What do you think about BSD?

What do you think about BSD?

Other urls found in this thread:

vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt).
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

better than gnu/linux for sure

Port system is quite nice combo of binary packages and custom source packages or configurations, although Gentoo's flag system is easier to use.

FreeBSD has some questionable defaults (see vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt). But Jails, ZFS, bhyve can make it a nice server machine. Never had to work with more people to use MAC or spending on storage to use GEOM, so can't comment on that.

OpenBSD has pretty cleaned system. Their network tools have very consistent configs, so far that they can share include files with macros. There is maybe too much memory and execution hardening that I have to ask if it affects software written in language with any safety guarantees at all. Lack of advanced file system is a little awkward. It doesn't really have any real killer feature... but it's riddled with some great designs and implementations. But the update system is a little bit inconvenient.

Both projects have a great handbooks to learn from. Userspace utilities have a way less flags and extensions in comparison to GNU's variants, slightly closer to POSIX, but the gain is that manpages and source code are actually readable.
It's not a superior evolution of Unix as Plan 9 was, but it's usable in real world.

OpenBSD seems really appealing for it's extreme focus on security and code correctness. I do however prefer the GPL over BSD licenses and Gentoo is a nice mix of some of the cool stuff from BSD and the nice thing from Linux.

Is it true FreeBSD is sponsored by CISCO to get free developers and beta testers?
Is it true OpenBSD has backdoors?
Is it true BSD license is sponsored by companies to suck dry developers of their work?
Is it true BSD has shit hardware support?
Is it true BSD community advice on buying a whole different machine because has shit hardware support?
Is it true FreeBSD recommends certain hardware because they have partnership with a certain seller and for everything else has shit hardware support?

I don't know about the rest of your questions but I do know that the OpenBSD backdoor thing was a myth. OpenBSD went over pretty much all their code looking for it though.

Is it true you are a fag?

>shit hardware support
It's true. I just tried to install it and 11.1 installer kernel panicked on boot and 11.0 wouldn't detect my HDD in the installer.

OpenBSD is a bastion of good code and security. They basically look over all the source code constantly. There's basically never been a security fault in openbsd defaults (besides the openssl heartbleed which caused them to fork it to libressl)

NetBSD is absolutely great

why should I use netbsd?

Secure, fast, easy to install

Peer review is nothing. What (fuzzy) testing tools available for OpenBSD?

>Is it true OpenBSD has backdoors?
No
>Is it true BSD license is sponsored by companies to suck dry developers of their work?
No
>Is it true BSD has shit hardware support?
It is lacking
>Is it true BSD community advice on buying a whole different machine because has shit hardware support?
I wouldn't advise buying a whole new computer, just replace incompatible parts. I don't see how it's any different from buying a POWER machine to run AIX. You need hardware the OS supports if you want to run it.

>I don't see how it's any different from buying a POWER machine to run AIX
The AIX isn't supposed to be multiplatform. Though BSD don't give a shit about their users, so it doesn't matter.

It's more that manufacturers don't give a shit about BSD. The only one I know of that has first party BSD support is Nvidia with FreeBSD. Everything else is dependent on the community writing drivers, which they can't do with undocumented hardware.

Intel support is better than housefires' blobs.

multiplatform != supports a lot of hardware on one platform

It's great. I moved there from slackware aeons. Many of the benefits of slackware with single distribution too keep everything nice and cozy. I was instantly right at home.

FreeBSD freebsd101 11.0-RELEASE-p9 FreeBSD 11.0-RELEASE-p9 #0: Tue Apr 11 08:48:40 UTC 2017 [email protected]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64

I never said otherwise

The example was bad as your reading comprehension.
You should notice intel shekels in freebsd foundation. They also do drivers and testing.

>The example was bad as your reading comprehension.
That wasn't me, fuckwit. And it was a perfect example. If you want to run an OS, you're going to need to buy hardware it supports. This is true for every OS in existence.
>tfw Open Firmware could've solved this issue but Intel had to fuck us with UEFI

It's supposed to be OSS isn't it? Then someone who didn't have driver ported it or reverse engineered rather shitposting here as a butthurt fag like you. Whining is always easier, but nobody cares for real. I would be more concerned about clang faggotry, but openbsd haven't gone full retard to ditch gcc on other platforms, but x86 and x86_64. Maybe they could use it for 64 bit arm too as this is the hot cake and got tier 1 support. Hopefully they patched clang too as they did with gcc.

Now get to werk.

I starting playing around with it again for a project I've been meaning todo
haven't really started playing with it yet. surprised that it booted because I
am using a IDE -> SD card adapter that refuses to boot from grub but the BSD
loader seemed not to care at all.

>cuck license
lads...

afl is there, dunno any other exists

Ditching GCC is a good thing though.
>using a username you have to censor
>bash
Please learn how to use a computer. Never, ever use a username you have to censor.
Try tcsh or ksh93.
>am using a IDE -> SD card adapter that refuses to boot from grub but the BSD
loader seemed not to care at all.
Interesting!
Also, what project are you intending to do?

Played with it around 2010 and I didn't enjoy it.
Maybe should I try now?

good
>zfs in kernel instead of having to be distributed as a separate module
>separate bae system and /usr/local
>everything feels well-designed and simple
>jails
>pf port
>the ports system seems simpler than portage
>dtrace might be nice

bad
>some zfs features are missing I think
>pf port might be outdated
>the linux compatibility layer is somewhat oudated right now
>drm gpu drivers need a separate kernel module found in ports, only available for 12.0-current
>csh can't do single-line loops, if statements, ..
>no aslr

overall it's pretty good
I'd recommend you try hardenedbsd instead if you care about security, though

>pf port might be outdated
Not in OpenBSD, though.

>Maybe should I try now?
Yes.

which BSD material is recommended for general purpose? I tried at the time freeBSD, is it ok go with it now?

OpenBSD is bretty good so far on my Thinkpad T510. It had a lot development tools that I need and relatively secure. Also, it has mednafen and mupen64plus, meaning I can play my vidya along with listening to music and watching videos with mpv.

bsd is bad. cuck license and the people who shill it everywhere give me bad vibes. i don't trust what they say or promote. if somebody is using bsd then i instantly trust them less than a macfag or winfag. i can't quite put my finger on it but something is wrong with bsd users so don't ever use that shit

this is most likely all true

linux(the kernel) success is because you can use it anywhere
bsd fails at that
and yeah im not a kernel developer i cant patch or make it by myself

no driver. shitty performance for general purpose

some are because new versions had issues porting. Qutebrowser is frozen on 0.11.0, boost library has some old version as well, there are tons of these because it's alsmost never tier1 platform.

>Never, ever use a username you have to censor
I was going to write a bunch of shit on how I disagree but its not worth it. I post here frequently and I use the same username for all my machines.

I want to see if I can make a usable (in todays environment) OS using only the P3 and 512mb of ram in the picture.
ie. something I could still use everyday for light web browsing (I am not expecting a lot here) and maybe basic stuff.
Its a pretty trivial/lame project but I've always liked the idea of using old hardware and "modernizing" it.

Utter fucking garbage with shills that won't go away.

I used it many years ago on a laptop, where I found it much nicer than Linux since it was very RAM-constrained, and it seemed to have much better swapping performance. I also enjoyed the integration of the base system and many other aspects, so I'd like to return to it one day.
What makes me stay off it for now is primarily that it doesn't support my current laptop's wifi card, and I don't want to convert my highly configured Debian desktop system to anything else whatsoever.
I'm also not too fond of sysctl; it seems that Linux's /proc and /sys filesystems are much more Unix-like, but that's admittedly not a big deal.

Blackscreen the moment I selected my usb drive to install, and I never tried again

you write like a pajeet

>There's basically never been a security fault in openbsd defaults
"Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long time!"
kys faggot.

FreeBSD is sponsored by CISCO in the same way it's sponsored by multiple other companies, either through money because they are making $bigsum thanks to it, or with code (mostly regarding the network stack in their case, Juniper's, and Netflix).
Bhyve AFAIK was also something donated to BSD by NetApp.
Companies like Qlogic and Emulex invest a lot of effort in creating drivers for their storage adapters which can be used in FreeBSD.

...

One was presence of OpenSSL. What was the second one?

OpenSSL didn't lead to remote root, that was a data leak. The two remote holes were OpenSSH and a buffer overflow in the IPv6 stack, both leading to root.