With all the smoke blowing around about OpenBSD, I've got a serious
question about that system.
I understand it's worshipped by some religious fanatics (as is Linux,
hence the religious wars raging in other threads - it is not my intent
to start another one here, please keep this discourse more civil and
focused on objective reality not subjective articles of belief?). My
default assumption is that any package that gains such strong adherents
has virtue, and I'd like to be able to explore it for myself.
There is a problem however, inherent in the philosophical approach of
the development team. One consequence of the great care taken in
vetting source code is that device support is somewhat less extensive
compared to other systems. For example, the system I would like to use
for experiments with OpenBSD is old and has one network interface card
that is not supported by OpenBSD (although it is running fine with Linux
now).
Question is, how convenient is the architecture, and the development
environment, for taking software from another system and porting it? Is
it a completely unique beast, or is it just the same basic architecture
with careful design and implementation to assure that there are no
unintended "features" introduced down in the details of coding?
Also, how does OpenBSD compare with NetBSD and FreeBSD in terms of both
code portability and device support? Anyone know the inner workings of
those systems well enough to comment?
THANKS!
--Bruce McCulley
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
