系统与基础设施unixsheikh.com
选择 FreeBSD 而非 GNU/Linux 的技术理由
Technical reasons to choose FreeBSD over GNU/Linux (2020)
2020 — 2022，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这篇文章从技术角度列举选择 FreeBSD 而不是 GNU/Linux 的理由，涉及软件安装与 base system、ZFS、jails 与虚拟化、防火墙、安全选项和向后兼容等。文中把不少 FreeBSD 与 Linux 的实现差异表述为优势，评论区对此既有支持也有明显反驳。
为什么经久不衰：它把 FreeBSD 与 Linux 的系统设计取舍集中成一份可讨论的清单，正反双方的具体经验让它今天仍是理解两者差异的有用入口。
HN 评论精选
老用户列举 bhyve、FIB、向后兼容和 jails 等他认为 FreeBSD 优于 Linux 的具体技术点。
我从 FreeBSD 8 起就用它满足所有服务器需求；以前用 Linux，但服务器上受不了它的混乱。再补充几点：NetApp 开发的 bhyve 舍弃旧技术支持，在我的 i5 服务器上比 i7 笔记本上的 KVM 还快，ZFS 快照也不可忽视；FIB 路由表很神奇，可给任意软件定义 fib 1（比如 OpenVPN），再用 setfib 1 bash 在子进程中使用；Linux 的向后兼容性很糟，有人展示过 FreeBSD 2 编译的二进制能在 FreeBSD 10 运行，而 Linux 连小版本间都不兼容；jails 比 Docker 早 15 年以上、内核支持、经受时间考验，除社区采用度外各方面胜出；更别说 Linux 生态下一小版本命令开关就可能完全不同。除了硬件支持，我不理解人们凭什么技术理由在服务器上用 Linux。
stiray查看英文原文
I am using freebsd since version 8 for all my server needs (was using linux, but got repelled by its chaos which I dont care about on my laptop, but it pisses me off on server). Some more points: - bhyve, developed by netapp, they ditched all old technologies support and it works faster on my i5 server than kvm on my i7 laptop. Snapshoting using ZFS is not a feature to discard either. - FIBs, absolute miracle routing tables that you can apply to whatever software, define the routes as fib 1 (lets say it is openvpn) and then use them as simply as `setfib 1 bash` to use them in all child processes - backward compatibility, this is where linux is really horrible, there was an article about compiling binary on freebsd 2 and running it on freebsd 10. Try this on linux, binaries are not compatible even on minor versions. - jails... docker? Really? Jails are 15+ years old implementation, kernel supported, that stood test of time, actually being a security feature. It runs circles around the docker in everything except how much it was adapted by community. I never understood why people rather used an inferior solution like docker. - not to mention all the chaos in linux ecosystem, in next sub-version, the commands can have completely different switches,... I will never understand on what technical merits people are using linux for servers except the support-ability of hardware. Due to the whole show that linux is getting we would prosper as a humanity by ditching the linux. Unfortunately, marketing is worth more than anything. (I do understand that people will not agree due to their preference, but try to use it. I doubt you will prefer linux ever again.)
FreeBSD 在桌面和新手基本配置上仍有较高门槛。
我偶尔尝试学习 FreeBSD，多半出于怀旧，因为多年前在 MicroVaxes 上学过 BSD 4.3/4.4 的 Unix；但我总卡在很基本的事情上：Wi-Fi 卡不工作，安装器能识别但驱动不行；控制台默认 80x25，我不知道怎么调整；不知道怎么启动 X；在 VirtualBox 等虚拟机里网络桥接不工作，实例没有互联网。可能是我自己的问题，文档里应该有，但这也说明我不是目标用户，我没时间也没耐心去搞懂最基本的东西。
bxparks查看英文原文
I have tried learning FreeBSD occasionally, mostly for nostalgia because I learned Unix on BSD 4.3 (or 4.4?) on MicroVaxes many years ago. But I get stuck on some very basic things: - My wifi card doesn't work. The installer recognizes it, but the driver doesn't work. - The console terminal defaults to 80x25, I don't know how to resize it. - I can't figure out how to start X Windows. - If I run it in a VM (e.g. VirtualBox), the network bridging doesn't work so my FreeBSD instance has no internet access. It's probably my fault, I'm sure it's in the docs somewhere. But it probably means that I'm not the target audience for FreeBSD, since I don't have the time and patience to figure out the most basic things.
FreeBSD 的 ZFS NFSv4 ACL 能无损映射 Windows NT ACL，文件服务器场景有实际优势。
FreeBSD 特别擅长的一个场景是作为 Windows 客户端的文件服务器：与 Linux 不同，它原生支持 NFSv4 ACL。Windows/SMB 使用的 NT ACL 比 Linux 的 POSIX draft ACL 表达力强得多。Windows 客户端把文件写到 Linux Samba 服务器时，文件的 ACL 不一定能无损表达为 POSIX ACL；Samba 的 vfs_acl_xattr 会把“真实”ACL 保存为扩展属性，这意味着客户端设置的 ACL 不会对文件服务器本地用户强制执行，而且需要特殊工具才能查看和编辑。相反，FreeBSD 在 ZFS 上支持 NFSv4 ACL，而它是 NT ACL 的超集；Samba 把 NT ACL 保存为 NFSv4 ACL，可以用 getfacl 和 setfacl 像普通文件一样查看或编辑。
mshroyer查看英文原文
One application where FreeBSD especially shines is as a fileserver to Windows clients: Unlike on Linux, NFSv4 ACLs are supported natively! The NT ACLs used in Windows and SMB are much more expressive than Linux's POSIX draft ACLs. When a Windows client writes a file to a Linux Samba server, it cannot necessarily express the file's ACL as a POSIX ACL losslessly. To work around this, Samba's vfs_acl_xattr saves the "real" ACL as an extended attribute: https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/current/man-html/vfs_acl_xattr.8.html This means the ACLs set by clients won't be enforced for local users on the file server, and that you need special tools to view and edit those ACLs. In contrast, FreeBSD supports NFSv4 ACLs on ZFS, and those are a superset of NT ACLs. Samba saves the NT ACL as an NFSv4 ACL, and this can be viewed or edited using getfacl and setfacl as with any other file on the server.
文章列出的多是差异而非明确优势，FreeBSD 在桌面生态和硬件支持上仍处劣势。
这是一份不错的 FreeBSD 与 Linux 发行版差异列表，但把它们描述成 FreeBSD 相对 Linux 的优势是有问题的。除防火墙和核心文档外，几乎每一项是否真有优势都高度可争议，很多我认为 Linux 有更好的选择。这类列表反而凸显 FreeBSD 剩下的独特卖点极少；我承认它在网络基础设施类角色上更强，但也就这样。作为 Linux 用户，这里没有一条让我考虑切换。补充说：包管理、容器、虚拟机和文件系统，Linux 要么开箱更好，要么很容易增强；我还认为 systemd 比 shell 脚本式 init 更好。切换本身费劲，FreeBSD 的桌面硬件支持差（先把 Wi-Fi 搞好），软件支持也差，Electron、Wayland、桌面虚拟化和 Flatpak/Snaps/Appimage 等都落后。重点不是这些细节，而是 FreeBSD 赢得 Linux 用户正变得越来越难。
DCKing查看英文原文
This is a good list for differences between FreeBSD and Linux distros, but describing them as advantages FreeBSD has over Linux seems problematic to me. Except for firewalls and core documentation (but what about "community documentation"?) nearly every item is highly debatable whether using FreeBSD has an advantage in the first place, and many I would argue Linux has obviously better options for [1]. To me, lists like this sadly highlights that FreeBSD has extremely few unique selling points left. I accept its superiority for network infrastructure type roles, but that's about it. As a Linux user, there's nothing on this list that makes me consider switching [2]. [1]: Anything to do with package management, containers and VMs and even filesystems Linux system can either do better out of the box or can easily be augmented if you need it. I also think systemd is better than shell script based inits. But there's a reason this is a footnote, this is not the thing I want to argue here. [2]: Besides it taking effort to switch, FreeBSD has the additional problems that it has poor hardware support for desktop usage (PLEASE get your wifi act together), and software support is also substantially worse - with FreeBSD lagging behind with stuff like Electron, Wayland, desktop virtualization and desktop containerization (Flatpak, Snaps, Appimage even). The point here isn't these details, but FreeBSD winning over Linux people is an increasing uphill struggle.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
TTY 揭秘（2008）
The TTY demystified (2008)
经典文章深入剖析了 Unix/Linux 中 TTY 子系统的工作原理，包括线路规程、终端驱动、信号与控制字符等机制。
系统与基础设施上首页 11 次 · 2009–2025linusakesson.net编辑精选为什么 GNU grep 这么快
Why GNU grep is Fast
FreeBSD 邮件列表上一篇广为流传的帖子，解释 GNU grep 为什么快：核心在于 Boyer-Moore 字符串搜索算法配合精心优化的内部循环和 I/O，让程序在搜索时“…
系统与基础设施上首页 9 次 · 2010–2022lists.freebsd.orgXplain：为普通人讲解 X11
Xplain – Explaining X11 for the rest of us
《Xplain》是作者（HN 用户 Jasper_）写的一系列 X11 长文，用他在浏览器中重建的 X11 绘图模型做交互演示，讲解 X11 的绘图模型与窗口系统设计。
系统与基础设施上首页 6 次 · 2013–2020magcius.github.io编辑精选旋风教程：为 Linux 创建极小 ELF 可执行文件（1999）
A Whirlwind Tutorial on Creating Really Teensy ELF Executables for Linux (1999)
breadbox 写于 1999 年的经典教程，主题是如何为 Linux 手工构造并裁剪出体积极小的 ELF 可执行文件。
系统与基础设施上首页 6 次 · 2007–2025muppetlabs.comPostgreSQL 内部原理
The internals of PostgreSQL
《The Internals of PostgreSQL》是一本免费在线书籍，系统讲解 PostgreSQL 的内部实现，包括查询处理、并发控制、WAL、缓冲区管理等核心机制。
系统与基础设施上首页 5 次 · 2017–2025interdb.jp编辑精选