I wanted to make my opinions about
Slackware 15 Linux and NetBSD 10.0 known.
NetBSD 10.0 was released a short time ago.
I've taken a chromebook I have and installed
a qemu virtualization of NetBSD 10.0 for my
personal play.
NetBSD is derived directly from the original
AT&T UNIX. UNIX was developed and created on
mainframe computers where Slackware was developed
on personal computers with the INTEL CPU inside.
The base license used in creating NetBSD is the
BSD software license. Slackware uses a Linux kernel
and it's license is the GPL software license.
Due to the explosion of popularity of the IBM PC and
it's generic clones, Linux based operating systems
such as Slackware received much more development than
Operating Systems such as NetBSD.
Today, Linux has become the 250 lbs 8 year old son who's
good at knocking down all the kids on the block and can
also FILL any couch he can find to sit on.
Sure, Linux has over 10 times the hardware support and 100
times the user interfaces to exploit than any of the BSD's.
Linux is the bully on the block, as fast as any BSD and
more capable. Yet, there are only a few Linux distributions
which are used in commercial servers. Two of them are Debian
and Ubuntu because they will upgrade in place. It's important
to be able to upgrade in place if your business has thousands
of servers across the globe in various data centers.
That's one of Slackware's biggest problems is that you can't
upgrade Slackware in place like you can NetBSD. Slackware
only supports two architectures, x86_64 and i386. There
has been an effort to make Slackware available for ARM however
with an on-going effort to get Slackbuilds set up to support
ARM.
Here's where NetBSD shines past Slackware. NetBSD supports
dozens of hardware architectures and is upgradable in place.
And thanks to the package source {pkgsrc} system, you can
install applications and utilites to all those architectures
when using NetBSD. Unlike Ubuntu which publishes a release
with new applications every 6 months, package source releases
every 3 months with new packages. NetBSD also supports
native ZFS file systems.
Linux is just a kernel, it's not a whole operating system.
Linux development consists of a highly uncoordinated group
of developers across the globe, some of which work for major
corporations who all submit patches to the Linux kernel
developement maintainers.
Distributions such as NetBSD will pick though the Linux
garbage dump collection of working patches and port them
to be used with NetBSD for anything the NetBSD developers
feel the system needs to support. Often times, NetBSD
developers will be the only ones to fix critical bugs
in this code base. The entire NetBSD operating system
is compiled from source code as a requirment of the
release so that nothing is missing or untested. The
same things said for NetBSD will also apply for package
source {pkgsrc}. It should be note'd that package source
can be used on operting systems other than NetBSD to allow
those other systems to compile and use their own
applications.
It's really funny that one of the TOP commercial Linux
distributions known as RHEL from RedHat forces you to
re-install your operating system with every release.
Could you imagine the payroll costs you'd incure having
to upgrade 1000 servers to the next release of rhel?
While the bulk of the development community is working
to improve Linux distributions every day, there are
drawbacks to this environment. Drawbacks such as System D.
Drawbacks such as Wayland. For in the Linux community,
when these 'changes' are 'implemented' by the 'GODS to BE',
the rest of the Linux community will 'have to follow GOD'.
If you like using thin clients, Wayland will stop that.
If you don't want all your major system functions tied
up by 'ONE' 'GROUP' who controlls them, then System D isn't
for you. Which is one reason people like Slackware as
it's one of the last Linux distributions which doesn't use
System D. OR, perhaps your issue is with the way Flatpaks
or SNAPS actually run. Maybe your issue is with how these
'canned' 'commercial' daemons you need run in your Linux
system. Some companies have to rely on the efforts of
5 or more corporations who build their canned server
applications/daemons which they absolutely require to stay
in business. The people who have to maintain such Linux
server farms are constantly worried about what their 5
supporting companies are doing with those services? Will
all of the services be compatible and supported next year?
In short, everything today in the Linux commercial space
is geared to help the profits and protect the companies
which develop these canned appliances. There is little
concern for the actual needs of their customers. And
the same thing can be said of the Linux Kernel. Linux
customers must follow the herd or they will be cut off.
NetBSD has remained consistent in architecture support
and quality of software and their code base. If you
used NetBSD, you can still use your thin clients, you
can still have support for i386, and your daemons will
still be autonomous. NetBSD is completely different
from the Linux community in that they do not continously
lead their user base down a path of intentional direction,
extermination of services, and elimination of choice.
Slackware is Linux based and strives to keep the operating
system open and allow it's users to have their own choice
and direction. Slackware is the only Linux distribution
which deliberately tries to maintain the same posture
on architecture that NetBSD does. Slackware's mission
becomes more and more difficult as the years go by in
their efforts to get around the decisions made by the
group/herd minded efforts of their controllers. Slackware
in not a developed operating system but rather an operating
system which is 'assembled' from the 'parts' found lying
around on the internet. If these 'parts' disappear for
them, then they can't have their operating system as
Slackware is not a development environment as NetBSD is.
NetBSD is not going to drop 32 bit I386 support any time
soon. Nor will NetBSD just decide to quit supporting file
systems such as the ext2 file system has been dropped from
the Linux camp.
Linux doesn't have 64 bit time yet. 64 bit time is a serious
concern.
If they tried to build a car using the same mentality
they have over in the Linux camp, their company would be
bankrupt within 5 years time. The vendors will eventually
get too controlling and bankrupt the company out of business.
Linux has become a disease in that the kernel has become so
large and complicated that billion dollar companies {GOOGLE}
have tried twice now to develop their own kernel from the
Linux source code and have failed.
Oracle linux and Oracle as a company would be crippled
financially if IBM's management of RedHat took RHEL south.
And yes, I'm not even writing about Oracle acquiring SUN and
everything which went on in their efforts to line their
own pocketbooks for short term gains.
I could provide more examples but it should be obvious to
anyone that too much interdependance on 3rd party vendors
for key pieces of your system you depend on is a disastrous.
The writing was on the wall for Kenworth SEMI's and they
decided to finally develop their own diesel powerplant after
Catepillar decided suddenly to quit producing their diesel
powerplant for SEMI's.
In house ownership of your 'thing' is a requirment, not an
option.
In conclusion: When the IBM PC came into being, the following
decade brough us Linux. Everyone felt this was their 'big'
opportunity to break away from corporate control and board
rule of their computing environments. They all felt they
could break away from corporations and 'be free'.
Touching isn't it. And as time went on, these kids who lived
in their mom's basement realized they could not develop the
platforms we see today without office buildings of commercial
developers who are all controlled by insane
corporate leadership.
Yet at the same time I am amazed at this battle between
the GPL hippies and the corporate overlords. I wonder
why these corporate overlords don't try and take over
the BSD community as they have GPL'd Linux? Well, Apple
did use FreeBSD as the basis for MacOSX. The FreeBSD
community didn't even get the equivalent of a cup of PISS
back from Apple in that transaction, but, FreeBSD isn't
being steered into HELL by Apple like the Linux community
is by it's thousands of corporate overlords.
Having said all of that though, NetBSD is a great Operating
System and so is Slackware Linux.
