Itβs also lighter weight at its core, which is a big plus for servers.
Really? Busybox is more-or-less feature equivalent to a BSD userland (FreeBSD userland can be a bit more bloated, see the ls man page), but how many people have picked that up? Still using GNU coreutils, haha.
I saw many *BSD developers told Linux kernel developers to hang their work for a while and fix quality problems.
Tell me about how you chose a specific distro because you thought the name was cool or because it ships with some completely unknown utility no one uses.
Alpine Linux: musl, minimal, fast
OpenBSD: correctness, simplicity, easy to use
But I don't think you are brave enough to take it up :)
"gnu/Linux nowadays" is unusable on old hardware (except distros like Alpine) I think?
That research is much easier than figuring out what is computer's "stack" without using my first language!
I don't think its power is comparable to research unix :)
Write your own script, arch users :)
"real".
repo.or.cz is lightweight. Codeberg isn't, and it is currently not as fast as github.
You can always fall back to your "zip", anyways. But why don't .tgz?
Now that Arch is so easy to install with the Archscript
Trash. Not true arch user.
Switch to BSD instead, it is easy to use while being better in quality.
Their words shows that they purely depend on people to quote information for them and they are not going to do researches.
Current distros doesn't support many hardware platform, despite being very well funded. Compared to OpenBSD. (NetBSD is too much, right? and it is not really usable.)
Fedora: Only run on amd64, arm64, arm, ppc64le, s390x
Debian: i386, amd64, arm64, arm, ppc64le, mips64le, s390x, riscv64 (testing).
Alpine: same as Debian but no MIPS support
Add your own here.
There isn't sparc64 support at all!
OpenBSD: alpha, amd64, arm64, armv7, hppa, i386, landisk, loongson, luna88k, macppc, octeon, powerpc64, riscv64, sparc64 (all equally supported except Alpha)
(VAX is discontinued after 6.9)