[MUD-Dev] Re: Quick socket question

[Adam Wiggins]

On Sat, 7 Nov 1998, Dr. Cat wrote:
> Well, we were going to install Solaris 86 on the Furcadia server machine 
> to replace the buggy older version of BSDI it had on it.  But the 
> sysadmin out there suggested going to Red Hat Linux instead, because it's 
> a BDS family rather than a SYSV family, and there might be fewer 
> problems.  I agreed.  I don't know how hard getting it going on SYSV 
> would have been, but I know my O'Reilly "Using C on the Unix system" is 
> so old that it says Berkeley Unixes have sockets and SYSV don't!  Surely 
> SYSV has to have sockets now, what with this "internet" thing having 
> gotten so popular since this book was written - don't they?

I don't know the answer to your real question (which I omited from
the quote), but I was under the impression that Linux is actually
*more* like System V.  If you want a BSD I strongly recommend checking
out FreeBSD (www.freebsd.org), or its sisters NetBSD and OpenBSD.
After having some trouble with the firewalling code in the Linux 2.0
kernels, I tried out the latest version of FreeBSD and it works great.
Many say that FreeBSD is more robust and higher performance for server
tasks (specifically networking).  This may not be as true with all the
changes in the Linux 2.1 kernel series, but if you're looking for a
"true" BSD you might want to check it out.
(Against it I've heard that its scheduler is less than optimal, but
for a server doing a single task you don't much care about that.)

Adam W.