gnupic: Re: [gnupic] Fwd: [Bug 132141] kernel doesn't know its own name--Best OS for gnupic
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] Fwd: [Bug 132141] kernel doesn't know its own name--Best OS for gnupic
From:
"Xiaofan Chen" ####@####.####
Date:
13 May 2006 03:11:24 +0100
Message-Id: <a276da400605121911s2cfa5811gda7427dc82b018f9@mail.gmail.com>
On 5/13/06, Robert S. Sciuk ####@####.#### wrote:
> On Fri, 12 May 2006, Dan Andersson wrote:
>
> > And why pissing about with Linux at all when there is FreeBSD?
> >
> Actually, that's good advice. I've long ago decided that the BSD distros
> had some significant advantages over any number of Linux distros, and the
> fact that there are only 3 forks of BSD rather than the n Linux distros
> seem to show that they have covered their respective territory quite
> well:
> OpenBSD -- security
> NetBSD -- portability
> FreeBSD -- originally the best i386 OS, and now ported to a
> number of different architectures ... so now, likely
> the most complete, and best PORTS package available.
>
> I suggest that if you are reconsidering your Linux distro that you try
> FreeBSD as a solid alternative. As I type this, I'm using the latest
> FreeBSD (6.1) release on a freshly installed HP Omnibook 4150 (old).
> Works GREAT!
>
I've tried FreeBSD for about one month and got most GNUPIC tools
(gputils/gpsim/sdcc/pikdev/piklab/ktechlab/...) working. However one
big problem with FreeBSD is the support for USB. I could not get PICkit 1/2
and ICD2 to work under FreeBSD since libusb is broken there. In the end
I deleted the FreeBSD patition. In terms of hardware support, BSD is simply
not good as Linux.
I will say Ubuntu is one of the best for PIC developement now. Fedora Core
4/5 may another good choice as well.
Regards,
Xiaofan
