Installed size comparison
Welcome, Guest.
“Theory and practice sometimes clash. And when that happens, theory loses. Every single time.” ― Linus Torvalds

Author Topic: Installed size comparison  (Read 2805 times)

Offline FOSS-user

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
Installed size comparison
« on: July 10, 2015, 04:42:44 AM »
Just a quick note, as I was surprised at the difference in installed sizes between OpenBSD & FreeBSD.
I have been putting OpenBSD (5.7/64bit) on my machines but found one had a dodgy touchpad, so I put FreeBSD (10.1/64bit) on it & the touchpad worked properly.
When I checked with df -h, I found it was twice the size of my OpenBSD installs, (base installs with Fluxbox & Firefox), agreed I had left out compilers from my OpenBSD installs, (but they only amount to around 60MB), & I had added a couple of other programs to it.
My OpenBSD system was about 950MB, compared to FreeBSD which was 1.8GB.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2015, 08:05:53 AM by FOSS-user »
Linux since 1999, & now OpenBSD.

Offline OrvilleG

  • Newbie
  • **
  • Posts: 0
Re: Installed size comparison
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2015, 09:16:12 PM »
Yeah I noticed FreeBSD does take up a lot of space. I used up to 15 GBs in my install.

Offline FOSS-user

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
Re: Installed size comparison
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2015, 03:52:45 AM »
So, not just me, seems strange that the base systems sizes are so different.

Any NetBSD users here to give a comparison?
Linux since 1999, & now OpenBSD.

Offline TheFlagCourier

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
  • FOSS Ronin
Re: Installed size comparison
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2015, 04:33:26 AM »
I'd imagine that it's just a bunch of bloat (like when you compare the Ubuntu kernel to the base Linux kernel...)