BSD And Other Things

/bsd/ - *BSD General Thread
Discuss FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFlyBSD

Join the IRC: #baot @ irc.rizon.net

News sites: dragonflydigest.com | undeadly.org
Docs: freebsd.org/handbook | openbsd.org/faq | netbsd.org/docs

Potential Linux switchers welcome. Ask questions, get answers, etc.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/qlCmvFFJ5cg
grymoire.com/Unix/CshTop10.txt
freebsd.org/releases/10.3R/hardware.html
youtube.com/watch?v=k_-W8XmOycs
autism.org.uk/helpline
github.com/lattera/articles/blob/master/infosec/tor/2017-01-14_torified_home/article.md
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

First for GNU/Linux

Fuck BSD

>>ARCH FOR LIFE
.... But BSD is cool

Just one question: why should anyone switch to BSD?

GNU/Linux is already a good Unix-like. In fact, the only criticism that is constantly thrown around is lack of software/support, because it's not a popular operating system. So why should I switch to BSD? Even if it's better than Linux (and if it is, how so?), wouldn't any possible improvement be shaded by the fact that BSD is even more obscure than Linux and is famous for lacking not only software (like Linux) but also even more, such as driver support?

I'm not bashing BSD or shilling for Linux, so long as both are free they're good in my book, but I'm genuinely curious as to why anyone would use BSD as a desktop OS.

with bsd, it can be quite easy to change mac os software to run on bsd, based on its relation, not all software, but some of it for sure. also it is quite a bit more secure than some distros of linux **cough*ubuntu*cough**. also everything is not going to break after each update

freebsd can do this
youtu.be/qlCmvFFJ5cg

I find the system to generally be more integrated than most GNU/Linux distributions. Things in the ports tree have to play nice with each other, so almost everything works directly out of the box. I also prefer most BSD utilities over their GNU counterparts, but that's personal preference. ZFS is pretty nice as well.

As a side effect of integration, there isn't as much software. I guess this isn't as much of a problem if you enable the Linux compatibility layer.

I haven't had any issues with drivers, but I'm using fairly standard hardware.

I wouldn't use it as a Desktop OS, but I think it's wonderful for servers.

>i-i don't come here to shill linux but it's better than BSD
just fucking kill yourself

Anyone use csh? I mostly use ksh but I want to expand my knowledge. Already read the manpage, but I wonder if anyone knows neat things it can do.

GNU is barely Unix-like. Stallman has convinced so many people to add Lisp OS features to GNU software. A real clusterfuck. GNU is consistently different both from Unix and UNIX/SUS/POSIX

If you are going to use BSD, use OpenBSD.

The rest are cancer.
And especially fuck TrueOS.
Yall niggers need to fucking die.

These threads are half shills from big companies who profit because they can steal BSD and half hipsters and contrarians who don't even use BSD but just pretend to. Nobody can actually "switch" to BSD because it's an unusable piece of shit with no drivers and software.

Nice bait, m8.

>replying

Don' give people expectations. The only reason your system doesn't break is becuase you use only the hardware recommended for BSD.

you mean he looked up supported hardware to make sure it worked? wow! what a shock!

How do you put up with lumina? It's absolute shit when xfce works far better, and has more capability/costomizability

What's the difference between free/open/net/etc, and which should I choose, based on what requirements?

So can linux, or windows via cygwin.

>costomizability
How many times a day do you customize your desktop?

When I add plug-ins/widgets to show me more than just the time

You actually can't look up your hardware because they don't have a list of supported ids.

They literally have such shit support that they don't know if something works and the only way they can test it is if they trick someone into trying to get it to work.

Then when you file a bug report they expect you to submit a patch that fixes it.

BSD support.

there is a reason why its dead user
grymoire.com/Unix/CshTop10.txt

I hope you enjoy "\" because you will be using it lots.
#!/bin/csh -f
sed '\
s/ /\\\\
/' file

OpenBSD is trash. Use FreeBSD instead.

>OpenBSD
>Want modern packages with security updates (without checking an eratta)

>your options:
>hang self
>use -current
>choose to use -current
>look all over the place because documentation is nonexistant
>finally find /snapshots on the FTP server which is referenced nowhere
>time to upgrade to a newer snaphot
>have to use bsd.rd, can't use pkg_add or something like freebsd-update.
>bsd.rd's upgrade is borked in this snapshot. Basically you have to shoot yourself.

OpenBSD does security well but does everything else wrong. Theo is truly a follower of the UNIX philosophy.

>As a side effect of integration, there isn't as much software.

Only for proprietary shit. For open source stuff there may not be an existing package or port for it, but anything that can be compiled on Linux, should compile on the BSDs as well.

bsd hardware "support" is "throw it out" aka "lol u dont need dat"

>I need this wireless card / graphics card / anything to work
>lol u dont need dat

>they can steal BSD
>stealing - the dastardly act of using something that is freely given, especially in accordance with it's license.

why do gnutards always feel the need to shit up these threads despite that fact that they neither use nor care about bsd?

BSD users are the hipsters of the Linux world. Linux is waay too mainstream. They must jump through additional hoops to run the same. fucking. toolchain.

>hipsters of the linux world
>don't you linux
nani?

Because you BSD shits constantly try to throw your quantum "use it but fuck off" garbage at everyone.

In OP's post:
>Potential Linux switchers welcome
>Ask questions

#1 quesiton: will it actually work

answer is always

>fuck off pleb lol u dont need dat
Admit that this thread is a circlejerk, is all I'm asking. But you won't, you keep trying to bait in new people when we know full well you have no interest in "converting" them. You WANT them to use it and freak out because you think this makes you intelligent.

This sounds oddly like #Gentoo on Efnet.

>does it actually work
to which the reply is
>why don't you try it and find out
you fuckers are all the same. If no one spoonfeeds it to you you just whine about it not working.

>protip
It's microshills

>since both Linus and RMS respect each other
lmao is this a fucking joke

>with bsd, it can be quite easy to change mac os software to run on bsd
That sounds actually pretty good, I didn't know about that. I'll look it up.
>also everything is not going to break after each update
But neither does GNU/Linux.

So can GNU/Linux.

Yeah, I can see a reason to run it on servers. But I came to this thread because I thought most posters in here actually used BSD as their main desktop OS, and this always gets me curious.

I don't know much about BSD, which is why I came here and asked a question. With my current knowledge of BSD I don't see any reason to run it over Linux on a desktop, but there are a lot of people that do and I wanted to listen to their reasons to become more informed and maybe even change my mind about the subject. Sorry if I sounded condescending, kid.

That could be an argument, but can you exemplify why this is becomes a problem for GNU? In principle just because a system isn't pure Unix doesn't mean it's bad. In fact GNU never sought to be a perfect Unix clone (GNU's not Unix, after all).

Hes lying about OSX compatibility.
BSD users like to mislead to give the illusion of value where there is none.

I usually don't put up with it since I usually use cwm on OpenBSD. But this is the machine I'm currently on, which yea, has Lumina. It's okay. I haven't used xfce in years though, so I suppose I'll try it again some day.
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, and DragonFlyBSD are actually four different OSes, that share neither a kernel nor userland. They're all similar though. I only regularly use OpenBSD and FreeBSD, so I'll only compare those:
FreeBSD tends to emulate a lot of GNU/Linux stuff in an effort to appeal to enterprises. Has a lot more money in it, and all the things that come from that. They don't reply to bug reports consistently though.
OpenBSD tends to have more convenient and easy-to-understand config files. Developers often reply if you send an email to the mailing lists. It comes with X11 already available.
I see. I heard of this article but haven't read it: I'll do that now.
>your post
It's bad to lie, you know. Tell me about the packages you have that aren't modern.
>nonexistent documentation
I have a -current install on another SSD and I promise you it wasn't hard to find out about snapshots.
>want to use pkg_add to replace the kernel
???????? what would make this seem reasonable?
Though I will say that binary updates are coming soon, probably in 6.1 or 6.2: they're working on something equivalent to freebsd-update.
>UNIX philosophy
Unix philosophy* UNIX is just for SUS/POSIX losers.
Either extreme conformism or inferiority complex. Probably the former. They're upset that not everyone does the same thing they do.
>the same. fucking. toolchain.
Do you think anyone wants to use as bad a toolchain? No, that's why FreeBSD switched to clang, which is bad, but less bad.
Not him, but it's usually easier to port GNU/Linux software than Mac OS X software. Depends on the author: some are good at not making shitty dependencies. But both can work.

>actually used BSD as their main desktop OS
I do since it's more productive for me: I personally prefer the BSD userland over the GNU one. Documentation is better since man is easier to read than info, too.
>why this is becomes a problem for GNU?
Sometimes mixing things together works, but for GNU software, it seems it hasn't. Stuff like --long -------loooooooooooooooong options are less ergonomic to type out, and same with the default keybindings in many of their programs.

>Documentation is better
It isn't though.

>It isn't though.
[citation needed]

see
It's a common misconception that BSD has good documentation, it doesn't. It has a distinct lack of documentation.

The man pages often list hardware that works with them. At least it did when I was reading some network driver man pages.
See also:
freebsd.org/releases/10.3R/hardware.html
Who are you trying to bullshit?

That page literally supports my argument.

Its a bullet point list of models.

If you look at the Linux wireless documentation its far more useful.

im sorry, im actually not a user of bsd, i recently got interested in it, and read somewhere that there was some compatibility.

OSX is all proprietary shit, there is no method for running its software under any other OS, there is a project to emulate apps but it never got beyond very basic hello world type support.

just ignore him. he literally has no knowledge of bsd and just likes to shit on it.
/ of his posts boil down to shit like
>I don't know what hardware I use so I can't look it up

It isn't shit.

There are different revisions wireless of hardware models that have different product id, they don't list the ids because in most cases the drivers haven't been tested with them.

I know he's shit, I just want other people to know that he is.
It's going to be difficult for you to hear, but as long as there is closed-source hardware, there will be driver problems. The only solution is open-source hardware.

What are you even talking about?

I was pointing out that their documentation is shit, their drivers having shit support is an entirely separate matter.

>I just want other people to know that he is.
why do you think everyone here is a redditor like you who responds to tripfags?

It's a common misconception that Sup Forums cares who you are, we don't. We have a distinct lack of caring about who tripfags are.

inb4 no systemd

>muh INNOVASHUN

>to which the reply is
>>why don't you try it and find out
aka
>we don't know, nobody actually runs it, we only tried it in parallels

there it is, the hardware list. aka the "throw it out" list

>Oh everything will work great if you just find this one 15 year old laptop
>If you don't use this hardware then you're an idiot for expecting BSD to work
>I noticed you have need for hardware made in the last 5 years. Just throw that out and go find this 15 year old piece of shit.

By using FreeBSD and Emacs I can be the ultimate elitist.

Funny, I've never had any issue with it not working on any of my hardware. I don't specifically buy hardware for it either. I used to be a gamer, and it was recent enough that my main PC build reflects that. OpenBSD works just great on it.

For older hardware I have lying around it's not an issue at all. While OpenBSD will be slower than Linux to support new hardware, once it is supported you can almost certainly be assured that it will always work. Windows actively breaks shit to force users to buy new hardware, which is designed not to work with older versions of Windows. Linux does this too, but without having any compelling reason to do so other than for the hell of it apparently. FreeBSD is more conservative about it, and try not to, but if it comes down to a choice between backwards compatibility and new features, it will choose new features every time. OpenBSD will not go out of it's way to break shit once it's been supported. Even if active support has ended it will do everything within reason to ensure that it can still be used.

FreeBSD, NetBSD, and DragonFlyBSD all have their purposes. There are some smaller worthwhile projects, for example there are RetroBSD (2.11BSD fork) and LiteBSD (4.4BSD fork) for microcontrollers

>inb4 no systemd

no systemd, more integrated. linux is just kernel. FreeBSD is a operating system. hardware support is on par because its easier to reason about how a BSD system run. i.e running gtx1070 on freebsd

updates without breaking the whole system, AMI BIOS seems to directly boot a BSD partition scheme, like the american megatrands bla directly loads without skipping screens.

portsnap fetch
portsnap extract
pkg install xorg mate mate-desktop slim
echo 'exec "mate-session"' > .xinitrc
echo '
dbus_enable="YES"\
hald_enable="YES"\
slim_enable="YES"\
' > /etc/rc.conf

reboot, done

FreeBSD: power of gentoo with simplicity of ubuntu

why would you need the ports if you're using binary packages

it's even SIMPLER than what you did

People do in fact run the BSDs. The very active communities surrounding them aren't just there merely to troll you, and other useless dipshits. They tend to know what their BSD(s) of choice are, and are not capable of. They tend to be knowledgeable enough to have made the decision to use them in the first place, without seeking Sup Forums's extremely valuable input. Very few just up and decide to install BSD on a whim, or just to be different or unique, or just to spite Linux users. If that's the only reason you can think of to install one, and explore it more in depth, then I can assure you that it's probably not the OS for you, which is fine. None of them have ever intended to be a one-size-fits-all solution, nor are they intended to be an elite social club or a messianic cult.

Do any of the BSDs actually work? Yes, as any BSD user can attest, it's very much possible to install and boot them, and then use them to do shit. Will they work for you to accomplish the things you need an OS to do? I dunno. I don't know your circumstances. However if your circumstances entail having random strangers make decisions for you, and hold your hands, then no, they probably will not work for you at all, and that's that. You can now move on with your life, and never have to worry about the mean old BSDs posing a threat to your own precious ever again.

I've been seeing this throw it out meme quite a bit lately, sounds like someone's a little assblasted that OpenBSD doesn't support his GTX 970.

Why don't you just get a job and use Windows or Mac like normal people?

>very active communities
Maybe compared to darwin and OS2.

> relevant music

youtube.com/watch?v=k_-W8XmOycs

If including macos darwin is bigger than leenux

When I first switched to *BSD I was quite hyped about it, but now after a few months, I don't see the point in making these threads and holding the BSD flag as if we were special snowflakes. Why separate ourselves from the rest of the UNIX culture?
I mean, I am aware that the /fglt/ is mostly a systemd thread with some gentoo renegades. But why not keep up with the /friendly UNIX general/ for all those that keep with the Unix style? Why make a BSD thread at all?
I also regret that so many projects are made for Linux only, I really hate that. I've wanted to try a couple projects I've found on the net but they're always the same shit: GNU Makefile, GNU configure, #!/bin/bash and so on.
And some are filled with GNU dependencies like gnutls, wget, and all sorts of related bullshit...
As such I don't see why it is at all healthy to have the community separate into "clans such as Linux, *BSD, etc. Why not just make two threads: /fsdg/ for systemd and /fug/ for unix?

friendly unix general is a good idea, the problem is all the other unices have died off

Except for Solaris, and also the non-system linux distributions loosely fit into the unix-like category.
Makes more sense to integrate the different systems rather than segregate them further, as I already said, portability between them is highly neglected.

>GNU/BSD

>Do any of the BSDs actually work? Yes, as any BSD user can attest, it's very much possible to install and boot them, and then use them to do shit
Second this, I remember when I used GNOO/LEEX, with absolutely every distribution but two ( Arch and Gentoo ), every single time something would break without me touching anything. Either the installer would abort (and because it's a blackboxed installer I was left with nothing but a blank drive) or right after installation something weird would happen like network drops every minute, random system crashes every two hours (debian!!), or a pop-up dialogue saying "A system program failed" with just an [OK] button (Ubuntu!).
The only ones that worked, as I said were Arch, which I ditched because muh systemd. And gentoo, which is a bitch to even get started, as opposed to the BSDs (at least FreeBSD which I don't really like and OpenBSD) where you can just install and run, and it JUST FUCKING WERKS.
I'd forgotten about my leenux experience, and decided to try void linux. Only to find out that getting it to connect to the network is an absolute PITA with absolute shit documentation (see man iw, it pretty much just says "use iw help for more information", and "iw help" gives the worst documentation I've seen in my life)

autism.org.uk/helpline

Idiots who can't get ahold of many maschin to put their softwares into, what is switching when you can have multiple?

you haven't heard that oracle has laid off every employee working on solaris?

Well Illumos is still going

its not about being a special snowflake, you have technically superior and inferior software. linux is great but its also pretty heavily fragmented inside itself. BSD has fragmentations but they are whole operating systems, running a window manager is from from running a usable stable operating system. Linux people legit are like the riced drifter kids, with parts assembled from wherever. BSD is more like audi or muscle desu.

BSD is not about people, the GNU/LINUX kids seem to focus more on politics/community then actually building something usable.

I think alot of people who use linux now would stay in BSD if they actually tried it to understand it.

So for BSD its about letting people know there exists something out there between Windows/Linux/MacOSX.

Minix3 microkernel is going to run bsd userland, My money is on that honestly.

Every operating system sucks and is insecure atm so i think its better to bet on a horse that does not have cancer already.

>BSD is more like audi or muscle

I mean i rather have a BSD license where people can openly "steal" from eachother.

Then GNU/linux, where the quality of your theft depends on how many shit dependencies you can push downstream. looking at systemd

*upstream

or the number of shit distributions you can come up with

I'm not sure that saying that BSD has fragmentations. Net/Hardened/Open/Free/DragonFly/Retro/Lite-BSD all share the same root (same root being various versions of the original Berkeley Software Distribution), but they are very much different OS' nowadays - Try doing a diff between just the kernel on each of them to see what has changed (which ignores the userland, which has changed way more).
That said, I'm a happy FreeBSD user of 16 years and have other BSDs installed on stuff like my SHARP X68000 and RPI and other things.

When are you going to stop posting in this thread because someone has owned you this time? That's what you do in every thread when someone refutes your ignorant shilling.

That number is seemingly not as near-infinite as it once was, as Linux distribtions seem to be converging on being basically the same systemd-infected system with different DEs.
One of the few things I liked about Linux was how many flavours it came in - you could literally find anything that suited your tastes including full-on SEL inspired stuff.

Unrelated to any of the above, I found github.com/lattera/articles/blob/master/infosec/tor/2017-01-14_torified_home/article.md earlier today which seems very cool.

> Net/Hardened/Open/Free/DragonFly/Retro/Lite-BSD all share the same root (same root being various versions of the original Berkeley Software Distribution), but they are very much different OS' nowadays

thats what im saying, its not enough to install a new gtk3 theme and call it a distribution/operating system.

My picture is a more apt representation of the two communities.

BSD code is the tiny fire that a dev is defecating on because he doesn't contribute back. GPL encourages innovation and contribution.

Saying that BSD is like audi and Linux is like a ricer makes no sense.

I knew I shouldn't have removed by BePawsome filter.

he's a furry? laffo

I would argue that GPL actually discourages competition because everybody feels like they can fork everything else unconditionally. So what you get literally is shit, it takes what was coherent software and turns them into shit.

> muh friendship

If you can't share ideas you can't innovate (evolve) and you die out.

Its exactly what happened to BSD.

BSD is far from dead, its in every playstation 3 and 4, its in OSX, its in the windows TCP stack. Its in legit everything.

I'm not sure that's true, but GPL definitely means companies are very unlikely to base their systems on it like NASA, NetApp, Dell, Apple, Netflix, Juniper, Citrix, Panasonic, and Sony have done - most of which have contributed code back to BSD or have donated to the FreeBSD foundation because they can't contribute code back but want to help in some way.

Ignore BePawsome, he's a shill who has no fucking idea what he's talking about and will eventually go away. I suspect that he actually gets off on being insulted, so when he goes away is when he's had his cummies and need to get some tendies.

BSD has a marketing problem, not a user problem. It does not have happy story about friendship and love.

Like those companies have done with BSD.

Not really those. Those who need to run it will usually find it, and those who're too stupid to do anything without a HOWTO (see: most linux users nowadays) aren't likely to bother with it anyway.

>look mom I fixed my wifi without a howto
>wow timmy you showed those linux users , so proud of you

What I mean is copy/pasting verbatum from a HOWTO, specifically. It's what every new Linux convert wants, to be given the command to accomplish exactly what they want instead of learning how to do it themselves.

There is no BSD code in any playstation.
OSX has a few userland tools derived from BSD but it also isn't BSD.
Windows having used BSD network code is also a myth. A few command line tools do, similar to OSX but on a far smaller level.

None of these projects contribute back to BSD there is no growth there, the OSX and Windows userland tools are decades old examples that aren't relevant today.

Gentoo is a great distro to learn working with Linux in general, I find. Gets down to the core of things. Next step is probably just using the kernel itself

>The PlayStation 4 system software is the updatable firmware and operating system of the PlayStation 4.

> The operating system is the Unix-like Orbis OS, based on FreeBSD 9.