3 ms·

BSDI was legally in the clear in January 1994 and FreeBSD had an unencumbered version out by the end of 1994. Linux distros were still toys at that point. I thi

BSDI was legally in the clear in January 1994 and FreeBSD had an unencumbered version out by the end of 1994. Linux distros were still toys at that point. I think it's fair to say that the lawsuits didn't help BSD, but the lawsuits don't seem like they should have been a decisive reason for Linux overtaking them in mindshare and marketshare.

rwmj 4y ago
FreeBSD didn't support shared libraries while Linux did, and that made a huge difference trying to run X11 on the 386 systems of the time, specifically because of hard disk space required.
- dekhn 4y ago
  linux's shared libraries were pretty limited in '94- I forget the technical reason but it had to do with runtime linker not being able to compute unique addresses for each .so, and so they sort of had to be assigned "ranges" that a particular .so owned (https://www.linux.co.cr/free-unix-os/review/1994/0914-a.html https://www.linux.co.cr/free-unix-os/review/1994/0914-a.html). Probably a.out vs. ELF.
  - rwmj 4y ago
    Yup, that was the limitation of the old a.out format. ELF was a breath of fresh air, but it didn't arrive until after Linux 1.2.
kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
> Linux distros were still toys at that point. I had Slackware 1.1 running in 1Q94. It had X11 and you could run Mosaic on it plus all of the shell userland. It was pretty usable.
- lizknope 4y ago
  I installed Slackware 2.1 in the fall of 1994. I had everything working. X11, networking, sound, Mosaic. I compiled Spice 3f4 and used it for my EE circuit sims. The next year I asked some questions on a FreeBSD usenet forum and was told to buy a SCSI card, SCSI hard drive, and new network card. No thanks. I just stayed with Linux because the hardware support was much bigger.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    I wasted so much money on SCSI back in those days. This was the thing that finally killed it for me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaz_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaz_drive
    - lizknope 4y ago
      I ended up buying a SCSI card in fall 1995 so I could use this. The drive was about $500 but each 650MB cartridge was only $30. I could format it with a ext2 and use it as a regular filesystem. No need to make an ISO image to burn. CD burners weren't cheap yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-change_Dual https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-change_Dual This technology was later turned into DVD-RAM which was never as popular as DVD+/-R(W)
dekhn 4y ago
Linux wasn't a toy in '94: I had a full X11 with emacs, g++, and all the other goodies and easily ported scientific software from the grown-up UNIX in the lab, using it to write my undergraduate thesis. This was using Slackware from 4 floppies. At the time I was offered two pills: Slackware or BSD. I picked linux since it sounded "newer and hotter". It was a toy in '92-93 and they still didn't have good dynamic linking in '94, and I'd argue things were pretty dicey before glibc (I stopped using debian for years during the bo->hamm transition) but it was usable for production work at the time. (none of this should be taken as a statement that BSD wasn't in great shape in '94; I had heard of the lawsuit but I don't think it affected my decision to go linux at that time)
- sgt 4y ago
  '94 it was definitely not a toy, but certainly needing a lot of work from the user. But to me (at the time), that's also what made it so much fun. Recompiling the kernel every single weekend. Big part of my childhood.

rwmj 4y ago

FreeBSD didn't support shared libraries while Linux did, and that made a huge difference trying to run X11 on the 386 systems of the time, specifically because of hard disk space required.

dekhn 4y ago
linux's shared libraries were pretty limited in '94- I forget the technical reason but it had to do with runtime linker not being able to compute unique addresses for each .so, and so they sort of had to be assigned "ranges" that a particular .so owned (https://www.linux.co.cr/free-unix-os/review/1994/0914-a.html https://www.linux.co.cr/free-unix-os/review/1994/0914-a.html). Probably a.out vs. ELF.
- rwmj 4y ago
  Yup, that was the limitation of the old a.out format. ELF was a breath of fresh air, but it didn't arrive until after Linux 1.2.

kevin_thibedeau 4y ago

> Linux distros were still toys at that point. I had Slackware 1.1 running in 1Q94. It had X11 and you could run Mosaic on it plus all of the shell userland. It was pretty usable.

lizknope 4y ago
I installed Slackware 2.1 in the fall of 1994. I had everything working. X11, networking, sound, Mosaic. I compiled Spice 3f4 and used it for my EE circuit sims. The next year I asked some questions on a FreeBSD usenet forum and was told to buy a SCSI card, SCSI hard drive, and new network card. No thanks. I just stayed with Linux because the hardware support was much bigger.
- dekhn 4y ago
  I wasted so much money on SCSI back in those days. This was the thing that finally killed it for me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaz_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaz_drive
  - lizknope 4y ago
    I ended up buying a SCSI card in fall 1995 so I could use this. The drive was about $500 but each 650MB cartridge was only $30. I could format it with a ext2 and use it as a regular filesystem. No need to make an ISO image to burn. CD burners weren't cheap yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-change_Dual https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-change_Dual This technology was later turned into DVD-RAM which was never as popular as DVD+/-R(W)

dekhn 4y ago

Linux wasn't a toy in '94: I had a full X11 with emacs, g++, and all the other goodies and easily ported scientific software from the grown-up UNIX in the lab, using it to write my undergraduate thesis. This was using Slackware from 4 floppies. At the time I was offered two pills: Slackware or BSD. I picked linux since it sounded "newer and hotter". It was a toy in '92-93 and they still didn't have good dynamic linking in '94, and I'd argue things were pretty dicey before glibc (I stopped using debian for years during the bo->hamm transition) but it was usable for production work at the time. (none of this should be taken as a statement that BSD wasn't in great shape in '94; I had heard of the lawsuit but I don't think it affected my decision to go linux at that time)

sgt 4y ago
'94 it was definitely not a toy, but certainly needing a lot of work from the user. But to me (at the time), that's also what made it so much fun. Recompiling the kernel every single weekend. Big part of my childhood.