Joe
I was just wondering about the differences between NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD. If anyone who has worked with any of them could give us an opinion.
Ayman
I am not very sure about them since I have never used any of them except FreeBSD, I guess they are all just distros based on BSD other than that I have no idea :P
Joe
Well, yeah. The three of them are open source "distribution" of UNIX, and instead of using the Linux kernel they use a descendant of the old BSD kernel (Linux was written from scratch by Torvalds).
But my question is more about the difference amongst them, their communities, their usage/reputation, ...
I'm still struggling enough with linux for now so I won't test any of them right now. I'm just curious about user's experiences
sys-halt
FreeBSD is the simplest distribution amongst the BSD's Family, it has the largest software repository and the biggest community, also the package management is easier than the other BSD's Family, plus it has a lot of scripts built-in ready to use for almost all services, so instead going over trying to write and support your services, if you search you will most likely find others in the community who did it for you. like yahoo uses FreeBSD, so is BBC and a lot more sites..
NetBSD, has the fastest TCP/IP Stack in all the *nixes (Unix and Linux) so it is while FreeBSD is being used to Provide Online Services, NetBSD is being used to Provide Network Services, it uses the pkgscr package manager which is the same as Slackware Linux Distro, so if you have a prior experince with Slackware Linux you can then switch smoothly to NetBSD since the same package source technique is being used in installing and managign packages, also Slackware and NetBSD uses the same configuration technique in that you configure services through the /etc directory, so you will gain a strong knowledge on how things work. that means using Files and less GUI tools.
If you check out the Sendmail Servers present in the work online, you will find most of them runs on Slackware and NetBSD
OpenBSD, is my favorite in all the *Nixes, once you work with OpenBSD you will not stop loving it. OpenBSD is being built with Security in mind, so they take every module and redesign the code to implement security and cryptophray. No other OS in the world have proven to be more secure or even close to OpenBSD. for the past 12 years and so OpenBSD found just one security hole in its default installation. yes, even if you compared OpenBSD to Cisco ASA/PIX Firewalls, NetASQ Firewalls and all others, OpenBSD will win the game, and I have tried and implemented the mentioned firewalls in corporates, they all works good and NetASQ is even much powerful and perform better than Cisco ASA's and have better prices too, but when OpenBSD is mentioned between the Firewalls, they all nuke the Head Down for it.
more over, the developers of OpenBSD have developed some of the best and the greatest tools in security like OpenVPN the best security tool for VPN which you implement the most secure VPN concentrator with OpenVPN and OpenSSH, OpenBGPD as a Border Gateway Protocol, OpenNTPD and OpenCVS.
OpenBSD is the hardest to use amount BSD's Family, but with time you will gain a great and pwoerful experience.
there is also currently one of the latest BSD's Family namely DragonFly, it's main focus is clustering in the main kernel, building a fastest operating system on the internal and network modules they also work on their own fielsystem structure to help them accomplosh their goals. it is an amazing BSD distro and well-worth to work with it.
hope that might help you, good luck.
rolf
Let's talk about what they have in common...
They all have little devils as mascotts and they're all awesome, once you get past the 70ies style installation.
(PS: i never got past the install screen on FreeBSD)
battikh
rolf wroteLet's talk about what they have in common...
They all have little devils as mascotts
they don't. open bsd's maskot is a fish.
Joe
@sys-halt: Thanks for your input! That answers exactly my question. In your opinion, how would they rate on the desktop? (mainly compared to desktop linux distros like Ubuntu, Fedora and the likes).
And NetBSD is a flag.
Here:
http://www.netbsd.org/images/NetBSD.png
sys-halt
Glad I could help rahmu. and I don't like to compare them to Desktop Distros.
UNIX from its start built with Networking in Mind to Provide Services. That's to say it is designed to be thrown onto your Server especially the Servers that requires to handle so much requests, loads, and stability as time path. and most of UNIX implementation is to provide specific service like Security Assessment Tool, Gateway, Router, E-mail Server, Web Hosting and such. you rarely could find a UNIX Server that is full loaded wit hall of these Services combined together on on Server unless it is Serving a Blade Center where you can create and manage partitions and visualizations to support more UNIX Services.
For example, you will not find much of UNIX Servers that is built and designed as a SOHO Server for Networks. by SOHO Server I mean a UNIX Server that is full with loaded Services such as Web Service, FTP Service, Multimedia Streaming Service, Radio Broadcast Service, File/Print Service, Mail Service and such. it is not because UNIX Servers are not designed or cannot do that. they can do of course and they can do it better than Home Servers from Windows. but the Problem lies in the ability to install these services with their packages and dependencies and start configuring each Service one by one, which really is a time consuming.
Instead I could simply buy an Appliance that would help me in an easy way to accomplish that like using NAS Storages from QNAP or Thermaltake or even try the FreeNAS distro which is based on FreeBSD. So, it is really better to buy ready appliances with intuitive Web Interfaces than trying to put a lot of time and effort to implement my own solution, although it will be of great knowledge to gain when you try in your own lab setup to implement such SOHO Solution, which will teach you a lot. and by the way all the NAS Storage Appliances uses Linux as their embedded OS and they managed to implement all the needed features using a simple and easy to click web interface.
Moreover there is solutions like ClarkConnect and Collax which both are fine distributions and a great competitors to Windows on the SOHO Level Solution, I mean by that a single BOX that can handle all in a nice clean way. Both Linux Distros are Web Based Interface, they have a clean and intuitive interface with almost all of the features packaged in one Solution, a True SOHO Box, not a SOHO for 10 or 20 users, it is a SOHO in its way of having multiple Services for the most required features to implement an Intranet Box, and it can handle as many users as your Hardware can hold the stress.
BSD's Family can be installed and configured on any Desktop/laptop. but the problem lies in the installation for the packages and dependencies needed to implement a Desktop BSD OS.
Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva and OpenSUSE are all built from the ground up with the Home/Normal User in Mind. so they put the effort, time and creativity in designing a solution for the home user. their GUI is neat, they built their own tools and applets to make life easier for the Desktop User, they have a hug list of hardware support, and when you try to install it form the start up they have options to install Desktop PC, Laptop, Workstaiton Options which each one of these bundle a nifty of software's for special purposes depending on your need.
In BSD's you will have to install GNOME or KDE yourself, then look for the software's you need and download that. so you will have to put the effort in customizing your own solution. so it is hard to find BSD wild spread on the Desktop because in the first place that is not their intention, it is not their intended market. they only want to build the Best Performance and Fastest OS on the Server Side.
Although there is some nices work toward throwing BSD on the Desktop, like the PCBSD Distro, I tried it and it has a nice interface, the installation process is GUI based, they even have their own package installer, so just click-n-install wizard.
People always argue that BSDs have text-based old installation hard process and even no simple to click installs manager that would install for me the required package with its dependencies and that we have to take care in person for that. the idea is that every GUI tool implement means a potential security hole, and really as a Server Distro with time you will also convince that they are right, because all your services are configured and managed through the CLI so why I need a neat cool interface will lots of Applets and Tools which will embedded security holes in their coding, and with time you will see that much of the stuff you want to make will be much faster and easier to you to accomplish from the CLI than the GUI.
imagine the simplest and ubiquitous command ls which inherits more than 48 switching parameters, how could you build a GUI which will support all of that!
anyway, it is an endless discussion but the good thing is that there is a fast growing need for Linux/UNIX in the Market and Linux Desktop Distros are getting easier and easier with the same simplicity as Windows in use.
Joe
@sys-halt: PCBSD looks fun. I'll try it when I have the time.
Couple question, out of curiosity:
* Do you need to modify your Linux code to compile it on a BSD kernel? Or you can use the regular tarballs?
* Do the BSDs have built-in "package managers" (or equivalent)? Or is it only about compiling?
* Are BSD tools available (packaged) for major linux distros (and vice-versa)?
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. Now that I have a BSD connoisseur I'm gonna satisfy my curiosity!
sys-halt
hey rahmu, PCBSD is more like a fun distribution, it is a strong Desktop Distro which is based on the stability and security of BSD, mainly the FreeBSD Distribution. it uses a Package Manager GUI based to install applications in an easy to click wizard, it uses the package type .pbi
Please note that Linux Tools, like the Ubiquitous BASH Shell, ls, cd and such are tools were first built to be used and implemented on UNIX until Richard Stallman and others of Open Source Movement started to build their own Open Source OS.
although UNIX Distros does use their own package manager for ease of installation, like FreeBSD and OpenBSD uses the port package manager, pkg_add pkg_delete, while NetBSD uses the pkgsrc package Manager and note that the pkgsrc is a modification of the port package manager, so there is slight difference in that, not a big deal once you use one of the BSD you can use the others without a great deal of difficulty. and the other option is to simple use the compile procedure which will absolutely work on all *nixes.
although take special note that Slackware the OLD SURVIVAL DISTRO uses the old style of UNIX in installing packages the pkgsrc although recently they are working on their package manager more than before but still if you got experience with Slackware then UNIX will be definitely be much easier.
concerning using Linux packages on UNIX and vice versa using compiling will definitely work, gcc compiler works on them all so you will find no hard time in comiling and installing packages from Linux to UNIX and vice versa.
there is always differences some might work others not but major Applications and Services should work on all *nixes and should have ports from Linux to UNIX or tarballs to be used on Linux if they originate from UNIX.
I always stress on mentioning Slackware since it is like a crossing Line between Linux and UNIX so working with Slackware will give you a great experience on how to really configure things and troubleshoot and in return you can take this knowledge a level up to any UNIX distros.
A word to the advice, always use VMWare or VirtualBox to play/try Linux or UNIX distributions, you will not do any harm in this process and you will cut time and gain great insights during your initial experience.
good luck,
Joe
Ok you convinced me I'm trying Slackware soon. I was thinking of tinkering with Arch Linux for a while but you made me curious about Slackware. After all it is one of the oldest distros. I have never used anything but Debian-based distros. I hated RedHat-likes (Fedora, Mandriva, Centos mainly).
And not that I disagree, but I fear my old Toshiba cannot properly run any VM for now, so I usually keep a partition on my /dev/sda to install funny distros. (I don't have Windows at all, I use Ubuntu as my main OS on my laptop).
Thanks for the advices.