>He doesn't use BSD
Daily reminder BSD is the only truly free and open OS, superior in every mature right to GNU/Linux. Why aren't you using it, user?
>faster
>more open
>used in the world's most profitable OSes
>doesn't contain the marxist GPL
>lean and clean from the start
>no half working drivers
>no dependency hell
With GNU, you lose. BSD will always be a superior experience which treats the user as an adult.
Other urls found in this thread:
wiki.freebsd.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
how is software compatibility currently? and i'm talking about your normie-grade Dropbox and shit that you're simply forced to use unless you're a hopeless, jobless NEET.
that being said, i really, really like FreeBSD, it just wasn't really an alternative due to above mentioned reasons (and yes, i'm aware you can get to work most things but i simply don't have the time to get even the most mundane shit working). i wish it weren't so, but package availability for linux is just way, way better.
addendum: i couldn't give less of a fuck about licensing if i tried. i just license all of my shit GPLv3 to be on the safe side, but i really, really don't care.
I know GNU/linux fairly well, lots of time with Debian, Arch and back in the day, Knoppix. I would actually like to start learning about BSD, where do I start? FreeBSD? OpenBSD? What distro? PC-BSD?
FreeBSD is lean, has a really nice package manager (two actually, one for compiling packages and one for installing binaries) and amazing docs. i don't know much about OpenBSD but i can highly recommend FreeBSD.
I would use, or at least try, BSD, but for lack of drivers.
I have OpenBSD on my server and really enjoy it. I have X installed as well for various purposes and it seems to work well. The issue is immediate compatibility. With ports you can use most linux software, but it's often a very complicated process whereas on linux it's a comfy one-liner. Lots of compiling and configuring. If you enjoy tinkering you'll probably enjoy it. For me, it's not really viable as a desktop/laptop OS. The BSD help community is very special and welcoming.
I wouldn't recommend BSD to Sup Forums users. People around here a consumers who only use their computers to play video games or rice a linux machine. BSD is still by a large number a system for hackers and not a system for consumers.
Even many of the developers for BSD say if you want something done that you should code it yourself.
I like chaos. BSD is just too ordered for me.
GPLv3 makes your code unable to be used on Linux and other GPLv2/other-licensed open source software.
>faster
It runs at about the same speed or slower for me.
>more open
Please elaborate
>most profitable
irrelevant
>marxist GPL
Implying Marxism is bad, and implying the GPL is bad (both are not). Furthermore, you haven't established a link between Marxism and the GPL. Stallman isn't even a communist, nor has any Marxist leaning.
>lean and clean
I suppose so
>no half working drivers
You're right; instead it has no drivers. I still haven't found how to get a Wacom Bamboo tablet to work on OpenBSD. 3D accel is not supported for my HD7850.
>no dependency hell
Please elaborate; so long as you use modern, large, cross-platform programs like Chromium (which lags on OpenBSD horribly) then you'll have dependency hell.
I would use OpenBSD if it supported at least my monitors native res of 2560x1600.
yeah, that's the point, i currently want to be asked if anyone wants to use my shit, i'm not proud enough of it yet to just let it run free
...
They still can though without asking you. They just have to comply and also release their code under GPLv3 while attributing you.
BSD freedom to the corps
GPL freedom to the end user (me)
No brainer.
What freedom do you lose with BSD?
Anyone can take BSD-licensed software and make it proprietary. GPL protects it and keeps it always free.
>Anyone can take BSD-licensed software and make it proprietary
As they should be able to.
>GPL protects it and keeps it always free
And why would I want that?
>And why would I want that?
If you're advocating for using the BSD license in the first place, you must agree that freedom is a desirable quality in software, because otherwise you would be advocating for original distributors to use a proprietary license.
I really don't understand the question; why would you want the source to be kept free, no matter where it is used? That might not be what you personally have any need for at the moment, but it would be nice if one day you're curious how someone has used your code and you can't see it.
Do you value profits over the freedom of the users of your code? If so, then say it and at least make your position clear on the matter. That way we know not to listen to you.
Marxism and the use of force in initiation are both objectively violent and inhenrent in GPL v3
I want the BSD license to allow software to be used in closed source software because it promotes superior software in everything. For example had FreeBSD not been licensed in such a way that Sony couldn't have used it for the PS4 and Vita, both would be running inferior systems as Sony would have to go elsewhere for such software, because we both know Sony's not just going to open source everything. I would rather see open source software be used to make a better closed source product than a closed source product use inferior closed source software because that's what they need to do to keep it closed source.
daily reminder that op is gay and cant survive without creating these kinds of stupid threads
The original shit is still free though, just their new garbage is unfree. You sound like the MPAA/RIAA MUH PIRACY faggots.
GPL can't be said to be protecting freedom because it infringes upon my freedom to distribute code as I'd like
All of my this
Wow you, really can't be this stupid.
>Marxism [...] objectively violent
This is false; Marxism isn't just Young Marx. Do you know anything at all about Marxism?
>use of force inherent in GPLv3
No. But if you want to say that, then I can say the use of force is inherent in the BSD licenses too. You need to leave attribution.
>just their new garbage is unfree
This does not mean that it needs to be non-free, though. I want as much software as possible to be free, as it is generally agreed that having freedom with regard to the software you run is a good thing.
You're confused. The GPL specifically protects the freedoms which free software guarantees you, by the definitions of the OSI and the FSF. It does not give you nor protect the right for you to take away those freedoms from others.
Unless you're an anarchist (which is a valid position to take), one can say that the government protects certain freedom, at the expense of other freedom (like the freedom to murder somebody). There's no reason why we need to change the rules when we're talking about software.
The BSD license also infringes upon your freedom to distribute code as I'd like. So you must be arguing for works to be placed into the public domain. I suppose we just have different philosophies.
do i have to learn code to install a gui after 6 hours of typing?
You should probably write a VisualBasic script, maybe you can get an IP address.
>GPL can't be said to be protecting freedom because it infringes upon my freedom to distribute code as I'd like
Stupid Libertarian/ancap detected. That's not how life works asshole.
>This does not mean that it needs to be non-free, though. I want as much software as possible to be free, as it is generally agreed that having freedom with regard to the software you run is a good thing.
Being this inflexible is the reason people think RMS and the FSF goons are fucking loons.
>I'm a cuck and I like it
Are you reay to scrifice security?
The possibility to audit the code you compile/install?
The same can be said about BSD.
>look mom I posted it again!
Is BSD entirely free of GPL code?
If so, I'd like to use it.
Currently on Linux, but using software inspired by an ideology that killed 60 million of my people (ethnically Chinese here) does not sit well with me.
it's true tho
No, it's not.
>waaaaaah
>if we don't acknowledge it's not real
>INNOVASHUN
time for the babies to leave Sup Forums
>denial
>time for the babies to leave Sup Forums
Then leave. Take your shitty cuck meme with you.
Nah
t. cuck
BSD is free of the GPL License, although software using GPL may be installed if the user chooses. This is total unrestricted freedom
Letting capitalists use my code without anything in return is being inflexible? I want my users to have all the freedom that I had. I can't see anything wrong with this.
I refuse to sacrifice my freedom because somebody wants money from me. This whole idea that money is more important than freedom is exactly what you've been conditioned to think.
Free software advocates killed 60 million people? No. You're probably referring to the policies of Chairman Mao. It's useful to note that his policies have nothing to do with Marxism (if that's what you're implying). You've also not shown that there is a link between Marxism/Communism and the GPL.
Letting people take away the freedom to run software how you wish, make modifications and distribute the modifications doesn't sit well with me.
>because it promotes superior software in everything
I'd rather have free software and my freedom than "superior software". Not only that, but there's no reason why free software funded by alternate models such as crowdfunding, selling binaries (but releasing the source), micro-donations, selling assets etc. cannot produce this "superior software" either.
lolol ur so funny xDDD
>no power management
>no drivers
>no vm
>no containers
no thanks
what i'm trying to avoid is people using my stuff for serious/commercial/production application. i'm fine with other devs looking at it, reusing it, making it better whatever. am i in the wrong here? should i be using something else?
this thread made me reconsider and look at MIT and BSD licensing. i think i actually don't give as much of a fuck about people using it without asking as i thought i did.
>software using GPL MUST be installed if the user chooses to use his computer
ftfy
>I'm this much of an incoherent retard
bsd was literally made for cucks like you
>implying this is remotely true
*BSD is freedom to have choice you can only code BSD license and another code with permissive license or you can use GPL code too and another code with copyleft license.
We simple has alternative:
wiki.freebsd.org
it is tho
>i can't read sentences more complex than a tabloid headline
okay then
>Chairman Mao's Red China wasn't communist
Wew lad
>I don't even know what you're talking about
confirmed
Nah
>no half working drivers
Yeah, instead it's zero working drivers
Zero
Communism is by definition stateless, moneyless, classless society in which, most importantly, the workers own the means of production. That's even part of socialism.
"Communist" China was not a Communist country, just as DPRK isn't a democratic country.
>I'm a cuck
lad...
BSD is for socially inept atheist retards
>proprietary blobs
no thanks. I like my Trisquel.
*Arch
>le epik cuck maymay
>quick! damage control!
no point in hiding it, applecuck!
I'm done, I'm not going to spend my day arguing with deluded stallmanites.
>truly free and open OS
Yeah, thats nice, but I need a working OS. Maybe in 20 years I'll give it a try but for now it's worthless.
>no power management
powerd, cpufreq?
>no drivers
All driver which linux support and even more.
>no vm
bhyve, xen?
>no containers
Jail, docker?
well then, if my attitude isn't coherent enough for your licensing-gourmet tastes, i am terribly sorry to have disturbed your obviously superior lawyer-brain with such nonsense.
fuck off, you wanker. i have never dealt with licensing and intellectual property before because i never had to. if you don't have anything of value to tell me, why are you talking at all?
>I got told
>I'll get my toys and go
please do
Fuck off you piece of shit
>All driver which linux support and even more.
bwahahahahahahaha, bsd cucks are actually this deluded!
bwahahahahaha, how's that parallels working for you, appletard? nice drivers you got for that virtual vga adapter!
t. fucking cucks, I swear
>possibility
yeah, and no one does.
Being open source does not make software more secure.
did you say you're gonna fuck off, macshit? you're afraid to go alone? sheltered cuck life?
>intellectual property
deluded cuck confirmed
I see your only arguments are le epik cuck meme and the fact that fortune 500 companies use BSD licensed software
>le state control and distribution of resources can work!
So triggered.
>fortune 500 companies cuck BSD licensed software
ftfy
>projecting this hard
I see only your butthurt in your post.
I bet you just underage faggot.
>le epik cuck meme
>again
Man you GPL retards are just full of original material
I'll hop in on his behalf here
The BSD license is what prevented it from growing.
When corporations take the code they don't contribute back to the community, which is why BSDs developer base is stagnating.
When someone uses code under the GPL it is always available for Linux users, which is great for growth. Every person or group who enacts a new implementation or modification of the code is in essence a new developer.
>projection meme
>meanwhile freebsd releases an iso that doesn't boot on real hardware
what a time to be a cuck, amirite, m8?
Forcing people to contribute is not the proper way to stimulate growth.
>posted from my ipad
cuck, please
>implying I have any Apple products
>FreeBSD devs use them so all BSD users do
Man you GPL faggots are beyond retarded.
Nobody is forcing anybody into anything. Please use your brain next time.
>the devs are cucked
>but we, the simpleton users, are not tho
I have bad news, user...
GNU/Linux is a progressive and viral system. Yes, it grows faster. Yes, it is viral. It's also broken often and is 'patchy' across the board ie Android. BSD is slower to develop, more stable when done, and far more surgical which has proven beneficial in stability and smoothness ie iOS.
No one is forced to use GPL software, there are many proprietary alternatives out there. The GPL is just a way of saying "I don't want this software to become one of those proprietary alternatives"
And the real world growth of available software between the two systems (BSD and Linux) shows which system is more effective.
I use pfsense and fuck I hate everything about BSD whenever I have to interact with the CLI
You're just proving your lack of knowledge. The FreeBSD devs choices do not affect OpenBSD and NetBSD users.
The GPL is literally a document of forced contribution and lack of choice
>OpenBSD and NetBSD users
see
>he posted it so it's true
The whole reason I started using OpenBSD was Linux's lack of drivers.
You are mistaken. It's simply a distribution license.
>literally
You also look like a complete buffoon right now.
>faster
It isn't
>more open
both are completely open, get fucked
>used in the world's most profitable OSes
not one of them makes any profit and that includes osx
>doesn't contain the marxist GPL
true but this is such a nonargument
>lean and clean from the start
define "lean and clean".
>no half working drivers
limited range of hardware supported though.
>no dependency hell
yea thanks for that one systemDickhead.
I like BSD but this is a fucking bait thread so fuck yourself OP.
>I'm mentally ill
ok then
>demands and restrictions aren't force
>Mao wasn't communist
>a hardware specific OS 25% the size of Linux isn't faster
This is what Stallmanites actually believe
>meanwhile freebsd releases an iso that doesn't boot on real hardware
Oh~ VM iso?...
Considering your age should I probably explain what's "VM" mean?
If you want to boot on "real" hardware you must get iso/img for your CPU architecture.
en.wikipedia.org
>what a time to be a cuck, amirite, m8?
*cuckold
en.wikipedia.org
You probably just don't understand what it mean.
Wow user, you sure got me