Original Linuxsucks post: https://lemmy.world/post/50070857?scrollToComments=true
- Linux distro's may ship different kernel patches.. But different BSD distributions ship different kernels too. NetBSD does not use the same kernel as FreeBSD. We can make the same argument about packaging systems on linux as we can between different BSD variants.
- Random vendors DO patch linux differently. But, so do different vendors that use BSD kernels. Playstation 5 as an example apparently uses a heavily patched FreeBSD kernel (as an example). No doubt, if more hardware did use BSD, they likely would too.
- Nvidia have always had serious issues (even back to nforce 15+ years ago). But, vendors have had the same issues on MacOS too in the past, such as with ProTools and OSX updates. At the moment, there are ongoing issues with Sound in Freebsd . They're not a good example. Even something basic like Wayland, they could have fixed their problems years ago. If the NVIDIA argument held ANY weight, the NVIDIA DGX Spark wouldn't be using Linux.
- "Most people on Linux are probably running very old kernels (along with drivers)." Linux has SLTS kernels (10 years support). FreeBSD is up to 5 years. Old does not mean unsupported. If new hardware is needed, Hardware Enablement stack
- Linux distro's don't randomly break kernel drivers on minor distro updates. It's not a huge issue unless you compile your own kernel regularly. Very few people do.
- The Linux Kernel does support Live Patching for many things, and has since at least 2008. Microsoft has "hotpatching" . FreeBSD and MacOS (BSD based kernels) still apparently don't.
Also, I was involved with Project Utopia in the early 2000's.. So, I can quite honestly say first hand, that this imho overall, complaining about these things is a fairly crap argument, and has been since projects like Jockey and Driver on Demand.
Each OS has their own disadvantages and advantages.. BSD has advantages and disadvantages compared to Linux
0 Comments
No comments yet.