FreeBSD vs Linux in 2023

FreeBSD is a well-known server platform and a free and open-source Unix-like operating system derived from the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD). FreeBSD is an OS designed to power contemporary servers, PCs, and embedded systems.

BSD is an abbreviation for "Berkeley Software Distribution". It is the moniker given to source code releases from the University of California, Berkeley that were initially enhancements to AT&T's Research UNIX® operating system. Multiple open-source operating system projects are based on the 4.4BSD-Lite edition of this source code. In addition, they include a variety of packages from other Open Source projects, the GNU project in particular. The comprehensive operating system includes:

• Shells, file utilities, compilers, and linkers.
• The kernel of the BSD operating system, manages process scheduling, symmetric multiprocessing (SMP), memory management, device drivers, etc.
• The C library, is the system's core API. The BSD C library is not based on the GNU project, but rather on code from Berkeley.
• The X Window system, is responsible for graphic presentation. The X.Org project maintains the X Window system used by the majority of BSD distributions. FreeBSD offers a range of desktop environments, including KDE, Gnome, and Xfce, as well as lightweight window managers, such as Fluxbox, Openbox, and Awesome.
• Numerous additional applications and services.

Linux and FreeBSD are operating systems that resemble Unix (or more specifically, the Linux kernel is used in Unix-like operating systems). They have many similarities, yet there are also significant variances. Linux is utilized on everything from tiny devices to desktop PCs, but FreeBSD is used nearly exclusively on servers.

In this article, we will examine the primary distinctions between Linux and FreeBSD.

What is the Difference Between FreeBSD and Linux?

Despite FreeBSD and Linux having superficial similarities, they are quite distinct operating systems.

Linux and FreeBSD are both dynamic possibilities for every user of open-source software. FreeBSD is more comprehensive and more standardized than Linux, which simply supplies a kernel and drivers and needs the use of third-party applications.

FreeBSD is the superior alternative for those who want to reduce the amount of setup required. However, Linux provides greater customization choices and remains a fantastic alternative for those who value system flexibility. Additionally, Linux is more likely to provide support for hardware constraints than FreeBSD.

FreeBSD is ideal for you if you like stability, performance, and security. You will enjoy how quickly Linux releases new technologies, features, and upgrades if keeping on the leading edge is vital to you.

Figure 1. Linux vs FreeBSD

We will evaluate Linux and FreeBSD based on the following criteria:

• Operating System

• Price

• License

• Origin

• Firewall

• File System

• Security

• Compatibility

• Reliability

• Performance

• User Shell

• Package Management

• Updates

• Development

• Releases

• Desktop

• Server

• Vendor Support

• Documentation

• Oracle/ERP Applications

The following table summarizes the differences between Linux and FreeBSD.

FreeBSD	Linux
FreeBSD is developed by a central group of people	Linux is maintained by the Linux Foundation, the worldwide developers are contributing to the Linux Kernel
It was developed by The FreeBSD Project.	It was developed by Linus Torvalds.
It was launched in 1993	It was launched in 1991
It is licensed under the BSD license	Linux is licensed under GNU GPL (General Public License)
FreeBSD kernel type is Monolithic with modules.	The kernel used on Linux is Monolithic
Computer architectures supported by FreeBSD are IA-32, x86-64, ARM, MIPS, and PowerPC.	Computer architectures supported by Linux are IA-32, x86-64, ARM, PowerPC, and SPARC.
Packages are managed using ports and pkg tool	Different Linux distribution uses different methods of package management
The performance of FreeBSD is excellent	Linux has good performance
FreeBSD uses tcsh as the default root shell, and the Bourne shell-compatible or sh as the default user shell	The default interface is BASH (Bourne Again Shell) some of them are using c shell as default
By default, FreeBSD doesn't include a GUI desktop, but you can download and install it	Many Linux distributions come with a default GUI. GNOME, KDE, and Xfce are the most common desktop environments on Linux
used on servers	used on desktops, servers, mainframes, mobile phones
It has built-in support for ZFS filesystem	Linux does not come with direct support for ZFS, although you can still use it via third-party modules
The file systems supported by FreeBSD are UFS2, ZFS, ext2, ext3, FAT, ISO 9660, UDF, and NFS.	The file systems supported by Linux are ext2, ext3, ext4, btrfs, ReiserFS, FAT, ISO 9660, UDF, and NFS.
The non-native APIs supported through its subsystems are Mono, Java, Win16, Win32, and Linux.	The non-native APIs supported through its subsystems are Mono, Java, Win16, and Win32.
FreeBSD has better security than Linux	Linux has good security.
FreeBSD does not support any of the Oracle or ERP applications	Linux supports all types of Oracle or ERP applications

Table 1. FreeBSD vs Linux

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Price?

FreeBSD and Linux are both free under their open-source nature. Expenditures on extras, such as support and hardware, are inevitable. Anyone is free to use, change, examine, or distribute FreeBSD and Linux source code. Any improvements to Linux, however, must be made public. This is not the case with FreeBSD, which provides it an edge over other operating systems for enterprises seeking to include it in their products.

Get Started with Zenarmor Today For Free

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of License?

While FreeBSD uses its BSD License, Linux employs a GNU GPL (General Public License) license. BSD License permits users to have unrestricted access to the operating system and edit the source code as they see appropriate. They release and share this source code if they so want. Alternatively, they have the right to keep it to themselves.

GNU GPL license allows Linux users to alter the source code. If they make modifications to the Linux source code, they are legally required to provide their source code. This strategy has both benefits and cons. A downside of Linux is that it cannot be used to create a closed-source system. However, a benefit is that other users may build upon the efforts of others and further expand the system. This is a significant reason why Linux has such a thriving community.

The majority of users are not affected by license differences, since they don't edit the source code. If they plan to create a closed-source system from an open-source system, they should utilize FreeBSD rather than Linux.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Origin?

Linux and BSD are similar to the original Unix system created by Denis Ritchie and Ken Thompson at AT&T Bell Laboratories. However, they were unable to disclose it to the public owing to copyright restrictions. Therefore, they chose to pass over the system to their counterparts at Berkeley.

The BSD foundation was founded to change the original Unix system by modifying the source code until it no longer included any source code. Thus, the BSD family of Unix systems was born. They have the same structure and functionality as the Unix established by Ritchie and Thompson, but with changed codebases.

During this period, Linus Torvalds, a graduate student at the University of Helsinki, was attempting to purchase a Unix system for his operating system course. In addition, he lacked sufficient funds and chose to create a clone of the system on his own. Using concepts from MINIX, an educational Unix-like system, he created the whole kernel by himself. Thus, Linux's introduction into the community started. It cemented its status as the most potent and widely-used Unix-like system ever created by future cooperation with the open source movement.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of OS?

FreeBSD is superior to other operating systems. This is because FreeBSD is an operating system that has all the necessary components, including a kernel, drivers, documentation, and tools. On FreeBSD, it is immediately apparent that you are dealing with a "full operating system" that has been meticulously assembled. Third-party programs are totally isolated from the kernel and base system. /etc contains the system settings, whereas /usr/local/etc contains all third-party configuration. Everything that can be configured, tuned, or set up is detailed in the man pages. You have everything from the rc utility, which is the command script that controls the automated boot process after being called by init, to the command scripts, the sysctl kernel management tool, the various system configurations, and everything else very well organized and documented.

Because FreeBSD is managed as a complete operating system and project and not as a collection of projects glued together in distribution, everything is well-thought-out. FreeBSD is based on many years of experience. When things change, they change for the better for the entire community and in response to real-world use cases and industry problems.

Linux is a kernel and not a complete operating system. This is a widespread misunderstanding, and people commonly refer to Linux as a whole operating system. Linux is dependent on software developed by third parties for its operating system, bringing nothing more to the table than a kernel and associated drivers. It is often included as part of a Linux distribution with system software and libraries. Because most of them come from the GNU project, the Free Software Foundation refers to Linux as "GNU/Linux". Some popular Linux distros are as follows:

• RedHat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)

• Ubuntu

• Debian

• CentOS

• Fedora

• Linux Mint

• Alma Linux

• Arch Linux

What is the Difference Between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Security?

FreeBSD, on the whole, has a lower number of security flaws than Linux does, albeit not by a significant margin. The FreeBSD installer includes a range of security options that are enabled or disabled during installation.

• Hiding jailed processes

• Hide the message buffer

• Hiding other UIDs processes

• Hiding other GIDs processes

• Randomize process IDs

• Disable process debugging

• Disable Sendmail

• Disable syslogd networking

• Non-executable stack and stack guard

• Secure console

Most of FreeBSD's other kernel-level security settings are available in the security.bsd sysctl tree and more get added every few months. You may use the following command to list the available settings on your FreeBSD system.

sysctl -d security.bsd

A list of FreeBSD and Linux vulnerability statistics is given below. The usually smaller number of security concerns on FreeBSD does not necessarily imply that FreeBSD is safer than Linux. However, the attack surface of the majority of Linux distributions is far greater than that of FreeBSD.

Year	FreeBSD	Linux
1999	18	19
2000	27	5
2001	36	23
2002	31	15
2003	14	19
2004	16	50
2005	17	133
2006	27	89
2007	9	59
2008	14	69
2009	11	104
2010	8	118
2011	9	80
2012	10	114
2013	13	186
2014	18	128
2015	6	79
2016	6	215
2017	26	449
2018	30	178
2019	29	290
2020	32	126
2021	25	161
2022	2	188
2023	6	269
---------	---------	-------
Total	438	3166

Table 2. Number of Vulnerabilities for FreeBSD and Linux till 6 October 2023

Both FreeBSD and Linux offer security event auditing capabilities. Event auditing facilitates the dependable, granular, and flexible recording of several security-relevant system events, including logins, configuration changes, and file and network access. These log data are useful for live system monitoring, intrusion detection, and postmortem examination. FreeBSD incorporates Sun's Basic Security Module (BSM) Application Programming Interface (API) and file format and is compatible with Solaris and Mac OS X audit implementations.

On the other hand, Linux is less secure than FreeBSD. Security was a cornerstone of the FreeBSD project, thus it's not unexpected that they had an advantage in terms of security. FreeBSD is equipped with superior security measures.

Additionally, Linux has a larger user base than FreeBSD does, which means that, in theory, more security flaws have been found in the Linux system. Because FreeBSD delivers a comprehensive system, its default setup is very safe.

However, this does not imply that Linux is not very secure. Linux is extremely adjustable, allowing you to incorporate almost any security feature. The user's setting has a significant role in determining how secure a Linux system is. Linux users bolster the safety of their computer systems thanks to the platform's high degree of personalization. But from the perspective of the whole operating system, FreeBSD is more secure than Linux.

What is the Difference Between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Firewall?

FreeBSD includes three distinct firewalls:

• PF: A ported version of OpenBSD's PF firewall has been included in the FreeBSD operating system since version 5.3. ALTQ (Alternate Queuing) offers Quality of Service (QoS) and is optionally supported by the PF firewall. PF's filtering syntax is similar to that of IPF, with clarification adjustments. Network Address Translation (NAT) and Quality of Service (QoS) have been included in PF, with QoS accomplished by importing the ALTQ queuing software and tying it to PF's setup. PF has also been enhanced with pfsync and CARP for failover and redundancy, authpf for session authentication, and ftp-proxy to simplify firewalling the challenging FTP protocol. Additionally, PF supports STO (Stateful Tracking Options) and SMP (Symmetric multiprocessing). PF's logging is adjustable on a per-rule basis. PF provides conf and logs through a pseudo-network interface called pflog, which is the sole mechanism for user-level applications to get data from kernel-level mode. Standard programs, such as tcpdump, are used to monitor log files.

• IPFW: IPFW is an IPv4 and IPv6-compatible stateful firewall designed for FreeBSD. It includes the kernel firewall filter rule processor with its integrated packet accounting facility, the logging facility, NAT, the dummynet traffic shaper, a forward facility, a bridge facility, and an ipstealth facility. FreeBSD includes an example ruleset in /etc/rc.firewall that specifies many firewall types for typical circumstances to aid inexperienced users in developing suitable rules. IPFW offers a robust syntax that enables expert users to create customized rulesets that satisfy the security needs of a specific environment.

• IPFILTER: IPFILTER, also known as IPF: IPF is a cross-platform open source firewall that has been ported to other operating systems, such as FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and Solaris. IPF is a kernel-side firewall and Network Address Translation (NAT) technology that may be managed and monitored by userland applications. ipf may be used to set or remove firewall rules, ipnat to set or delete NAT rules, ipfstat to output run-time statistics for the kernel components of IPF, and ipmon to record IPF activities to the system log files. IPF was initially built using a rule processing logic of "the last matched rule wins" and stateless rules only. IPF has been improved since then to include the fast and keep state options.

Linux features a built-in L4 packet filtering system called Netfilter, as well as a configuration interface called iptables. When a packet arrives at the server, it is directed to the Netfilter subsystem, which accepts, manipulates, or rejects it in accordance with the rules specified by userspace through iptables.

iptables/Netfilter is the most extensively used command-line-based firewall. It is the first line of defense for a Linux server's security. Numerous system administrators utilize it to fine-tune their systems. It filters network stack packets inside the kernel. Iptables is a user-space software that enables administrators to customize the IP packet filter rules of the Linux kernel firewall, which are implemented by different Netfilter modules. Netfilter is the Linux firewall framework, while iptables is the program that controls and administers Netfilter. Iptables are used to filter and route incoming and outgoing network packets. The filters are grouped in distinct tables containing chains of rules dictating how to handle network traffic packets.

Best Practice

Both FreeBSD and Linux systems can be deployed as a next-generation firewall by installing Zenarmor, the best firewall for open-source platforms, on them to protect networks against cyber attacks. You can easily apply application control and web filtering by configuring policies via Zenconsole that is the centralized cloud management interface of Zenarmor. Security rules feature of Zenarmor provides a powerful network security against phishing attacks, malware, botnet and zero day attacks. You can quickly install and start to try Zenarmor Free Edition forever for non-commercial use.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of File Systems?

Linux and FreeBSD both have efficient file systems. FreeBSD includes ZFS (Zettabyte file system) that is released by Sun Microsystems (now owned by Oracle) as open-source software under the Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) as part of the OpenSolaris project in November 2005. ZFS is without a doubt one of the most effective technologies for long-term data storage. It has integrated volume management. This enables users to establish several file systems that share a single storage pool. It safeguards against data loss due to physical failures, misprocessing, or data corruption.

The default file system for most Linux distributions is Ext4. ZFS development is not supported by the Linux kernel because of probable legal conflicts between the CDDL and GPL, despite both being OSI-approved free software licenses that conform with DFSG.

Linus Torvalds, the designer of the Linux kernel, claims he cannot risk a lawsuit from "litigious" Oracle by including the ZFS module in the kernel. He cautioned kernel developers against using ZFS on Linux and refuses to integrate any ZFS code until Oracle modifies the open-source license it employs. Therefore, Linux does not have native ZFS support.

Even though you may still utilize this incredible program on your Linux system by using third-party apps or modules, operating ZFS on FreeBSD differs significantly from operating ZFS on Linux. On FreeBSD, there are additional tools available for investigating ZFS performance problems and other pertinent concerns.

Among the outstanding attributes of ZFS are:

• Hierarchical checksumming of all data and metadata, guaranteeing that the whole storage system can be inspected and confirmed to be stored properly, or corrected if corrupted, upon usage. Instead of being saved with the block itself, checksums are stored with the block's parent. This is in contrast to the majority of file systems, which store checksums with the data, meaning that if the data is lost or corrupted, the checksum is also likely to be lost or inaccurate.

• Designed for long-term data storage, infinitely scalable data store sizes, minimal data loss, and extensive configurability.

• In the case of an error or discrepancy, an automatic rollback of recent file systems and data modifications is implemented.

• Can keep several copies of data, metadata, or chosen categories of data, as determined by the user, to increase the capacity to recover from data corruption of critical files and structures.

• Automated and quiet self-healing of data inconsistencies and write failures when identified, for all recoverable mistakes. All the following can be used to reconstruct data: error detection and correction checksums stored in each block's parent block; multiple copies of data (including checksums) held on the disk; write intentions logged on the SLOG (ZIL) for writes that should have occurred but did not (after a power failure); parity data from RAID/RAIDZ disks and volumes; copies of data from mirrored disks and volumes.

• Native support for common RAID levels and other ZFS RAID configurations ("RAIDZ"). For efficiency, the RAIDZ levels stripe data across just the appropriate drives (many RAID systems stripe across all devices), and checksumming reduces rebuilding of inconsistent or damaged data to only those blocks with flaws.

• Typically, the native management of tiered storage and caching devices is a volume-related activity. Because ZFS also comprehends the file system, it can employ file-related information to inform, integrate, and enhance its tiered storage management, while a standalone device is incapable of doing so.

• Native snapshot and backup/replication management may be made more efficient by combining volume and file management. Relevant tools are given at a low level and must be used with additional scripts and applications.

• A RAID controller must often rebuild a whole disk, but ZFS may use disk and file information to restrict rebuilding to data that is genuinely missing or defective, substantially accelerating the process.

• Native data compression and deduplication, however, deduplication is mostly RAM-based and memory-intensive.

• Unaffected by modifications to RAID hardware that impact many other systems. On many systems, if self-contained RAID hardware such as a RAID card breaks or the data is relocated to another RAID system, the file system will be unable to handle data on the RAID array because it lacks information from the original RAID hardware. This may result in the loss of all data unless similar or nearly equivalent hardware is procured and utilized as a "stepping stone". Since ZFS maintains RAID by itself, a ZFS pool may be transferred to other hardware or the operating system may be reinstalled, and the RAIDZ structures and data will be readily available by ZFS again.

• For data that might ordinarily cause delays in data processing, alternative caching mechanisms are used. For instance, synchronous writes that have the potential to slow down the storage system may be transformed into asynchronous writes by being written to a separate, fast caching device known as the SLOG (sometimes called the ZIL-ZFS Intent Log).

• Ability to recognize data that would have been located in a cache but was recently purged, allowing ZFS to reevaluate its caching choices based on future use and facilitating very high cache-hit levels (average ZFS cache hit rates are above 80%).

• Can be utilized for high availability clusters and computation, despite not being intended specifically for these functions.

• Numerous internal factors are configurable for optimum functioning.

All of these functions are also available when using ZFS on Linux. However, there is a significant gap, since no Linux distribution even comes close to FreeBSD's degree of ZFS integration.

What is the Difference Between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Compatibility?

Linux is the clear winner in terms of compatibility and portability. Linux is compatible with a far wider variety of hardware than FreeBSD, which has fewer supported platforms.

Linux is the most popular open-source operating system presently available, and as a result, there is an abundance of resources available to support it. Although FreeBSD has its dedicated user community, it is not nearly as large as the Linux user community. This has resulted in Linux having to compromise performance to function on a broad variety of systems. FreeBSD, on the other hand, does not have to compromise performance because of its restricted platform support.

Because Linux is a popular operating system and FreeBSD is not, hardware and software are often developed with Linux support in mind. Consequently, you must examine how you want to apply your system. For example, if you need frequent upgrades for your graphics drivers, Linux will handle these changes considerably more quickly than FreeBSD. The majority, if not all, of these discrepancies and FreeBSD's lack of support, pertain to desktop components like peripherals and graphics cards. FreeBSD is a server-centric operating system.

What is the Difference Between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Reliability?

Linux and FreeBSD are both operating systems that are very reliable. However, if we were forced to choose just one of them, we would go with FreeBSD as our operating system of choice. This brings up the point that FreeBSD is more structured than other operating systems. FreeBSD's engineering and release management procedures are superior. From concept genesis to public release, FreeBSD undergoes many processes.

When someone has an idea and creates something novel, it is initially subjected to technical peer evaluations. Then, it enters the "current" branch for integrated testing, and the migration window into stable is changed based on the complexity or possible effect. Then it joins the "stable" branch for testing by a larger user base. This is often where all beta testing takes place, along with community participation. It then undergoes release candidate testing, which typically consists of three rounds, before becoming a standard release. This indicates that you may be quite certain that everything will continue to function, assuming you understand the release and upgrade notes. Released patches for software address vulnerabilities and issues.

The extra components that a user is consuming might make Linux less stable. This can be a problem for the user. In the meanwhile, since FreeBSD is a whole operating system, the configuration that it comes with is more reliable.

Consequently, FreeBSD is often a relatively reliable operating system. However, stability is not something that can be said to be missing in any of these operating system options.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Performance?

Both systems perform better than other systems in certain specific areas. FreeBSD has much-reduced network protocol latency than Linux has. This is why streaming giant Netflix chose FreeBSD as its main server operating system. Latency is the amount of time that passes after an interrupt before a processor starts to execute the code necessary to process the interrupt.

Although there is no concrete data to suggest that FreeBSD is superior to Linux in terms of performance, the majority of people who have experience with both operating systems agree that FreeBSD is superior to Linux.

FreeBSD seems substantially quicker and more responsive than the main Linux distributions on the same hardware, including Red Hat, Fedora, Gentoo, Debian, and Ubuntu. Running identical copies of the same server apps on each system revealed a significant performance advantage for FreeBSD over the Linux distributions. FreeBSD is simpler than other operating systems. This enables it to work as intended, which ultimately leads to its performance is significantly improved across the board.

Linux, on the other hand, offers superior speed and performance when native programs are executed. As Linux is far more application-centric than FreeBSD will ever be and has hardware support from companies such as IBM and Intel, Linux computers often execute their programs somewhat quicker than their BSD equivalents.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of User Shell?

The shell is one of the most significant Unix system innovations. It allows users to operate and manipulate their system with ease. sh was the universal Unix shell. Since then, this shell has been improved, and more powerful shells such as bash, zsh, and tcsh have emerged. Linux's systems usually ship with the bash shell by default. On most POSIX-compliant Unix systems, it is a generally recognized and very powerful shell that can do anything.

The majority of users prefer Linux's default BASH shell rather than FreeBSD's "tcsh" shell. This is because the "tcsh" shell is quite dated. The BASH shell is very flexible and enables users of Unix-compliant computers to do practically anything. However, this does not indicate that the "tcsh" shell is subpar. Utilizing it merely demands further knowledge and comprehension. BASH is ultimately simple to install on FreeBSD as well.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Package Management?

When using FreeBSD, installing software packages is a simple process. The FreeBSD ports system is the progenitor of both NetBSD's pkgsrc (package source) and OpenBSD's ports collection.

At the time of writing, there are 56176 ports available in the FreeBSD Ports collection, all of which may be readily deployed by users and administrators. Each port includes all the required changes to make certain that the user's machine can properly run the source code.

FreeBSD, like Debian Linux and Arch Linux, contains binary packages that are managed by the pkg package manager. However, FreeBSD also has the option to generate software from the source using user-specific compile time settings. In reality, the Arch Linux Build System was greatly influenced by the FreeBSD ports system. On the other hand, the FreeBSD ports system allows you to choose the most relevant compilation time parameters during make, but on Arch Linux, you must manually modify and update the package maintainer's PKGBUILD script essentially, you are expected to accept the default settings.

The FreeBSD ports collection uses Makefiles to automate the building, installation, and removal of software using the make tool. The files comprising a port contain all the information necessary to automatically download, extract, patch, configure, compile, and install the application, with minimal user intervention required after issuing a command such as make install or make install clean in the port's directory of the desired application. If the port requires other apps or libraries, they are automatically installed beforehand.

The default configuration of the majority of ports has been judged suitable for the majority of users. However, one of the nice features of the ports system is that these configuration parameters may be altered before the installation using the make config command. The command displays a text-based interface from which the user may choose the appropriate choices.

The performance of Linux's package managers is not always reliable. Some of them are quite good, while others are not. It is entirely dependent on the distribution you use. The following are some of the Linux package manager systems:

• RPM (Red Hat Package Manager)

• DPKG (Debian Package Management System)

• Advanced Packaging Tool (APT). Ubuntu

• pkgsrc

• Pacman Package Manager, Arch Linux

• Portage Package Manager, Gentoo

• Zypper Package Manager, OpenSUSE

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Updates?

When thinking about updates, you need to take into consideration two distinct aspects:

• the ease with which updates can be obtained

• the rate at which updates can be obtained

The "all from one provider" aspect of FreeBSD makes updates far simpler to manage than they are with Linux. FreeBSD manages library version changes by providing compatibility modules for prior library versions, allowing binaries that are many years old to operate without issue. Users can choose which updates they want and which they do not want. They have the option of selecting the fundamental components, such as the src, kernel, and world, or they may pick simply the sub-components. Or chose them all. After that, putting these adjustments into effect is easy.

When it comes to the speed at which updates are made accessible, Linux comes out on top. There is a strong incentive for companies that use open-source software to generate upgrades on time. As a result, they are obtained not long after their use has become necessary. The development and distribution of these updates on FreeBSD take longer than on Linux; nevertheless, in practice, both Linux and FreeBSD often have updates available around the same time since they are both obtaining them from the same upstream projects.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Development?

FreeBSD's kernels are created and updated by following the Open Source development methodology. Each project maintains a source tree that is visible to the public and includes all project source files, including documentation and other incidental files. Users may acquire a copy of any version in its entirety.

A vast number of developers from throughout the globe contribute to BSD's development. They are separated into three categories:

• Contributors: Contributors create both code and documentation. They are prohibited from directly committing/adding code to the source tree. For their code to be included in the system, it must be evaluated and checked in by a registered developer, sometimes known as a committer.

• Committers: Developers having write access to the source tree are contributors. To become a committed member, a person must demonstrate skill in the field in which they are involved. FreeBSD has about 500 committers from all over the world. Before committing modifications to the source tree, it is up to the discretion of each committer to gain authorization. In general, an experienced committer makes plainly valid modifications without seeking agreement. A documentation project committer, for instance, rectifies typographical and grammatical problems without review. However, developers who make extensive or intricate modifications are required to submit their changes for evaluation before committing them. In severe circumstances, a core team member with a role such as Principal Architect directs the removal of modifications from the tree, a procedure known as backing out. Each commit is sent to all committers by email, hence it is impossible to commit in secret.

• The Core Group: Each FreeBSD and NetBSD project is managed by a core team. The core teams evolved over the projects, and their roles are not always well-defined. Although being a developer is typical for core team members, it is not required. The guidelines for the core team differ from project to project, but in general, they have more influence over the project's direction than non-core team members.

The vast majority of contributors are unpaid volunteers. Every two years, active committers have elections to choose who will serve on the Core Team.

FreeBSD development configuration varies from Linux in several ways:

• While FreeBSD is managed by nine members of the Core Team, Linus Torvalds is the only person who is responsible for the control, modification, and maintenance of the Linux kernel. The Core Team is responsible for fixing issues, developing new features, and making improvements to the master source code repository. On the other hand, when it comes to new functionality for Linux upgrades, the decision ultimately rests with Linus Torvalds.

• There is a central repository where the complete FreeBSD operating system source code, including previous versions, is found.

• No one individual manages the system's content. This distinction is overstated since the Principal Architect demand that code is rolled back, and even in the Linux project, several individuals are authorized to make modifications.

• Due to the institutionalized maintenance of a single SVN(Subversion) source tree, FreeBSD development is transparent, and any version of the system may be accessed by release number or date. SVN also permits incremental system upgrades; for instance, the FreeBSD repository is updated around 100 times each day. The majority of these modifications are minor.

• FreeBSD's initiatives preserve the "Operating System" as its whole, not just the kernel. This difference is slightly helpful since neither FreeBSD nor Linux is usable without programs. The apps used on FreeBSD are typically identical to those utilized on Linux.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Releases?

FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD provide three distinct "releases" of the system. Similar to Linux, releases are given numbers such as 1.4.1 or 3.5. Additionally, the version number includes a suffix that indicates its function:

1. The system's development version is referred to as CURRENT. FreeBSD assigns CURRENT a number, such as FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT. All new system development occurs in this branch. FreeBSD-CURRENT represents the "cutting edge" of FreeBSD development, and users are required to have a high level of technical expertise. FreeBSD-CURRENT contains works in progress, experimental modifications, and transitional mechanisms that may or may not be included in the subsequent official version. Less technical users who desire to follow a development branch should instead follow FreeBSD-STABLE.

2. Two to four times every year, the projects release a RELEASE version of the system, which is accessible for free download from FTP sites and on CD-ROM. Examples include FreeBSD 13.1-RELEASE. The RELEASE version is the standard version of the system and is meant for end users.

3. As defects are discovered in a RELEASE version, they are repaired and uploaded to the SVN repository. In FreeBSD, the resulting version is referred to as the STABLE version. After a period of testing on the CURRENT branch, this branch may also get smaller new features. Additionally, essential security and bug patches are added to all supported RELEASE versions.

On the other hand, Linux maintains two distinct code trees:

1. Stable version: Stable versions include version numbers such as 2.0, 2.2, and 2.4.

2. Development version: Development versions have an odd minor version number, such as 2.1, 2.3, or 2.5.

In each version, the number is followed by a second number that identifies the precise release. Additionally, each manufacturer includes its userland applications and utilities, making the distribution's identity crucial. Each distribution vendor provides the distribution a version number, for example, a full description may be "TurboLinux 6.0 with kernel 2.2.14".

As Linux systems are distributed as distributions, their release schedules vary often. However, you may get fresh distribution versions around every three months. Popular and stable distributions, such as CentOS, Debian, and Ubuntu, have predetermined release dates.

FreeBSD, on the other side, requires much more time to acquire new features because of its long release schedule. In annual disputes between FreeBSD and Linux, this extended term helps FreeBSD maintain its status as the most reliable operating system.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Desktop?

Linux is the superior option for a workstation or desktop system with a graphical user interface. Because for desktop PCs Linux has much better hardware and software support than FreeBSD. Desktop users have a more difficult time using FreeBSD due to the limited availability of applications and the incompatibility of hardware. Hardware and software are often designed with Linux support as a primary focus, rather than FreeBSD support since Linux is a widely used operating system whereas FreeBSD is not. Linux can handle these changes a lot quicker than FreeBSD can if you require regular updates for your graphics drivers. The vast majority of these inconsistencies, if not all of them, relate to desktop components such as peripherals and graphics cards. FreeBSD lacks support for certain kinds of hardware, like sound cards or video cards.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Server?

FreeBSD is preferable to Linux as a server operating system. FreeBSD is an operating system that is focused on the server. FreeBSD offers much better network performance and security than Linux does.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Vendor Support?

Linux has much better hardware vendor support than FreeBSD has. HP, IBM, and Dell, all provide direct Linux server support. Thus, Linux systems may be operated on a variety of platforms. This helps Linux maintain its position as the preferred server operating system for a variety of architectures. However, this expanded breadth of architectural support comes at the expense of reduced performance. As a result of Linux's necessity to support several platforms, developers are compelled to sacrifice critical performance parameters.

FreeBSD, on the other hand, has minimal support for architectures. FreeBSD assures users get the same performance from their system on every given platform, despite its restrictive nature.

You may visit the websites of the hardware suppliers that FreeBSD supports to obtain an idea of the hardware that is presently supported.

Since over a decade ago, BSDi / FreeBSD Mall, Inc. has provided support contracts for FreeBSD. In addition, the official website of the FreeBSD project has a list of consultants for hire.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Documentation?

Both FreeBSD and Linux offer freely accessible documentation of the highest quality. But, the FreeBSD project has a higher reputation for its thoroughness and quality of documentation than Linux has. The numerous documentation initiatives strive to provide actively-updated documentation in many languages and cover all system components.

FreeBSD's documentation is included with the system, therefore there is no need to do online searches. The man pages for the base system are of high quality and were produced expressly for FreeBSD. The majority of what you need is included with the system.

FreeBSD includes the FreeBSD Handbook, which details everything from installation to day-to-day usage. Local installation of the Handbook is also possible during installation. As the result of the continuous efforts of many people, the handbook sometimes contains out-of-date information, although it is typically current and well-written.

On the other hand, you can always find a solution to any issue you experience with your Linux system if you search effectively. A vast community of Linux ensures that every sort of present and future concern is recorded.

What is the difference between FreeBSD and Linux in terms of Oracle/ERP Applications?

While Linux supports Oracle and ERP applications, FreeBSD doesn't support these applications.

Is FreeBSD faster than Linux?

Yes. FreeBSD's TCP/IP stack has far less latency than Linux's. Therefore, media streaming providers like Netflix chose FreeBSD instead of Linux to broadcast their movies and shows on the Internet. This is the reason why Netflix pays some of its top engineers to contribute to the present and future development of the FreeBSD kernel rather than the Linux kernel. FreeBSD is used by companies such as Cisco, Apple, and Netflix for this processing advantage. Due to the improved "response time" or latency, many web applications seem "faster" on FreeBSD servers.

Linux operates fast depending on your settings. Notably, the majority of apps perform quicker under Linux. Because of this, most supercomputers prefer it over FreeBSD. IBM and Intel are the two major contributors to the Linux kernel, and they are mostly concerned with applications rather than networking. Because of this, almost every supercomputer runs on Linux. If you are using *nix as a workstation instead of Windows or Mac, Linux runs practically everything quicker than FreeBSD, except for games.

Linux does not need to eliminate the TCP/IP performance gap to be the quicker option for certain web applications. If you're running Laravel or WordPress without advanced caching plugins or approaches, that's a lot of PHP to be processed on the server, and Linux is quicker at doing so. But since languages like Java are built, FreeBSD is often quicker even without caching in this regard. The response speed is also the primary concern and consequently, FreeBSD is quicker if you have largely flat HTML/CSS files with client-side JavaScript, for example, a WordPress site that makes extensive use of caching. On the other side, if you use Java or a large amount of cache, your site is likely fast enough that you don't need to worry about migrating from Linux to FreeBSD.

Is FreeBSD more stable than Linux?

Yes. FreeBSD is more reliable than Linux because FreeBSD is more conservative, less chaotic, more tightly managed, and server-centric than Linux. FreeBSD prioritizes stability and security more than speed and new features. It is a complete operating system and not just a kernel alone like Linux is. FreeBSD has a much better-organized structure than Linux. The extra components that a user is consuming might make Linux less stable. FreeBSD is less likely to modify its core infrastructure, but Linux sometimes demands modifications to your code.

Is FreeBSD easier than Linux?

Yes. FreeBSD is simpler to understand, use, and manage than Linux since it offers fewer alternatives, such as distributions, and package managers, although FreeBSD and Linux both have a steep learning curve.

Most developers believe that FreeBSD is more organized than Linux. There are several methods to do the same activity, and various users have differing ideas on how things should be accomplished. It is a community characterized by frequent and rapid change. Consequently, many users prefer the constant and structured environment of FreeBSD.

However, the bulk of popular graphical apps for FreeBSD was initially developed for Linux, and some are being transferred to FreeBSD more slowly than others. Linux makes it easier to live on the cutting edge than FreeBSD if you want the most recent version of your favorite application immediately. Still, the majority of significant programs are ported to FreeBSD in a very short amount of time, and the majority of FreeBSD users favor stability over having the newest feature instantly.

Is FreeBSD based on Linux?

No. FreeBSD is a UNIX-based operating system, and it evolved from BSD UNIX. The AT&T proprietary code has been removed, but FreeBSD's origins are traced back to the 1970s. The Linux kernel, on the other hand, was built by Linus Torvalds in the early 1990s as a UNIX-clone or UNIX-like system.

What is FreeBSD best for?

FreeBSD is best for server systems that prioritize performance, speed, and reliability, such as web servers, file servers, and media streaming servers since it has superior networking, performance, security, and compatibility capabilities. FreeBSD offers dependable network services under the greatest loads and effectively utilizes memory to provide acceptable response times for thousands of concurrent user activities. FreeBSD provides powerful network operating system functionalities to embedded and appliance systems, including high-end Intel-based appliances and ARM, PowerPC, and MIPS hardware platforms. From mail and web appliances to time-servers, routers, and wireless access points, companies throughout the globe base their embedded devices on FreeBSD's integrated build and cross-build environments and sophisticated functionality.

Who uses FreeBSD?

FreeBSD is used by several prominent corporations, including WhatsApp, Netflix, Yahoo, Pfizer, and Goldman Sachs. FreeBSD is built particularly for bigger institutions that demand the performance and security it offers. FreeBSD-based embedded devices and embedded device operating systems are as follows:

• Netflix Open Connect Device

• pfSense appliances.

• Sony PlayStation4 ("Orbis OS")

• MC Isilon OneFS

• Data ONTAP 8.x and ONTAP GX by NetApp

• Juniper's JUNOS operating system for routers.

• Panasas' PanFS parallel file system.

Is FreeBSD good for programming?

Yes. FreeBSD provides a good development environment. Compilers for C and C++ as well as an assembler are included with the basic system, in addition to UNIX® classics such as sed and awk. FreeBSD is highly compatible with POSIX® and ANSI C, as well as its BSD legacy, therefore it is feasible to develop programs that will compile and operate on a broad variety of platforms with little or no change. The Ports collection has many additional compilers and interpreters. Here is a list of available interpreters from the FreeBSD Ports Collection:

• BASIC

• Icon

• Lisp

• Logo

• Perl

• Python

• Ruby

• Scheme

• Tcl and Tk

FreeBSD is an excellent platform for especially low-level programming. Developers prefer FeeBSD because it is exceedingly safe, and stable, and the community is very professional. Another positive aspect of developing on FreeBSD is the ease with which developers may tweak their OS and userland code, recompile it, and therefore experiment with their operating system. It is smaller, simpler, and less complicated than the majority of Linux distributions, making it an ideal environment for learning systems programming.

Does FreeBSD have GUI?

No. Using bsdinstall to install FreeBSD does not immediately install a graphical user interface. However, users can install and configure Xorg, which offers the open-source X Window System used to create a graphical environment. The majority of video cards, keyboards, and pointing devices are supported by Xorg. On FreeBSD, the Xorg binary package may be rapidly installed by running the next command:

pkg install xorg

After installing the Xorg on your FreeBSD, you can load GUI by following the steps below:

1. To enable 3D acceleration when available, add the user who will run Xorg to the video or wheel group. To add the user jru to any accessible group, run the following command:

pw groupmod video -m jru || pw groupmod wheel -m jru

2. By default, the TWM window manager is installed. It begins when Xorg begins by running the next command:

startx

Can FreeBSD run Linux apps?

Yes. BSD developers produced a Linux compatibility package that enables Linux programs to operate on BSD since there are fewer BSD apps than Linux applications. This makes it possible for users to install and use Linux binaries on devices running FreeBSD. The libraries that are included with Linux are not installed or activated by default. However, they can be manually installed or installed from the FreeBSD Ports Collection depending on your preference.

To successfully execute Linux system calls, the package contains both kernel changes and Linux compatibility files, such as the C library. There is no discernible execution performance difference between a Linux program running on a Linux computer and the same-speed Linux application running on a BSD machine.

While FreeBSD can run most Linux binaries, Linux can not execute BSD binaries. Numerous FreeBSD implementations are also capable of executing binaries from other UNIX®-like systems. Therefore, FreeBSD provides a simpler migration path from other operating systems than Linux.

Is Linux more popular than FreeBSD?

Yes. FreeBSD is less popular than Linux. Linux is more prevalent than FreeBSD for a variety of reasons:

• FreeBSD does not have sufficient corporate support. Large organizations, such as Red Hat, guarantee that Linux upgrades are given quickly. This is not feasible on FreeBSD.

• The quantity and size of Linux's package repositories provide the most flexibility and usefulness. FreeBSD does provide pre-compiled packages, but its resources are inferior to those offered by Linux.

• BSD developers are often more concerned with enhancing their code than with promoting it.

• Much of Linux's popularity is attributable to external causes, such as the press and firms created to supply Linux services. Until recently, there were no such advocates for open-source BSDs.

• AT&T filed a lawsuit against BSDI, the distributor of BSD/386, in 1992, claiming that the program contains AT&T-protected code. Even though the lawsuit was resolved out of court in 1994, the litigation continues to haunt individuals. In March 2000, a website said that the court matter had been "just resolved."

• FreeBSD does not support any hardware. This restricts the number of people who may use it.

Can FreeBSD run Windows programs?

No. The "Windows" ABI from Microsoft is not natively supported by FreeBSD. However, You may use an emulator, such as WINE, to execute Windows applications on FreeBSD, Solaris, Linux, and Mac OS X without a valid Microsoft license. Additionally, Microsoft may be run on a virtual machine that emulates the whole Microsoft operating system.

WINE functions by intercepting system calls, or requests from applications to the operating system, and converting them from Windows® calls to FreeBSD calls. It will also transform any replies into the format expected by Windows® applications. It thus emulates a Windows® environment in the sense that it offers many of the expected resources for Windows® programs. There may be apps that do not function as intended on WINE, do not function at all, or do not even install.

WINE ultimately gives an alternative method for attempting to execute a specific Windows® application on FreeBSD. It is always the first choice that, if successful, provides a nice experience without excessively taxing the FreeBSD host system's resources.