Some facts:

Some facts:

>The BSD code present in XNU came from the FreeBSD kernel. [1]
>XNU is licensed under Apple Public Source License 2 [2]
>APSL2 is FSF approved, along with the BSD License [3]
>The I/O Kit is an open-source framework in the XNU kernel that helps developers code device drivers for Apple's Mac OS X and iOS operating systems. Perhaps one could benefit from drivers created for Mac OS X? [4]

[1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU#BSD
[2] opensource.apple.com/source/xnu/xnu-3789.41.3/APPLE_LICENSE.auto.html
[3] gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#apsl2
[4] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I/O_Kit

Why even bother with Linux when there is a much stronger company making deals with the manufacturers to create drivers for their desktop AND server operating system? That leave us with two sane choices:
1. Take advantage of Mac OS X's open sourced parts released by Apple to build an OS.
2. Use FreeBSD.
Two insanes:
1. Mesh FreeBSD with XNU.
2. Use Darwin (it is a dead project, last I checked).

We don't need to reinvent all of the wheel when we have half of it done.

Other urls found in this thread:

vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt
tedunangst.com/flak/post/ZFS-on-OpenBSD
linuxfoundation.org/members/corporate
zeroonetwenty.com/blueharvest/
opensource.apple.com/release/macos-10123.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Apple is actually moving away from XNU in general, towards a BSD kernel. They're also giving us loads of code.

>Take advantage of Mac OS X's open sourced parts released by Apple to build an OS.

This,

THIS is what I want.

>tfw Apple doesn't release Darwin builds anymore

Not even FreeBSD devs use FreeBSD on the desktop. It's pretty cool for storage (ZFS) and networking (supposedly, I haven't tried it), but not for the desktop. If you want a free desktop, GNU/Linux is literally the only choice.

You seem to have forgotten about OpenBSD

Mac OS X has its core based on software whose license is FSF approved, that means better drivers, meaning better performance, meaning it is the best free desktop operating system.

>They're also giving us loads of code.
The BSD cuck continues to dream.

Thread's over, the shitposter found it

bump

But Mac OS X isn't good, and FreeBSD has known flaws compared to the other BSDs.
vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt
It's also well-known that XNU isn't a good kernel for performance.

The filesystem is incredibly slow.

It's not like your argument is based on anything, but your ass. Aside some hipster, nobody use freebsd on desktop. Even bsdnow made on Windows.

It's not slow on my machine.

There are no drivers for OSX though. Even when manufacturers do make drivers they won't update them and OSX versions break compatibility.

Support on OSX is by far the worst out of Windows Linux GNU/Linux with Linux being on top.

Good for you.

>Woerkz on mai macheen (((tm)))

Even FreeBSD developers use macOS on the desktop. They ssh into their FreeBSD machines. Go to any FreeBSD conference and you'll see MacBooks everywhere. Go to an OpenBSD conference and you'll see thinkpads running OpenBSD though.

>It's not slow on my machine.

What shell is that?

Used Bash because zsh likes to spit out a bunch of verbose shit.

>The filesystem is incredibly slow.
fast
secure
reliable

pick any two

>implying LUKS isn't secure or reliable

ksh: seq: not found

((x=1; x

real 0m0.086s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s

real 0m0.091s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s

wat is habbening ?

You aren't using a disk.

Your shit doesn't work, maybe you should learn how to use a posix shell like everyone else is doing, retard. I'll write a shell script tomorrow since I can barely stay awake at the moment.

There's many other choices, primarily illumos if you're going to build your own new distro.

Joylent/SmartOS and other OpenSolaris clones are based on it and you get full support for DTrace, Zones (KVM) and real OpenZFS not the half assed FreeBSD implementation.

FreeBSD makes a badass home server/NAS. I got it running on a Poweredge T20 and it runs beautifully. Was a cinch to set up, easier than doing the same with a Linux distro (in my personal experience). I fucking love how this like config files are standardized across the board, even with a lot of third-party stuff… it's a stark contrast to Linuxland where nobody can agree on anything, even within the confines of a particular distribution.

its an wd caviar blue. Maybe i am just missing something.

Dude I don't use sh I have no idea how to count to 100 in it. If you don't either then you probably don't know enough to care whether your shell is posix or not beyond blaming scripts for not working.

>I don't use sh

Filesystem could just be 15x faster I suppose, but I only get those speeds in tmpfs, so I'm leaning towards the latter.

BSD baby can't count to 100
:(

im on ubuntu , maybe i just missed the point of this being about bsd or something.

FreeBSD is already very stable, secure, and mature. I see no need to fork Apple's code to create an OS when the foundation (FreeBSD) is a suitable choice.

Now then, what we can make REALLY good use of is:

OpenSSH
OpenNTPd
Anything in BSD
Apple's drivers
Any driver written in the BSD license

We need to create a desktop environment that normal people can use very easily, create office software that isn't GPL'd, and then we'll need to write more software.

Then, we'll put it on a CD, close the source, and sell it for $50 -- A POSIX Compliant system with Pro-Grade support and stability.

I assume none of this violates Free/OpenBSD's license.

...

It was meant as a simple benchmark to show what "fast" means on BSD, but I guess they don't have bash and don't know how to count to 100 in sh so it was a useless endeavor.

They are looking at ZFS but want to write their own version being OpenBSD tedunangst.com/flak/post/ZFS-on-OpenBSD to deal with ZFS issues that were never solved. This is still ongoing 3yrs later.

If you want ZFS, and a ridiculously robust server that will run your private cloud and never go down no matter what happens (hardware failure, exploding traffic, VM failure ect) then use SmartOS. Zones + ZFS + fault management architecture (fmadm(1M) / svcadm(1M)) make it possible. You can run FreeBSD or Linux inside the zones and essentially create your own AWS

Implying that Linux users do not have mental disorders?

touche

How about this guy lol.

He didn't get raped by cops and still offed himself.

>There are no drivers for OSX though. Even when manufacturers do make drivers they won't update them and OSX versions break compatibility.
Nvidia makes drivers that are regularly updated, though I don't think polaris is covered yet. Intel drivers are built-in. Some AMD drivers are too.

init system and display server?

Because

>Use OS X
>finder polutes literally everything you connect physically with resource fork files, directory metadata, and trashes
>forced to use the command line to transfer files without wasting device space
>no setting to disable this except for networked storage
>FS support: HFS (garbage), FAT (garbage), NTFS (garbage)

At least on Linux you can read more than the worst FSes on earth and plug in your fucking SD card and use it without the command line

>Why even bother with Linux when there is a much stronger company making deals with the manufacturers to create drivers for their desktop AND server operating system?

linuxfoundation.org/members/corporate

That's 3 drivers bro.
Linux has literally thousands.

thats an old meme. freebsd works fine on desktop now, it just takes a lot of manual config similar to arch.

In ksh on OpenBSD on some toaster I use as my webserver.
0m00.63s real 0m00.01s user 0m00.06s system

And again, trying to get even more pessimistic by not using ksh's builtin test:
0m00.70s real 0m00.03s user 0m00.01s system

chrome and firefox still show abysmal performance (even after adding your user to video and getting the right drivers and blah blah) it's just not ready for desktop yet. im rooting for it because the system is fabulously designed but for desktop nope

hmm I'm not getting any real performance difference with firefox between freebsd and debian testing on my end. either way, I agree with you about the design, I love their implementation of OSS.

Isn't just the desktop environment, a few apps, and the recovery/bootloader that are closed source? Couldn't we use Gnome or Cinnamon, trash the apps and recovery, and use GRUB 2? Can we make it compatible with most current Mac OS X apps?

>Not even FreeBSD devs use FreeBSD on the desktop. It's pretty cool for storage (ZFS) and networking (supposedly, I haven't tried it), but not for the desktop. If you want a free desktop, GNU/Linux is literally the only choice.
I use it on my laptop dumbo. Works better than systemd+Linux

I love how people constantly mention that some 'big company' should put out their own stable linux distro. and then you have apple, a big company, that have essentially put out their own stable unix 'distro' and they're the most hated company in the world.

one thing I've learned about this board its filled with fucktards kek

I only hate Apple hardware myself. The software is great and I have a T420 hackintosh right in front of me that I use for Adobe products, music production, programming, and shitposting.

Aqua/Quartz (mac DE) isn't X or Wayland based, so those wouldn't work, and Cocoa isn't open source and all Mac apps require it. So in short, no.

If you had a feature-complete implementation of Cocoa that was based on garden variety linux desktop stuff, then yes. But such a thing doesn't exist. The closest thing is GNUStep which is forever stuck at compatibility with the Cocoa of 2007.

Depends on what you mean by violate. Certainly, you're free to close-source the modifications you make, but the unmodified parts have to comply by even the 2-clause BSD license requires you to include a license telling everyone where you got the vast majority of "your work" from, and even then FreeBSD base isn't completely free of GPL yet (although it's getting there, the only big remaining issue as I recall is grep). So what you'd be left with is essentially what TrueOS has, except that you'd not be impressing anyone with your upstreaming of code, and you'd just be called a clone of TrueOS.

apple is mostly hated for the overpriced hardware and crimped iphones

The vast majority of OSX nowadays is Apple or NeXT code, and is closed-source. The only things it retains from the fork of FreeBSD that became Darwin are the process model, vfs and netstack, as well as the userland. XNU is also open-source, but not strictly speaking related to BSD.

With Wayland in ports on FreeBSD, clang, llvm and lld in base and the few GPL components in base removed in 1-2 years, TrueOS with Lumina on Wayland will probably be the new desktop OS of choice for people looking to replace Windows or OSX.

What is trueOS? Just a shittier/more beginner-friendly FreeBSD?

>The filesystem is incredibly slow.
it's perfectly fine for a desktop operating system

the worst part is fscking if it shuts down abruptly

anyway i hope HAMMER2 is gonna get done soon

>OpenBSD conference
That's nice. They don't have time and money for bullshit, if they have an irl meeting they do hackathons.

go fuck yourself

It's essentially a FreeBSD distribution, in that it ships the FreeBSD kernel, but it also ships the entire userland with some modifications (most of which they upstream back to FreeBSD when they've tested them properly). It also tracks -CURRENT, but that's easily done on FreeBSD itself. It appeals to the crowd that wants a ~desktop experience~, but anything except the SysAdm stuff can be done in FreeBSD, and FreeBSD will probably migrate to OpenRC because of TrueOS.
It's run by Jordan Hubbard, one of the FreeBSD founders, and almost all of the staff at iXsystems (which are behind both TrueOS, TrueOS Server (which is essentially an attempt to create something like Solaris but based on FreeBSD) and FreeNAS and TrueNAS (an enterprise HA-aimed version of FreeNAS)) are FreeBSD commiters themselves or have their work sponsored by FreeBSD commiters when they upstream.
This is just my guess, but it seems like Jordan Hubbard is trying to use iXsystems to essentially do what Redhat once did for Linux - he's making a company that can improve FreeBSD, not just improve FreeBSD for x company who needs feature y and z (which is what Netflix, Verisign, ScaleEngine, Isillon/EMC/Dell, NetApp and similar companies who contribute code regularily already do).

If you ask me, the biggest problem in Linux-land is that the idea of upstreaming code is all but unheard of. NIH-syndrome is so strong, that Linux users often suffer for it.

Badly written opentrash drivers.

>NVIDIA
yet they release shit drivers for it. it took fucking valve for them to get less lazy, emphasis on less.

I'm sure you're very well informed. I'm sure that you've managed to sneak in the private hangouts to have that information when I wasn't there

fyi you're responding to the resident Sup Forums bsd troll

>The filesystem is incredibly slow.
Works on my machine
>It's not like your argument is based on anything, but your ass. Aside some hipster, nobody use freebsd on desktop. Even bsdnow made on Windows
Where did I say anything about using FreeBSD?

>shittiest tripfag on Sup Forums is incapable of even the most trivial things such as installing a different shell
What a surprise

I always suspected it was Apple paying these bsd shills to spam Sup Forums with this crap.

5 days has been added to your Red Hat Subscription Account for this post.

>I always suspected Apple pays people to shill for non-Apple operating systems

>bsdnow made on windows
lel

>bsd licensed software dropped

10 rupees and a plate of curry has been dispatched to your designated shilling account rajesh

5 pounds have been deposited to your happy merchant account, ahmed.

>still playing 1D chess

> AND server operating system?
Seriously hope you are not implying Mac OS is better choice then linux as a server operating system.

Nobody's implying an OS last updated 15 years ago is better than a modern OS for servers

FreeBSD on desktop is even more meme than Arch Linux.

You'll spend half your week fixing and compiling ports for common userland software.

>Not using BlueHarvest on macOS.

What a faggot.

zeroonetwenty.com/blueharvest/

You can use ZFS and Ext3 on OS X, just not for the root partition. On older versions you can install it on UFS.

Why the fuck are you compiling from ports unless you need non-default options - pkg exists for a reason.

Nigga you don't need ZFS for macOS.

macOS has APFS built in, but it is preview at the moment. APFS is also used in iOS 10.3 beta, which I have installed right now, it's actually faster now.

APFS will be fully available in the next macOS release due this year, which has ZFS features such as Snapshot...and it's designed for SSDs in mind.

Bitch I never said you needed it

APFS doesn't do any kind of redundancy (that's supposed to be provided by lower levels, so unlike ZFS and HAMMER, APFS isn't a combined LVM+FS - which it was for very specific reasons, since ZFS is designed to address the problems of traditional RAID) or checksumming last I checked (though supposedly that's not necessary since Apple-sourced NVRAM flash apparently includes ECC), and even includes fsck_apfs despite the fact that it's an atomic copy-on-write filesystem.
As for the 'designed with SSDs in mind', that's not really true since it's specifically made to run on SSDs as Apple sourced SSDs don't have block structure like rotationg disks or other SSDs have. What this does, though, is allow Apple to do proper i/o QoS to avoid the dreaded beachball.
There's also absolutely no compression in APFS, which even NTFS has - but at least they're finally getting rid of HFS+ which has decades of legacy built on top of legacy with multiple forks and an absolutely dreadful journaling.
It's also interesting to note that Apple will have to chance the way Time Machine works, because it can't handle an atomic filesystem with snapshots.

I have the sneaking suspicion anyone trying it on non-approved Apple SSDs are gonna have a BAD time, but that's pretty much par for the fucking course, because nowadays you can't even replace the harddisk or memory in new Apple hardware.

Not sure about Mac, but OpenBSD beats the shit out of Linux.

your post could mean anything, in any case:
opensource.apple.com/release/macos-10123.html
ctrl+f xnu, download the archive and check the timestamps yourself.

Mac OS and macOS are two separate things.

They are, but apparently people do have trouble distinguishing them - I'm surprised Apple did something so innane; pretty sure Steve Jobs would've told whoever suggested it to go fuck themselves.

Exactly why I refuse to acknowledge the change, 10.12 is OS X, 10.13 will be, and so on until Apple actually moves to a different OS with a different name.

Wayland is shit though. Where is waylandcalc, waylandedit, waylandclock, Wayland Athena Widgets, etc?

It's rude to lie on the internet. I've never had to do those things on OpenBSD or FreeBSD.

Wayland is a protocol for communicating between the compositor and the clients. If you want those things, go write them.

The thing is, X is good because it comes with enough programs to be considered its own DE. Wayland is nothing useful for me.

That's not what it's designed for, though. X was designed to let terminals without much computing power use a mainframe for the actual computation involved in drawing windows and such, but that's an idea that dates back to when people still used mainframes and terminals. Any modern PC is faster than the mainframes back then, so that model is very outdated, hence Wayland.

What are the benefits to me, as a user, though? Will ssh -X still work?

MacOS is not a free desktop operating system.

It's free in the normal sense of the word, not the freetard definition.

It's free to download if you have a running copy of it. Not FOSS.

Where can I download it?