Bruno Almeida do Lago wrote:
FreeBSD even has support for Linux *binaries.* In general, yes, software developed on one should work on the other once you satisfy dependencies.Can I expect that a software developed on Linux will run and compile on FreeBSD (since both use GCC)?
Especially for something like PostgreSQL... There are a few caveats for other software but this becomes a bit off-topic. For example, some games won;t work because they require access to a framebuffer device which FreeBSD doesn't have.
Best Wishes, Chris Travers Metatron Technology Consulting
-----Original Message----- From: pgsql-general-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of mmiranda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 4:59 PM To: pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Best Linux Distribution
I disagree on number 1, in fact , untar, cd, ./configure, make, make install is all you have to do on BSD, not RPM nightmares, at least on Freebsd and OpenBSD, not sure of NetBSD, I agreee on all others comments
---
-----Original Message----- From: pgsql-general-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Ian Harding Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:42 PM To: esoteric@xxxxxxxxxxxx; pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Best Linux Distribution
I didn't see the post asking about NetBSD, but I can answer it a bit:
I think NetBSD is like other BSD in that:
1. untar, cd, ./configure, make, install doesn't usually work. They put stuff in different places and not everyone in the Linux world cares enough to account for them.
2. Out of the box, NetBSD is not optimized for anything. It will run on crummier hardware than you will likely have (and will run on your toaster), but will not take full advantage of the great hardware you likely have. Shared memory settings are too low and require a kernel recompile, for instance.
3. The latest and greatest hardware is not supported. The latest and greatest software is not in the ports|pkgsrc collection. For example, since TCL went to 8.4, the package maintainer for pltcl won't create one because the working solution is not "clean" enough. The seeming slowness to adopt new stuff makes NetBSD rock solid stable. However, I just had to migrate my work system from NetBSD to Linux because IT bought servers with new whiz-bang RAID controllers that are not (yet) supported by NetBSD.
4. It is beautifully clean, compact, secure and consistent.
I learned a lot from my experience with NetBSD. More than I would have
with Linux. Linux is too easy.
I am learning a lot from my experience with PostgreSQL. MS SQL Server is too easy.
- Ian
Patrick Welche wrote:Geoffrey <esoteric@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 01/21/05 10:15 AM >>>
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 03:23:47PM -0200, Bruno Almeida do Lago wrote:
Any info about NetBSD?That's all we use - no problems, so never had to do any comparisons..
Hmmm, with that attitude, we'd all still be riding horse and buggies..
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
