &unix; like operating systems. + Both are developed by non-commercial projects (this does not + apply to many other Linux distributions, of course). In the + following section, we will look at BSD and compare it to Linux. + The description applies most closely to FreeBSD, which accounts + for an estimated 80% of the BSD installations, but the + differences from NetBSD, OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD are + small. Who owns BSD? No one person or corporation owns BSD. It is created and distributed by a community of highly technical and committed - contributors all over the world. Some of the components of BSD are - Open Source projects in their own right and managed by different - project maintainers. + contributors all over the world. Some of the components of + BSD are Open Source projects in their own right and managed by + different project maintainers. How is BSD developed and updated? - The BSD kernels are developed and updated following the Open - Source development model. Each project maintains a publicly - accessible source tree - which contains all source files for the - project, including documentation and other incidental files. - Users can obtain a complete copy of any version. + The BSD kernels are developed and updated following the + Open Source development model. Each project maintains a + publicly accessible source tree which + contains all source files for the project, including + documentation and other incidental files. Users can obtain a + complete copy of any version. - A large number of developers worldwide contribute to improvements - to BSD. They are divided into three kinds: + A large number of developers worldwide contribute to + improvements to BSD. They are divided into three + kinds: - Contributors write code or documentation. - They are not permitted to commit (add code) directly to the source - tree. In order for their code to be included in the system, it - must be reviewed and checked in by a registered developer, known - as a committer. + Contributors write code or + documentation. They are not permitted to commit (add + code) directly to the source tree. In order for their + code to be included in the system, it must be reviewed and + checked in by a registered developer, known as a + committer. - Committers are developers with write - access to the source tree. In order to become a committer, an - individual must show ability in the area in which they are - active. + Committers are developers with + write access to the source tree. In order to become a + committer, an individual must show ability in the area in + which they are active. - - It is at the individual committer's discretion whether they should - obtain authority before committing changes to the source tree. In - general, an experienced committer may make changes which are - obviously correct without obtaining consensus. For example, a - documentation project committer may correct typographical or - grammatical errors without review. On the other hand, developers - making far-reaching or complicated changes are expected to submit - their changes for review before committing them. In extreme - cases, a core team member with a function such as Principal - Architect may order that changes be removed from the tree, a - process known as backing out. All committers - receive mail describing each individual commit, so it is not - possible to commit secretly. + It is at the individual committer's discretion whether + they should obtain authority before committing changes to + the source tree. In general, an experienced committer may + make changes which are obviously correct without obtaining + consensus. For example, a documentation project committer + may correct typographical or grammatical errors without + review. On the other hand, developers making far-reaching + or complicated changes are expected to submit their + changes for review before committing them. In extreme + cases, a core team member with a function such as + Principal Architect may order that changes be removed from + the tree, a process known as backing + out. All committers receive mail describing + each individual commit, so it is not possible to commit + secretly. The Core team. FreeBSD and - NetBSD each have a core team which manages the project. The - core teams developed in the course of the projects, and their role - is not always well-defined. It is not necessary to be a developer - in order to be a core team member, though it is normal. The rules - for the core team vary from one project to the other, but in - general they have more say in the direction of the project than + NetBSD each have a core team which manages the project. + The core teams developed in the course of the projects, + and their role is not always well-defined. It is not + necessary to be a developer in order to be a core team + member, though it is normal. The rules for the core team + vary from one project to the other, but in general they + have more say in the direction of the project than non-core team members have. - This arrangement differs from Linux in a number of ways: + This arrangement differs from Linux in a number of + ways: No one person controls the content of the system. In - practice, this difference is overrated, since the Principal Architect - can require that code be backed out, and even in the Linux project - several people are permitted to make changes. + practice, this difference is overrated, since the + Principal Architect can require that code be backed out, + and even in the Linux project several people are permitted + to make changes. - On the other hand, there is a central - repository, a single place where you can find the entire operating - system sources, including all older versions. + On the other hand, there is a + central repository, a single place where you can find the + entire operating system sources, including all older + versions. BSD projects maintain the entire Operating - System, not only the kernel. This distinction is only - marginally useful: neither BSD nor Linux is useful without - applications. The applications used under BSD are frequently the - same as the applications used under Linux. + System, not only the kernel. This distinction + is only marginally useful: neither BSD nor Linux is useful + without applications. The applications used under BSD are + frequently the same as the applications used under + Linux. - As a result of the formalized maintenance of a single SVN - source tree, BSD development is clear, and it is possible to - access any version of the system by release number or by date. - SVN also allows incremental updates to the system: for example, - the FreeBSD repository is updated about 100 times a day. Most of - these changes are small. + As a result of the formalized maintenance of a single + SVN source tree, BSD development is clear, and it is + possible to access any version of the system by release + number or by date. SVN also allows incremental updates to + the system: for example, the FreeBSD repository is updated + about 100 times a day. Most of these changes are + small. BSD releases - FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD provide the system in three different - releases. As with Linux, releases are assigned a - number such as 1.4.1 or 3.5. In addition, the version number has a - suffix indicating its purpose: + FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD provide the system in three + different releases. As with Linux, releases + are assigned a number such as 1.4.1 or 3.5. In addition, the + version number has a suffix indicating its purpose: The development version of the system is called - CURRENT. FreeBSD assigns a number to - CURRENT, for example FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT. NetBSD uses a slightly - different naming scheme and appends a single-letter suffix which - indicates changes in the internal interfaces, for example NetBSD - 1.4.3G. OpenBSD does not assign a number (OpenBSD-current). - All new development on the system goes into this branch. + CURRENT. FreeBSD assigns a number + to CURRENT, for example FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT. NetBSD uses + a slightly different naming scheme and appends a + single-letter suffix which indicates changes in the + internal interfaces, for example NetBSD 1.4.3G. OpenBSD + does not assign a number (OpenBSD-current). + All new development on the system goes into this + branch. - At regular intervals, between two and four times a year, the - projects bring out a RELEASE version of the - system, which is available on CD-ROM and for free download from - FTP sites, for example OpenBSD 2.6-RELEASE or NetBSD 1.4-RELEASE. - The RELEASE version is intended for end users and is the normal - version of the system. NetBSD also provides patch - releases with a third digit, for example NetBSD - 1.4.2. + At regular intervals, between two and four times a + year, the projects bring out a + RELEASE version of the system, + which is available on CD-ROM and for free download from + FTP sites, for example OpenBSD 2.6-RELEASE or NetBSD + 1.4-RELEASE. The RELEASE version is intended for end + users and is the normal version of the system. NetBSD + also provides patch releases with a + third digit, for example NetBSD 1.4.2. - As bugs are found in a RELEASE version, they are fixed, and - the fixes are added to the SVN tree. In FreeBSD, the resultant - version is called the STABLE version, while in NetBSD and OpenBSD - it continues to be called the RELEASE version. Smaller new - features can also be added to this branch after a period of test - in the CURRENT branch. Security and other important bug fixes - are also applied to all supported RELEASE versions. + As bugs are found in a RELEASE version, they are + fixed, and the fixes are added to the SVN tree. In + FreeBSD, the resultant version is called the + STABLE version, while in NetBSD and + OpenBSD it continues to be called the RELEASE version. + Smaller new features can also be added to this branch + after a period of test in the CURRENT branch. Security + and other important bug fixes are also applied to all + supported RELEASE versions. - By contrast, Linux maintains two separate code trees: - the stable version and the development version. Stable versions - have an even minor version number, such as 2.0, 2.2 or 2.4. - Development versions have an odd minor version number, such as 2.1, - 2.3 or 2.5. In each case, the number is followed by a further - number designating the exact release. In addition, each vendor adds - their own userland programs and utilities, so the name of the - distribution is also important. Each distribution vendor also - assigns version numbers to the distribution, so a complete - description might be something like TurboLinux 6.0 with kernel - 2.2.14 + By contrast, Linux maintains two separate code + trees: the stable version and the development version. + Stable versions have an even minor version number, such as + 2.0, 2.2 or 2.4. Development versions have an odd minor + version number, such as 2.1, 2.3 or 2.5. In each case, the + number is followed by a further number designating the exact + release. In addition, each vendor adds their own userland + programs and utilities, so the name of the distribution is + also important. Each distribution vendor also assigns + version numbers to the distribution, so a complete + description might be something like TurboLinux 6.0 + with kernel 2.2.14 What versions of BSD are available? - In contrast to the numerous Linux distributions, there are only - four major open source BSDs. Each BSD project maintains its own source - tree and its own kernel. In practice, though, there appear to be - fewer divergences between the userland code of the projects than there - is in Linux. + In contrast to the numerous Linux distributions, there are + only four major open source BSDs. Each BSD project maintains + its own source tree and its own kernel. In practice, though, + there appear to be fewer divergences between the userland code + of the projects than there is in Linux. - It is difficult to categorize the goals of each project: the - differences are very subjective. Basically, + It is difficult to categorize the goals of each project: + the differences are very subjective. Basically, - &os; aims for high performance and ease of use by - end users, and is a favourite of web content providers. It runs - on a number of platforms - and has significantly more users than the other projects. + &os; aims for high performance and ease of use by end + users, and is a favourite of web content providers. It + runs on a number + of platforms and has significantly more users + than the other projects. - NetBSD aims for maximum portability: of course it runs - NetBSD. It runs on machines from palmtops to large - servers, and has even been used on NASA space missions. It is a - particularly good choice for running on old non-&intel; - hardware. + NetBSD aims for maximum portability: of course + it runs NetBSD. It runs on machines from + palmtops to large servers, and has even been used on NASA + space missions. It is a particularly good choice for + running on old non-&intel; hardware. OpenBSD aims for security and code purity: it uses a - combination of the open source concept and rigorous code reviews - to create a system which is demonstrably correct, making it the - choice of security-conscious organizations such as banks, stock - exchanges and US Government departments. Like NetBSD, it runs on - a number of platforms. + combination of the open source concept and rigorous code + reviews to create a system which is demonstrably correct, + making it the choice of security-conscious organizations + such as banks, stock exchanges and US Government + departments. Like NetBSD, it runs on a number of + platforms. - DragonFlyBSD aims for high performance and scalability under - everything from a single-node UP system to a massively clustered system. - DragonFlyBSD has several long-range technical goals, but focus lies on - providing a SMP-capable infrastructure that is easy to understand, + DragonFlyBSD aims for high performance and scalability + under everything from a single-node UP system to a + massively clustered system. DragonFlyBSD has several + long-range technical goals, but focus lies on providing a + SMP-capable infrastructure that is easy to understand, maintain and develop for. - There are also two additional BSD &unix; operating systems which are not - open source, BSD/OS and Apple's &macos; X: + There are also two additional BSD &unix; operating systems + which are not open source, BSD/OS and Apple's &macos; + X: BSD/OS was the oldest of the 4.4BSD derivatives. It was not open source, though source code licenses were available at relatively low cost. It resembled FreeBSD in many ways. Two years after the acquisition of BSDi by Wind River Systems, BSD/OS failed to survive as an - independent product. Support and source code may still - be available from Wind River, but all new development is + independent product. Support and source code may still be + available from Wind River, but all new development is focused on the VxWorks embedded operating system. - &macos; - X is the latest version of the operating system for - &apple;'s - &mac; line. The BSD core of this operating - system, Darwin, - is available as a fully functional open source operating - system for x86 and PPC computers. The Aqua/Quartz - graphics system and many other proprietary aspects of - &macos; X remain closed-source, however. Several Darwin - developers are also FreeBSD committers, and - vice-versa. + &macos; + X is the latest version of the operating system + for &apple;'s &mac; line. The BSD core of this operating + system, Darwin, + is available as a fully functional open source operating + system for x86 and PPC computers. The Aqua/Quartz + graphics system and many other proprietary aspects of + &macos; X remain closed-source, however. Several Darwin + developers are also FreeBSD committers, and + vice-versa. How does the BSD license differ from the GNU Public license? - Linux is available under the - GNU General Public - License (GPL), which is designed to eliminate closed - source software. In particular, any derivative work of a product - released under the GPL must also be supplied with source code if - requested. By contrast, the - BSD - license is less restrictive: binary-only distributions are - allowed. This is particularly attractive for embedded - applications. + Linux is available under the GNU + General Public License (GPL), which is designed to + eliminate closed source software. In particular, any + derivative work of a product released under the GPL must also + be supplied with source code if requested. By contrast, the + BSD + license is less restrictive: binary-only + distributions are allowed. This is particularly attractive + for embedded applications. What else should I know? - Since fewer applications are available for BSD than Linux, the BSD - developers created a Linux compatibility package, which allows Linux - programs to run under BSD. The package includes both kernel - modifications, in order to correctly perform Linux system calls, and - Linux compatibility files such as the C library. There is no - noticeable difference in execution speed between a Linux application - running on a Linux machine and a Linux application running on a BSD - machine of the same speed. + Since fewer applications are available for BSD than Linux, + the BSD developers created a Linux compatibility package, + which allows Linux programs to run under BSD. The package + includes both kernel modifications, in order to correctly + perform Linux system calls, and Linux compatibility files such + as the C library. There is no noticeable difference in + execution speed between a Linux application running on a Linux + machine and a Linux application running on a BSD machine of + the same speed. - The all from one supplier nature of BSD means that - upgrades are much easier to handle than is frequently the case with - Linux. BSD handles library version upgrades by providing - compatibility modules for earlier library versions, so it is possible - to run binaries which are several years old with no problems. + The all from one supplier nature of BSD + means that upgrades are much easier to handle than is + frequently the case with Linux. BSD handles library version + upgrades by providing compatibility modules for earlier + library versions, so it is possible to run binaries which are + several years old with no problems. Which should I use, BSD or Linux? - What does this all mean in practice? Who should use BSD, who - should use Linux? + What does this all mean in practice? Who should use BSD, + who should use Linux? - This is a very difficult question to answer. Here are some - guidelines: + This is a very difficult question to answer. Here are + some guidelines: - If it ain't broke, don't fix it: If you already - use an open source operating system, and you are happy with it, - there is probably no good reason to change. + If it ain't broke, don't fix it: If you + already use an open source operating system, and you are + happy with it, there is probably no good reason to + change. - BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably higher - performance than Linux. But this is not across the board. In many - cases, there is little or no difference in performance. In some - cases, Linux may perform better than FreeBSD. + BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably + higher performance than Linux. But this is not across the + board. In many cases, there is little or no difference in + performance. In some cases, Linux may perform better than + FreeBSD. In general, BSD systems have a better reputation for reliability, mainly as a result of the more mature code base. - BSD projects have a better reputation for the quality and - completeness of their documentation. The various documentation - projects aim to provide actively updated documentation, in many - languages, and covering all aspects of the system. + BSD projects have a better reputation for the quality + and completeness of their documentation. The various + documentation projects aim to provide actively updated + documentation, in many languages, and covering all aspects + of the system. - The BSD license may be more attractive than the GPL. - + The BSD license may be more attractive than the + GPL. - BSD can execute most Linux binaries, while Linux can not execute BSD - binaries. Many BSD implementations can also execute binaries - from other &unix; like systems. As a result, BSD may present an - easier migration route from other systems than - Linux would. + BSD can execute most Linux binaries, while Linux can + not execute BSD binaries. Many BSD implementations can + also execute binaries from other &unix; like systems. As + a result, BSD may present an easier migration route from + other systems than Linux would. - Who provides support, service, and training for BSD? + Who provides support, service, and training for + BSD? - BSDi / FreeBSD - Mall, Inc. have been providing support contracts for + BSDi / FreeBSD Mall, + Inc. have been providing support contracts for FreeBSD for nearly a decade. - In addition, each of the projects has a list of consultants for - hire: - FreeBSD, - NetBSD, - and OpenBSD. + In addition, each of the projects has a list of + consultants for hire: FreeBSD, + NetBSD, + and OpenBSD.