Re: how to convince that debian is one the three major choices for a stable server environment?



Dotan Cohen put forth on 2/22/2010 3:02 PM:

Don't forget that there is a FreeBSD-based Debian distro out there. I
don't know how it fares compared to the GNU/Linux Debian distro in
terms of application support, but the Debian name carries a lot of
weight in terms of stability and security. As does FreeBSD.

It's not production ready, probably never will be. Read on.

http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/

"Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is a port that consists of GNU userland using the GNU C
library on top of FreeBSD's kernel, coupled with the regular Debian package
set."

http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/

"Debian GNU/NetBSD is a port of the Debian Operating System to the NetBSD
kernel. It is currently in an early stage of development - however, it can
now be installed from scratch."


These are not "FreeBSD and NetBSD based Debian distros" by any stretch of
the imagination. They are Debian atop FreeBSD and NetBSD kernels and that's
it. The userland and packages are totally Gnu/Debian. Anyone who would use
these is merely choosing the FreeBSD or NetBSD kernel over the Linux kernel
as the rest of each system is identical (or at least meant to be).

Given that the amount of resources going into Linux kernel development over
the past 10 years and moving forward is a vast ocean compared to the trickle
of resources going into *BSD kernel development, for me, the choice of
kernel is clear, as it is with many folks. The Linux kernel walks over over
*BSD in too many categories to count. The *BSD kernels might walk all over
the Linux kernel in only a couple of categories, if that.

These projects are "hacks" in the true sense of the word. They are doing it
to prove to themselves it can be done. It will be a very long time until
either of these is production ready, if ever. Look at the Hurd project for
a sobering reminder. It's 12 years old and still not close to its first
release, let alone production ready. Probably never will be, again, due to
developer resources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_GNU/Hurd

Debian GNU/Hurd has been in development since 1998[1], but still has not
been officially released. Over 60%[2] of the software packaged for Debian
GNU/Linux has been ported to the GNU Hurd. However, the Hurd itself remains
under development, and as such is not ready for use in production systems.
The overwhelming majority of Debian users run Debian GNU/Linux, rather than
Debian GNU/Hurd.

--
Stan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4B83B3A1.5030301@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



Relevant Pages

  • unsubscribe
    ... > Subject: debian newbie... ... If I need to recompile the kernel, ... Also, what other additional packages, ... >> The package you're trying to install presumably ...
    (Debian-User)
  • unsubscribe
    ... delete your Windows partition TODAY! ... >> If you want to build kernel modules, you need to use the kernel headers ... >> I would like to know if anyone had a chance to installed Debian or other ... > I find the evince with Debian has very poor performance when I open ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Linux Functionality?
    ... Does Debian not use the Linux kernel? ... Linux - the kernel originally written by Linus Torvalds ... In the case of Windows we have: ...
    (Debian-User)
  • HPET regression in 2.6.26 versus 2.6.25
    ... I am a Debian user. ... stock kernel exhibited the same problem. ... ended up suggesting bisecting using 'git'. ... First commit causing failure: ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: pros/cons of installing from source
    ... Debian supply both optimised kernels and to a lesser degree ... Doing a full emerge of the kernel source (inside the ... really required and what is not for a package (this requires the most ... soon as it stopped compiling and installing. ...
    (Debian-User)