Debian GNU / Linux vs FreeBSD

[Purshottam Y]

Much attention is paid to Debian GNU / kFreeBSD, the operating system that uses the usual Debian userland (for most GNU), the GNU C library and the kernel BSD (FreeBSD), since this could serve as a milestone in the history of open operating systems. But I am not having enough knowledge about these things. So thought to take help from you members. Please provide some information that can be useful for me.

[S_Asnodkar]

It was a side of the Linux kernel 2.6.30 and the other from 7.2-1 FreeBSD. They have all been tested in their 2 for 32 and 64 sti. 27 tests have been conducted. Of these 27 tests 32-bit Linux version of Debian was more efficient than the 32-bit version of FreeBSD. However the difference is not huge which is very encouraging for the FreeBSD version. On the 64-bit Linux version is in front of 23 of the 27 tests. However on testing x264, 7-Zip, and Gcryp FreeBSD version is clearly ahead. Especially since the appearance of the nuclei has nothing to do ... But I read the same tests with the kernel + freebsd kernel 2.6.32 lib-dispatch and with the big bug fix on CFS in the kernel.

[Xena]

The current session of benchmarks comparing the latest snapshot of kFreeBSD Debian with kernel 8.1 and FreeBSD UFS filesystem and Debian Linux with kernel 2.6.32 and ext4 file system, in 64-bit, all in their default configurations, on a Lenovo ThinkPad T61 notebook. Referee's decision is Phoronix test suite. CPU-based tests see a substantial equality between the systems, with Linux, however, check that, on average, a few percentage points. Curious as always, the test database on the Phoronix Test Suite offers: SQLite sees the Linux kernel literally succumb. When compared with the previous session's benchmark, the FreeBSD 8.1 kernel does not bring novelty. However, the future Debian GNU / kFreeBSD is almost defined in its future performance and release ... does not seem bad at all.

[Reckon]

Does that put all but version on FreeBSD? Ubuntu unless I've played all these systems servers and the one I enjoyed was Debian, but I guess because I'm used to it. RedHat is not bad, provides good support and the software installs fine if it is specific to that version, but the party starts. Another much the same thing happens on SuSE, but it is so widely used among business applications, but for specific applications is an option as good as RedHat. For security more or less all the same. And BSD is what it is, and does the trick, but is still a long way to commercial level of RedHat and hence it is a niche too small to be taken into account, making it impossible to compare with others, because users have a number of quite small, you can not make a comparison in terms of stability and for security.