os/doc
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Remove all contractions from most of the articles. This solves the

Browse source 
problems with the usage of "its" vs "it's" among other things

Approved by:	nik
This commit is contained in:
Giorgos Keramidas 2001-10-16 11:53:01 +00:00
parent dc2b9385f4
commit 0b824da1aa
Notes: svn2git 2020-12-08 03:00:23 +00:00 
svn path=/head/; revision=10950
16 changed files with 372 additions and 372 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

26
en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.sgml
View file

@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
<abstract>
<para>In the open source world, the word <quote>Linux</quote> is almost
synonymous with <quote>Operating System</quote>, but it's not the only
synonymous with <quote>Operating System</quote>, but it is not the only
open source <trademark>UNIX</trademark> operating system. According
to the <ulink
url="http://www.leb.net/hzo/ioscount/data/r.9904.txt">Internet
@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
transfer 1.4 TB of data a day. Clearly this is not a niche
market: BSD is a well-kept secret.</para>
<para>So what's the secret? Why isn't BSD better known? This white
<para>So what is the secret? Why is BSD not better known? This white
paper addresses these and other questions.</para>
<para>Throughout this paper, differences between BSD and Linux will be
@ -105,7 +105,7 @@
could that happen when AT&amp;T has never released its code as open
source?</para>
<para>It's true that AT&amp;T UNIX is not open source, and in a copyright
<para>It is true that AT&amp;T UNIX is not open source, and in a copyright
sense BSD is very definitely <emphasis>not</emphasis> UNIX, but on the
other hand, AT&amp;T has imported sources from other projects,
noticeably the Computer Sciences Research Group of the University of
@ -157,16 +157,16 @@
<ulink url="http://www.FreeBSD.org">FreeBSD</ulink>. The two projects
originally diverged due to differences in patience waiting for
improvements to 386BSD: the NetBSD people started early in the year,
and the first version of FreeBSD wasn't ready until the end of the
and the first version of FreeBSD was not ready until the end of the
year. In the meantime, the code base had diverged sufficiently to
make it difficult to merge. In addition, the projects had different
aims, as we'll see below. In 1996, a further project,
aims, as we will see below. In 1996, a further project,
<ulink url="http://www.OpenBSD.org">OpenBSD</ulink>, split off from
NetBSD.</para>
</sect1>
<sect1>
<title>Why isn't BSD better known?</title>
<title>Why is BSD not better known?</title>
<para>For a number of reasons, BSD is relatively unknown:</para>
@ -221,11 +221,11 @@
<sect1>
<title>Comparing BSD and Linux</title>
<para>So what's really the difference between, say, Debian Linux and
<para>So what is really the difference between, say, Debian Linux and
FreeBSD? For the average user, the difference is surprisingly small:
Both are UNIX-like operating systems. Both are developed by
non-commercial projects (this doesn't apply to many other Linux
distributions, of course). In the following section, we'll look at BSD
non-commercial projects (this does not apply to many other Linux
distributions, of course). In the following section, we will look at BSD
and compare it to Linux. The description applies most closely to
FreeBSD, which accounts for an estimated 80% of the BSD installations,
but the differences from NetBSD and OpenBSD are small.</para>
@ -394,7 +394,7 @@
fewer divergences between the userland code of the projects than there
is in Linux.</para>
<para>It's difficult to categorize the goals of each project: the
<para>It is difficult to categorize the goals of each project: the
differences are very subjective. Basically,</para>
<itemizedlist>
@ -492,12 +492,12 @@
<listitem>
<para><quote>If it ain't broke, don't fix it</quote>: If you already
use an open source operating system, and you are happy with it,
there's probably no good reason to change.</para>
there is probably no good reason to change.</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
<para>BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably higher
performance than Linux. But this isn't across the board. In many
performance than Linux. But this is not across the board. In many
cases, there is little or no difference in performance. In some
cases, Linux may perform better than FreeBSD.</para>
</listitem>
@ -513,7 +513,7 @@
</listitem>
<listitem>
<para>BSD can execute Linux code, while Linux can't execute BSD
<para>BSD can execute Linux code, while Linux can not execute BSD
code. As a result, more software is available for BSD than for
Linux.</para>
</listitem>