FreeBSD vs. RedHat

[Vulpes Velox]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 12:47:51 -0600 (MDT)
SoloCDM <deedsmis at aculink.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, SoloCDM wrote:
> 
> > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 12:43:39 -0600 (MDT)
> > From: SoloCDM <redneck at cdm01.deedsmiscentral.net>
> > Reply-To: SoloCDM <deedsmis at aculink.net>,
> >      "FreeBSD-Questions (Request)" <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
> > To: "FreeBSD-Questions (Request)" <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
> > Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat
> > 
> > On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > 
> > > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 10:59:42 -0400 (EDT)
> > > From: Jerry McAllister <jerrymc at clunix.cl.msu.edu>
> > > To: deedsmis at aculink.net
> > > Cc: "FreeBSD-Questions (Request)" <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
> > > Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat
> > > 
> > > > 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?
> > > 
> > > Well, sort of.  FreeBSD itself does not offer any CDs.  It has some
> > > ISO-s.  Recently FreeBSD decided to quit putting out ISOs with all
> > > the source for all the ports.  So, the two ISO-s called disk1.iso
> > > and disk2.iso contain the installation system, the full operating
> > > system and some of the more popular ports.  They used to put out two
> > > more ISO-s that contained the rest of the ports in a four ISO set,
> > > but FreeBSD no longer does that.  You can easily obtain any and all
> > > of it through FreeBSD because the ISO-s have the complete ports tree
> > > skeleton from which you can install any of the ports directly over the
> > > net - and that is how you really want to install ports anyway.
> > > 
> > > BUT, some other companies package the larger sets on CDs - usually 4
> > > CDs.  Try FreeBSD Mall, for example.  There are a couple of others as
> > > well.  Those sets have the whole schmear.
> > > 
> > > The other combination is to download the mini-iso which has
> > > essentially just the installation system and the OS and everything
> > > else in then brought down over the net during installation.
> > > 
> > > > Does FreeBSD come with an installation package?
> > > 
> > > Yes.  You boot the install CD and voila.
> > > 
> > > > Is FreeBSD Linux or UNIX?
> > > 
> > > FreeBSD is BSD which has its origins in the Berkeley U written version
> > > of Bell Labs UNIX way way back in deep and dark history long before
> > > Linux was ever conceived, let alone birthed.
> > 
> > All of you did a great job of describing many features of BSD.  It
> > makes it enticing.
> > 
> > When RedHat started out, it had some conveniences, but it quickly
> > become so bizarre and discombobulated that I am feed-up, a voodoo act
> > and standing on one's head is involved.  Most of the so-called-experts
> > in RPMs don't know what they're doing from one minute to the next.  
> > Usually installing the tarball (my form of description) is the only
> > available option.
> > 
> > So many of the RPM distributors are inventing and reinventing new ways
> > to reroute the file to its original location.  Often the files go
> > through 6 links before you capture the original file.  That doesn't
> > include the original program from recognizing other renamed filenames
> > that produce optional executions.  This usually keeps some of the RPM
> > installations from installing, *unless*, all the rubble is ripped out
> > before you start.  Often that *breaks* the whole structure/hierarchy
> > apart.
> > 
> > Now distributors have moved to an option that supposedly entices
> > enterprises.  Usually it forces the installations to conform to their
> > type of networking.
> > 
> > Is it possible to go from one distribution version to another (4.x to
> > 5.x) without entirely removing the old version?  Do the upgrades with
> > the ports allow this possibility?
> > 
> > Can packages and their dependencies be removed through a package that
> > does the uninstalling?
> 
> What CPU (i386, i486, i586, ...) are the packages compiled and geared
> towards?

on the x86 side it is i386 for 4.x and i486 for 5.x...