For its excellent backward compatibility: NetBSD 6.1 is still able to run a.out binaries built for NetBSD 1.0
For its system-independant build system. Building NetBSD needs a POSIX system with a C compiler, which does not need to be NetBSD. It first builds the tools for the host, including the compiler itself, and then the target NetBSD system, which may be for another CPU.
For its machine-independant drivers. Have a fancy platform with an odd CPU? If NetBSD has a driver for a chip, it will work a
Theses two OSes are not really for the same usage. NetBSD is good for servers and embedded, but it is not very desktop friendly. It can be used as a desktop, but it required some work that you do not have to do with Fedora.
Wheres Fedora excels both as a server and as a desktop hence NetBSD is not really relevant. (Unless you want to run a.out binaries from NetBSD 1.0 or have some peculiar hardware.)
Wheres Fedora excels both as a server and as a desktop hence NetBSD is not really relevant.
IMO NetBSD is much better than Fedora as a server, but YMMV. This is what is nice with your troll-ish sentence: it works with any OS instead of Fedora and NetBSD.
Why NetBSD? (Score:5, Informative)
Why NetBSD?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:-1)
Wheres Fedora excels both as a server and as a desktop hence NetBSD is not really relevant.
(Unless you want to run a.out binaries from NetBSD 1.0 or have some peculiar hardware.)
Re:Why NetBSD? (Score:2)
Wheres Fedora excels both as a server and as a desktop hence NetBSD is not really relevant.
IMO NetBSD is much better than Fedora as a server, but YMMV. This is what is nice with your troll-ish sentence: it works with any OS instead of Fedora and NetBSD.