FreeBSD vs. RedHat

[Kenneth Culver]

Quoting Daniel Hawton <daniel at hawton.org>:

> 4.4BSD Lite 2 is BSD.. which is from SysV.. heh That's what I said.

But that's my point, it's NOT from SysV. It's always been it's own thing,
parellel to SysV. It had some AT&T code in it at some point, but is not from
SysV.

Ken
>
> Kenneth Culver wrote:
> > Quoting Daniel Hawton <daniel at hawton.org>:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>SoloCDM wrote:
> >>
> >>>Why do the ISOs seem to be three CDs of 600Mb each for RedHat compared
> >>>to 1.5 CDs for FreeBSD?  I thought the files were larger with FreeBSD
> >>>and its tarballs.
> >>>
> >>>Does FreeBSD offer all the packages from A to Z in their CDs?
> >>
> >>There are some packages which are only available through FTP.  Some
> >>packages aren't included on CDs because 3 cds is a little excessive.
> >>
> >>>Does FreeBSD come with an installation package?
> >>>
> >>>Is FreeBSD Linux or UNIX?
> >>>
> >>
> >>FreeBSD is a child of System V, so UNIX.  Linux was written from scratch
> >>by Linus with the GNU Public License, as opposed to FreeBSD which
> >>originated from BSD, which originated from System V.
> >>
> >>-Daniel
> >>
> >
> >
> >  Actually no, FreeBSD is a child of 4.4BSD Lite 2, which had all the AT&T
> SYSV
> > stuff yanked out.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >
>
>