Why does Sup Forums hate BSD so much?

why does Sup Forums hate BSD so much?

Other urls found in this thread:

vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt
opensource.apple.com/static
opensource.apple.com/release/macos-10123.html
youtube.com/watch?v=pmgTd8NFaME
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses.
freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It's not Gentoo

because if even linux is an unusable piece of shit that's good only for servers, what good can a system with an even smaller userbase and reputation be?

It's a reminder of how bad Linux used to be. Someday, user, someday.

They love Lennart's balls on their chins, so they fear True Unix rather than embrace it.

Linux never tried to be Unix.

...

GNU/Linux*

Sup Forums is dumb

Linux
Is
Not
Uni-
X

GNU/Linux*

I use both, as I consider BSD more of a research OS than Linux kernel these days.

There's also Illumos/Open Solaris type OSs around like SmartOS or OpenIndiana no reason to just use Ganoo or BSD.

On my developer's laptop I run OpenBSD simply because it will never fail and runs with almost zero maintenance while following -stable. I connect to a SmartOS run cloud which spins up Ubuntu VMs and other OSs if I need toolchains to build Android or whatever. I also have a Free/Net/OpenBSD VM on there too for research into things like hypervisors and microkernels. Hell I even have a Debian install with Hurd/Guix on there

(You)/Wrists

neat

Can freebsd run well on laptops? I feel like its a server os and wouldnt support laptop hardware well. Can it?

GNU/Linux*

neet

I use it on my x220 and w520

they most likely just pretend to just to fit in

I was going to try FreeBSD, but supposedly its a security nightmare, I might try OpenBSD one day if im bored, well really bored

>supposedly its a security nightmare
how so?

you have gentoo linux, but there is also gentoo freebsd

vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt

mind you im a bit of a normie, the main thing I got from that link is FreeBSD likes to connect to the net as root,, at times when it dosnt need to

It attracts weirdos, even for the Unix world.

BSD *is* the Unix world

>implying it did anything other than change documentation here and there and wasn't kicked out anyway
they even forced it to stop using freebsd in her name

I don't know. I'm trying TrueOs(former PCBSD) and everything works better than I expected

Because they don't actually like technology, they just obsess over licenses.

What about gnu darwin, anyone ever fucked around with that?

It doesn't start with g so we can't put / around it. Worse yet, it starts with b, the worst board.

Works well on my T60p.

>what is Sys V

They don't hate BSD because that OS died decades ago, but they hate the *BSDs because they're everything GNU/Linux wished to be but couldn't.

this

i actually just tried arch linux for the first time in years like hours ago and holy shit i fucking hate linux now

where is ifconfig? why is everything so abstract? why does everything have to go through systemdick?

And actually very wrong, worded by an OpenBSD fanboy who doesn't seem to realize that OpenBSD is a security nightmare to anything but OpenBSD fanboys. No MAC, no process isolation, shitty ASLR implementation that won't stop a damn thing(but will call FreeBSD out for having none), W^X that's not really W^X as you can mmap the same memory as PROT_WRITE and PROT_EXEC at the same time and bypass it. Oh and let's not forget the almighty pledge which has inherent race conditions because it's a syscall wrapper and once you exec() out of it, you're no longer in the fucking sandbox. OpenBSD is a fucking joke.

now post that trollaxor link again

so if you had to go with one of the *BSD's which one would you choose?

it'll be freebsd

they always go on autistic rants like this when you tell them freebsd is insecure, notice how he goes "freebsd doesn't have ASLR but at least it doesn't have an incomplete implementation" like that's any better

well what would you choose then? I want to play around with something other than GNU+Linux, but all the BSD seem to get hate, should I go with Darwin instead?

by play around I mean use as my main for a week or two, why I am hesitant to just jump in

The latest build of Darwin is equivalent to Mac OS X Tiger iirc, pretty old.

nah darwin is pretty dead

play with openbsd

if you don't like it, that's fine

what about ios

What about it?

test

did it work?

the latest darwin release was a few months ago

OS X without Aqua? May as well just run FreeBSD.

Pencils down. The test is over. Please hand your papers to the front of the room.

I'm talking about Darwin as a standalone OS, not the base of iOS and OS X. Last version was 8.11, which corresponds to Mac OS X 10.4.11.

could I download the base of mac os and add X?

Not legally.

Darwin's not available as a standalone OS anymore. Like I said, last version is 8.11.

For You could add X to OS X and pretend Quartz doesn't exist though

daily reminder

Literally dead or legacy (solaris, hp-ux)

What did he mean by not legally, can I download the latest dawrin from apple?

I tried here

opensource.apple.com/static

but It gave me javascript instead

He doesn't know what he's talking about. You can download the source, good luck compiling it.
opensource.apple.com/release/macos-10123.html

Ooooohhhh...tacos and burritos!

>shitty ASLR implementation that won't stop a damn thing

Could you expand on this? The others I understand. Is there not enough entropy in their implementation?

Because someone at Redhat jacks off thinking about Microsoft.

OpenBSD is the only operating system worth using.

Looks delicious, needs some french fries on it though

BSD could've been what's linux now if it wasn't for USL vs BDSI lawsuit in early '90s

>Bistro
Distro
Hmmm...

youtube.com/watch?v=pmgTd8NFaME
the japanese are insane dude

why do they like netbsd so much

Because it runs on anything

>Can freebsd run well on laptops?
Almost perfect on my X200, but suspend is a problem

>but supposedly its a security nightmare
This is bullshit "le unsafe defaults"

...

you have apmd running, right?

Hello again, Theo.

mexicans

Sup Forums (Sup Forums) hates linux too. What did you expect?

no drivers / software
post any need it's "lol u dont need dat"
quantum bullshit ports "recommendations" wherein if YOU say ports, they're insecure, but if some bsd shit says ports, it's fine
hippie hipster retard fanbase perma stuck in first year of CS thinking all that matters is how cuntrarian and unique they are
0-5 jobs in the entire world for it
used mostly by ex-linux losers just trying to be different and "recommending" you try it out but secretly hoping you don't use it so they can still pretend to be hardcore for their "real work" like dicking around in a terminal for months at a time

Should cover all the bases.

>no drivers
it has almost as much as GNU/Linux, I've personally never had problems, even on newer laptops
>no software
almost anything that can be compiled for GNU/Linux can be compiled for *BSD
>post any need it's "lol u dont need dat"
you're generalizing, care to give an example?
and no, we don't need systemd
>hippie hipster retard fanbase perma stuck in first year of CS thinking all that matters is how cuntrarian and unique they are
generalizing again, also has nothing to do with the OS
>0-5 jobs in the entire world for it
there are fewer jobs, but how is that a reason to hate the OS?
>used mostly by ex-linux losers just trying to be different and "recommending" you try it out but secretly hoping you don't use it so they can still pretend to be hardcore for their "real work" like dicking around in a terminal for months at a time
now you're just making stuff up, why so insecure?

you've obviously never used *BSD, nor have you interacted with real *BSD users outside Sup Forums and know little to nothing about it
you seem to be regurgitating what you read on Sup Forums, you should do a little research yourself and try to form your own opinion
or not, you seem to be too insecure and closed minded for that

Projection: The Post

go back to your ryzen thread, Sup Forumsermin cunt

It's too free. It's computer anarchy infact, and anarchy is for people with questionable respect from their parents and questionable sexual orientation. Plus userbase is a joke. BSD is usable only when you want to steal it (take it, because stealing it is perfectly legal) and turn it into abomination to tour liking.

Gui are suck

don't fucking reply to anyone who has "u dont need that" in their post, it's the usual autist who lives to post in these threads to tell us about how he doesn't like BSD

GNU/Linux*

*Linux

Broken, worthless garbage.

care to backup that statement with some arguments and facts?

>*nix never tried to be *nix

Gentoobabbies don't believe in facts.

You don't have to convince me I should install BSD. I already did, and it's utter shit. I will never touch that trash again. Fuck you for shilling such complete garbage.

what's wrong user, why is it shit?

They prefer Linus the Linux Penguin over BSD the BSD Blowfish

>shilling something free

Because Sup Forums is full of insecure manchildren who are threatened by a suggestion that something they don't use could be an option.

That's because it's busy trying to be windows

because of it's cuck license

>because of it is cuck license
good job

Not that guy, but FreeBSD just because it's still the most active and has marginally better HW/SW support. For example, NVIDIA officially supports FreeBSD.

I wish there was Lubuntu equivalent of BSD. I don't have 8 days to download all the necessary stuff to make a functioning desktop.

My god when will this meme end.
Fucking educate yourselves en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses.

>they're stealing your code
Nobody is stealing anything.
In whatever form they redistribute your software, be it source or just binary, they have to give you credit and cannot give any credit to themselves whatsoever without your permission.

>companies can redistribute your software only in binary form and never give you anything back
Why the fuck would they even do that?
I mean they can, but either way they can still sell your software and not share any of their profits with you (the same applies to GPL software).
Keeping a project open source does not diminish their profits usually because they will sell your software bundled with something more.
Apple integrates their open source Darwin OS with OS X and iOS which are selled together with computers and phones.
Android and much of Google's software is open source, but they don't profit directly from that.
Red Hat can still sell, even if the OS is almost completely open source.
They can also keep a project open source, then stop publishing the source and then after some time sell it.

>why is it not in their best interest to distribute only binaries all the time?
Who do they have to call if something goes wrong? You.
Why? Because they know jack shit about the project you wrote especially if it's a larger one.
By refusing to share the source code they're just crippling both your project and theirs.
Why? Because you may accept their patches in the upstream or just implement some of those ideas in your own way if it's beneficial to your project and they can then expand on that and so on.
There doesn't have to be much collaboration in order to make this a healthy relationship, but there needs to be some.

DragonflyBSD has the best linux binary compatibility. OpenBSD doesn't even have that anymore.

>KDE represents the entirety of the GNU/Linux community

But yeah, KDE really does look like a Windows 7 or Vista ripoff.

GPL'd software alienates companies, so they're more inclined to use and help develop FOSS software under the BSD licence.
Each licence has it's own advantages and disadvantages.
From the BSD devs perspective freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html
>In contrast to the GPL, which is designed to prevent the proprietary commercialization of Open Source code, the BSD license places minimal restrictions on future behavior. This allows BSD code to remain Open Source or become integrated into commercial solutions, as a project's or company's needs change. In other words, the BSD license does not become a legal time-bomb at any point in the development process.
>In addition, since the BSD license does not come with the legal complexity of the GPL or LGPL licenses, it allows developers and companies to spend their time creating and promoting good code rather than worrying if that code violates licensing.