Eine kurze Erklärung zu DragonFlyBSD und die FRage: Braucht die Welt noch eine weitere "große" BSD-Variante?
Anbei der Link zum englischen Text in der Originalumgebung, aber ebenso der Text als Rohfassung in englischer Sprache hier. Wer übersetzen möchte, einfach in den Thread kopieren, wenn fertig
http://www.distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20040719#2
BSD Rises
Practically every week we see the birth of a new Linux distro (and often the death of an existing distro as well). Yes, Linux distros come and go with the wind. Many of these distros were the creation of a single starving student, and in some cases never get used by more than one person. True, a few distros are the work of a team of paid professional programmers who intend to take the world by storm with their new product, but that's the exception rather than the rule.
It's a rather different situation in the BSD world. This may, in part, be due to the fact that there are still far fewer BSD users than Linux users in existence, but another factor is no doubt the existence of Linux From Scratch which allows any home hobbyist to slap together a Linux distro relatively quickly. Perhaps in the future we'll be seeing a BSD From Scratch, but for now there isn't one.
In view of the above, it's quite a major (rare) event when a new BSD comes into existence. Last week we witnessed the arrival of DragonFly BSD 1.0 (and this week a 1.0a bug-fixed version). The project is the brainchild of Matt Dillon and some devoted followers. DragonFly is a fork of FreeBSD 4.x - apparently the DragonFly developers were not happy with the direction FreeBSD 5.x was taking. Specifically, they wanted to implement SMP in a different way from FreeBSD 5.x, and they've also taken out a fair bit of the Perl dependent stuff, plus they thought they could do a better job of writing an installer.
Everyone who's tried DragonFly agrees that it's fast, but also far from complete despite the "1.0" (or "1.0a") designation. The DragonFly team will have their work cut for them trying to equal and improve upon FreeBSD, which by all accounts is no slouch of an operating system.
Also this week, the folks over at ekkoBSD decided to throw in the towel. EkkoBSD was a recent fork of OpenBSD, and the developers had some good ideas, one of which was to make the system more user-friendly. However, as they soon discovered, creating a major operating system is not trivial, and all the more so when the developers are basically volunteers doing the work in their spare time.
Which begs the question - does the world really need another BSD? Given that the BSDs don't command a very large share of the world's OS market, wouldn't it be better for developers to pool their resources rather than going off in different directions? The Unix market has been afflicted with this issue for several decades, and some say that Linux (which is relatively young compared to Unix) already suffers from "distroitis". Perhaps less is really more? Then again, competition is generally a good thing - isn't it? An interesting point for debate.
Anbei der Link zum englischen Text in der Originalumgebung, aber ebenso der Text als Rohfassung in englischer Sprache hier. Wer übersetzen möchte, einfach in den Thread kopieren, wenn fertig
http://www.distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20040719#2
BSD Rises
Practically every week we see the birth of a new Linux distro (and often the death of an existing distro as well). Yes, Linux distros come and go with the wind. Many of these distros were the creation of a single starving student, and in some cases never get used by more than one person. True, a few distros are the work of a team of paid professional programmers who intend to take the world by storm with their new product, but that's the exception rather than the rule.
It's a rather different situation in the BSD world. This may, in part, be due to the fact that there are still far fewer BSD users than Linux users in existence, but another factor is no doubt the existence of Linux From Scratch which allows any home hobbyist to slap together a Linux distro relatively quickly. Perhaps in the future we'll be seeing a BSD From Scratch, but for now there isn't one.
In view of the above, it's quite a major (rare) event when a new BSD comes into existence. Last week we witnessed the arrival of DragonFly BSD 1.0 (and this week a 1.0a bug-fixed version). The project is the brainchild of Matt Dillon and some devoted followers. DragonFly is a fork of FreeBSD 4.x - apparently the DragonFly developers were not happy with the direction FreeBSD 5.x was taking. Specifically, they wanted to implement SMP in a different way from FreeBSD 5.x, and they've also taken out a fair bit of the Perl dependent stuff, plus they thought they could do a better job of writing an installer.
Everyone who's tried DragonFly agrees that it's fast, but also far from complete despite the "1.0" (or "1.0a") designation. The DragonFly team will have their work cut for them trying to equal and improve upon FreeBSD, which by all accounts is no slouch of an operating system.
Also this week, the folks over at ekkoBSD decided to throw in the towel. EkkoBSD was a recent fork of OpenBSD, and the developers had some good ideas, one of which was to make the system more user-friendly. However, as they soon discovered, creating a major operating system is not trivial, and all the more so when the developers are basically volunteers doing the work in their spare time.
Which begs the question - does the world really need another BSD? Given that the BSDs don't command a very large share of the world's OS market, wouldn't it be better for developers to pool their resources rather than going off in different directions? The Unix market has been afflicted with this issue for several decades, and some say that Linux (which is relatively young compared to Unix) already suffers from "distroitis". Perhaps less is really more? Then again, competition is generally a good thing - isn't it? An interesting point for debate.