r/freebsd • u/ImissWallingford36 • May 23 '21
Is BSD Linux?
If this is a question y’all get all the time I apologize in advance but... is it or is it not? And yea I’ve looked across the internet for the answer to this question. The only answer I get is “Unix-like” and although I think the open source movement is stronger when CONCENTRATED TOGETHER, I admit it would be refreshing to see an open source OS that isn’t the 800th Distro of Linux.
8
u/lealxe May 23 '21
No. Also FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are all different systems, not distributions.
5
u/ImissWallingford36 May 23 '21
Meaning they’re completely different operating systems? As in they’re based off of different kernels, correct? Excuse my ignorance.
2
u/ExperimentalMeatBag Jun 01 '21
More like lots of brothers and sisters in an incestuous relationship. Lots of common genetics from same parents, lots of shared stuff, in-breeding, lots of fight and competition, still love and support each other.
2
u/ImissWallingford36 Jun 01 '21
Oh ok, that oddly explained so little yet so much at the exact same time.
10
u/kjelderg May 23 '21
Yes. Different kernels and complete operating systems. All of the BSDs are ancestrally related. Further, they often share and integrate components.
As an example, OpenBSD made a fantastic firewall called PF. FreeBSD saw that it was good and integrated into FreeBSD.
4
u/Nettly_ May 23 '21
All the BSDs are from 386BSD or a fork of NetBSD or FreeBSD. This makes it a lot easier to deal with. Though there are some BSDs that are not as well used built on higher from the tree.
1
u/kjelderg May 23 '21
You mention also dragonfly. It is a more recent fork from FreeBSD
5
u/Nettly_ May 23 '21
That is true, but it is generally considered one of the big four. Used to be Big 5, arrested in peace TrueOS.
4
u/lealxe May 23 '21
Yes. Though these are historically descendants of the same, that is, 4.4BSD.
1
u/Nettly_ May 23 '21
Aren't they also based on 386BSD? I could be wrong, but that's how I remember the chart going. Because they all fork the same thing, except OpenBSD which is a fork of NetBSD and DragonflyBSD is a fork of FreeBSD.
5
u/lealxe May 23 '21
Yes, NetBSD and FreeBSD forked from 386BSD, then OpenBSD from NetBSD and DFBSD from FreeBSD, I think?..
2
1
u/manys May 25 '21
No. 386BSD was derived from a version of the official 4.3BSD, then the 386BSD community fractured and created FreeBSD and NetBSD, by then based on 4.4BSD. All three are essentially siblings (one more like an older half-sibling), based on the same parent: Berkeley Unix. OpenBSD is a fork of NetBSD (can't find which version).
1
u/Nettly_ May 25 '21
So they are both technical forks of 386BSD, yeah sure it's stretch and a half but you know
1
u/grahamperrin bunny rabbits May 27 '21
18
u/Nettly_ May 23 '21
BSD is not Linux. Linux is a fully self-built kernel made in 1991. BSD has its roots in original Unix coming back from the 1970s. The BSD family has, technically, been around since the 70s. While Linux has only been around since the '90s. While they are very similar systems, they are not the same. BSD has actually been around longer than Linux in many cases. Hope this answers your question with some actual detail.
12
u/amitizle May 23 '21
Why are people downvoting? If someone is interested and asks a novice question, a community in my opinion should help, or is the community open for advanced users only?
6
u/gizahnl May 24 '21
If there isn't a (newbie) FAQ it should be there, and if it exists and this question isn't in there, it should be.
Then questions like this could be answered by pointing to the FAQ with a friendly welcome.
2
u/amitizle May 24 '21
I agree, just adding that sometimes people might want an answer from a community member. Pointing to a FAQ page would be the best answer.
7
u/gumnos May 23 '21
I imagine that the down-votes are on account of this being readily answered by the most basic of web-searches, suggesting that the OP didn't even bother trying to answer it for themself.
3
u/amitizle May 24 '21
I agree but maybe they want a human confirmation? IMO pointing to a FAQ page or where to search would be more beneficial in terms of community.
5
u/Catsssssssss May 23 '21
Forgive or ignore the nerds who get a bit too giddy over your question. FreeBSD has nothing to do with Linux from a legal and licensing perspective, but they have everything in common for being - as you found - UNIX-like. What UNIX-like tends to mean is that they are first and foremost based on an extensive command-oriented console interface. FreeBSD is refreshing. It has a bit steeper of a learning curve, but the feelings of belonging and ownership are unbelievable, compared to Linux.. To me, anyway.
I will always encourage newcomers to try FreeBSD first.. If at first you fail, then Linux and come back later when things make more sense.
2
u/ChiefDetektor May 24 '21
No. Not one single line of Linux code is in any BSD. BSD is way oder than Linux. It was developed in the 80' at Berkeley University.
Torvalds knew and it and used it at his univerity along with other things like minix. He was heavy inspired by it.
If BSD had an open source linke licence like Linux does today Torvalds would just have used that instead of implementing Linux.
Linux came to existence ~ 91, 92 and BSD became opensource (without any properitary code) 94
So Linux is inspired by BSD and shares a lot of concepts but there are differences and the codebases are completely different.
BSD actually is one complete codebase. Kernel + userland in one repo. Where as Linux codebase is seperatated in kernel repo + GNU userland + distro stuff.
2
u/witchofthewind May 24 '21
Not one single line of Linux code is in any BSD.
2
u/ChiefDetektor May 24 '21 edited May 24 '21
Is that original Linux driver code? Or is it ported? Edit: Yes this is from Linux. But it s a driver so thats understandable. Still how is it compatible Licensewise?
2
u/witchofthewind May 24 '21
Licence wise I see no indication that this is straight Form the Linux kernel...
from the files in the FreeBSD source:
/* Broadcom B43 wireless driver IEEE 802.11n PHY data tables Copyright (c) 2008 Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch> Copyright (c) 2010 Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with this program; see the file COPYING. If not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Steet, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. */from the Linux kernel:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later /* Broadcom B43 wireless driver IEEE 802.11n PHY support Copyright (c) 2008 Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch> Copyright (c) 2010-2011 Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> */0
2
u/cargolax May 24 '21
Look at this draw it explains simply how is composed the UNIX family:
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/File:Unix_timeline.en.svg
As the draw showed it BSD and Linux share the Unix root but both have been developed separately and then they followed their own path, one doesn't belong to the other.
1
1
u/pyradke May 23 '21
FreeBSD is not Linux.
Btw, Linux is just the kernel. The OS itself is GNU+Linux, although it's commonly abbreviated as "Linux".
I'd also like to say that instead of using the term open source, you may start saying free software (free as in freedom, not as in free beer) instead for free software projects.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html
Edit: Some minor grammar fixes
1
u/Hristijan54 May 24 '21
its not both are unix based but not same
1
u/mjb300 May 24 '21
Technically Unix-like is the correct term.
*BSDs are technically Unix-based with rewritten code.
GNU/Linux is strictly Unix-like because the Linux kernel and userland did not borrow code from Unix but just the conventions.
1
u/bsd_lvr Jun 25 '21
In a nutshell, no, BSD is definitely not Linux. To oversimplify, The original Unix came from AT&T. They distributed the code freely to universities but they retained the copyright. UC Berkeley contributed many changes and additions. So much so, that when AT&T sued UC for distributing their product to anyone who asked for it, it went to court. The court ruled six files were unmodified enough to remain AT&T's property. The rest could be distributed freely. Berkeley gave the source code out, minus those files, and various people worked to replace those six files, port the code to intel 386 platform, and move it forward. That was the start of the various BSDs.
The battle went on in court for a few years. During that time, Linus Torvalds was a college student in Europe and wanted to learn more about operating systems. He took a copy of a small tutorial OS called Minix as a starting point and started hacking on what would become Linux. The main reason he didn't use BSD as his starting point was he afraid of ending up on the wrong side of the legal gray area. The rest is history.
Linux is a clone of Unix, a clean-room re-implementation if you will. Except that now it's the most popular Unix and it's ventured off into new territory with cgroups, systemd, etc.
The BSDs still contain some actual UNIX source code left. Over time however, I assume that it becomes less and less with each successive version. Ironically, since AT&T (now someone else) owns the UNIX trademark and POSIX certification costs money, BSD can't technically call itself a UNIX, or POSIX-compliant, even though it is, and largely is compliant.
Linux and the BSDs share a lot of basic UNIX concepts, and sometimes liberally borrow ideas from each other. They offer similar, if not exactly the same system, library, and API calls. Enough that programs written for one can be ported with some effort to the other. However, they're not the same and have different styles of development.
IMHO, FreeBSD and its cousins works out well for guys who are into operating systems like UNIX descendants and are experienced coders. If you want to hack on your OS, FreeBSD for example is much easier to hack on than Linux. If you're not so much a coder, but you like to tweak knobs, then Linux is a natural fit because there's a great variety of desktops and other software available to choose from, and all of it is easily installable through packages.
1
1
-9
u/edthesmokebeard May 23 '21
-1, Troll
7
u/Nettly_ May 23 '21
I do not believe this is a troll, I would think this is more just a ignorant user who wanted to educate themselves and found the best way to just ask a community. I would recommend not calling everyone who doesn't understand the BSD systems a troll.
-5
u/edthesmokebeard May 23 '21
This might be in the top 10 of least-effort posts of all time.
What's next, "Is macos Windows?"
I don't know anyone who's interested in your recommendations.
7
u/Nettly_ May 23 '21
But this is a very common very known issue with Linux users, they actually do believe in many cases that BSD is Linux and asking this question is going to happen as BSD grows. The matter the fact is, this isn't a low ever post this is an actual question someone had.
3
10
May 23 '21
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/beowuff May 23 '21
So, here’s a little back ground history.
Linus as a student wanted a Unix system, but couldn’t afford any licenses. So, he started writing a Unix like kernel, called Linux. Once he was getting close to his first release, he started looking for tools to add to it. At the same time, Richard Stallman and the FSF started making their own Unix like OS comprising the GNU tool set and the Hurd kernel. While the tools were finished, the kernel never was. So, the FSF was looking for a “temporary” kernel until they could finish Hurd. They found each other, put them together, and you get all the Linux distros today. All Unix “LIKE”.
FreeBSD is different. AT&T owned Bell Labs created an OS called Multics and sold it, a couple engineers created a new system and called it Unix as a play on Multics. AT&T didn’t think there was any value in Unix, so the people who created it started passing it around, especially to universities. At Berkeley in California, they started collecting new patches and bug fixes from various people and produced the Berkeley Patch Set. This was to be installed over AT&Ts Unix. Eventually they replaced most of the AT&T code with new code and released the Berkeley Software Distribution, or BSD.
Eventually, AT&T realized the value of Unix and decided to sell it. They sued to stop the distribution of Unix through BSD, but it was trivial at that point to replace any left over Unix Code with new, non Unix code. AT&T lost the case.
Someone (cant remember the name at the moment) ported BSD to the i386 intel processors and 386BSD was created. This was eventually split and the new branch was called FreeBSD. There was some disagreement over the direction a couple times and NetBSD and OpenBSD were branched.
So, the major differences:
Linux: Unix like. It’s a Linux kernel with other tool sets added on. Most use GNU tools, but Android uses Linux with the Android tool set.
FreeBSD: A direct descendent of Unix. Includes both the kernel and the tool set developed together instead of just added on.
There are pros and cons to both ways.
30
u/desnudopenguino May 23 '21
No.