Peter McGarvey fbsd-x at
Fri Oct 10 18:03:59 BST 2003

* Henrik Morsing <henrik at> [2003-10-10 16:17:00 BST]:
> Hi,
> I have a few times been talking to colluages who seem to think that BSD is
> a Linux distro or a part of Linux. A windows colleague who uses Linux
> himself is still claiming that 5-6 years ago Linux was marketed as
> BSD/Linux, and a colleague in the security group thought that BSD was a
> secure version of Linux.
> Has anyone come across this before? Where does this come from?

To my shame I once thought BSD was a Linux distro.

After an objective comparison of all Linux distros I chose "BSD/Linux"
as it had better official documentation, better user contributed
documentation, it was easier and quicker to install, had a more logical
layout, and appeared more robust.

A couple of weeks after I'd started using it I finally realised the

As to why I though BSD was Linux.  Well, Linux was seen as the only
alternative to Windows.  It was a free unix variant with lots of
different distros.  FreeBSD was a free unix variant, therefore it must
be Linux distro.

The fact that each Linux distro was as different to each other as to BSD
didn't help matters.

But then I've seen a couple of magazine articles mention the BSD/Linux
roots of OS/X, so I think I can be forgiven.

> Maybe we need to market BSD better :-)

Or perhaps we need to educate the world as to the true meaning of the
term "Linux"....  Nobdy uses Linux, they use Slackware, Debian, RedHat,
etc., etc.

> Henrik Morsing
> ------ FreeBSD UK Users' Group  -  Mailing List ------


Peter McGarvey
Freelance FreeBSD Hacker
(will work for bandwidth)

More information about the Ukfreebsd mailing list