Re: Best Linux Distribution - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Best Linux Distribution |
Date | |
Msg-id | 41F1594B.5080104@commandprompt.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Best Linux Distribution ("Bruno Almeida do Lago" <teolupus@gmail.com>) |
List | pgsql-general |
Bruno Almeida do Lago wrote: >Can I expect that a software developed on Linux will run and compile on >FreeBSD (since both use GCC)? > > In general yes. Sometimes they do require some tweaks though. J > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org >[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of >mmiranda@americatel.com.sv >Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 4:59 PM >To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org >Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 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@postgresql.org >[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Ian Harding >Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:42 PM >To: esoteric@3times25.net; pgsql-general@postgresql.org >Subject: Re: [GENERAL] 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 > > > >>>>Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> 01/21/05 10:15 AM >>> >>>> >>>> >Patrick Welche wrote: > > >>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.. > > > -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
pgsql-general by date: