Why and when should I go with a BSD over something like Debian?

Why and when should I go with a BSD over something like Debian?

Other urls found in this thread:

freebsd.org/support.html
openbsd.org/support.html
trueos.org/handbook/helpsupport.html
discourse.trueos.org/c/help-support
dragonflybsd.org/commercial/
over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/01
blog.tintagel.pl/2015/01/03/code-rot-openbsd.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

they both suck desu

Just buy a used Mac. OSX is superior.

When your name is Sven, you're living in a cuck shed, your wife's getting banged my Jamal and you're wife's son is undergoing HRT

Hi Sven

When Linux gets compromised.

...

When you want to run a machine as stable as humanly possible with maximum uptime.
The advantage of BSD is that its software comes packaged with BSD, it is rewritten from source to be optimized for BSD, and software updates for most of the packaged software come down to you with the OS updates.
Like how Terminal, iTunes, safari, etc update with macos system updates, so do the packages on BSD.
On Linux they come as they are released, the kernel is modular as opposed to integrated.
BSD has a terrible user experience compared to every OS there is, it is painful to try to implement GUI and more painful to try to make it not look like AIDS, however, from a system administration point of view, it has advantages over GNU.

It’s honestly a debatable topic however, and you should research it more if you’re truly curious, but if you’re ever thinking of trying to *do* stuff with BSD, just don’t. If you want BSD to do stuff *for* you though, and I mean automating or managing network/database things that need to be extremely stable and stand up for as long as possible, then it’s worth considering.

If you want a stable and reliable server Operating System, both are good but BSD is better since it updates less often, barring security updates and is easy to manage along with having a generally lower energy footprint. In addition, things like NetBSD have the advantage of running on almost any architecture, including MIPS (like the PS2), ARM, ancient IBMs and Dreamcasts. So if you have an old computer that you aren't using, you could turn it into a headless BSD server of some sort.

If you want a desktop OS, only FreeBSD and Debian are there, but Debian is better since it has more packages and has the "testing" and "sid" suites if you want to get as close to upstream as possible, so Debian is a better choice in this case. In addition, Debian has better drivers for more modern machines in terms of keyboards, monitors and the like with it's usage of the .deb format meaning you can add Ubuntu repositories if you need anything or download it online and run dpkg. It also is easier to fix any possible problems that may arise due to the larger community and if you don't like systemd, there's Deuvan, which is Debian with sysvinit.

All in all, the choice is up to you, but the use-cases of each OS is dependent really by what you expect from them.

>mature zfs
>ports collection
>jails
>speedy networking stack
>dtrace
>kqueue
great for engineering stable high-performance systems, less great for it just werks desktop use cases

Its not debatable at all, BSD isn't more stable than LTS Linux versions.

>the system is modular as opposed to integrated
Me again.
To be more specific on this, BSD packages are literally bundled with the OS, their repositories are hosted with the BSD OS, and you can install the “original” packages alongside the BSD versions (not replacing, but running parallel). On Linux, you may have the packages included in your installation disk/iso/img, but the packages are direct from the software provider and their updates stream from the software provider, not from the OS provider.

This has advantages and disadvantages.

BSD uses the same software Linux does, take your canned dipshit cathedral philosophy and shove it up your ass.

Lmao I seriously doubt that. No LTS is responsible for what comes down in the latest update to your favourite administrative terminal apps, and the software providers are perfectly capable of fucking up shit with no interference from the provider of your LTS distro.
Not possible on BSD unless you explicitly run the software providers version alongside the BSD provided version

>what is package management

Congrats on not knowing what you’re talking about. Linux use pre packaged binaries, modular, built for one size fits all, BSD build everything from source, specific to the machine that’s running it.
And base system packages are rewritten by the BSD teams.
Try again weeb faggot

BSD uses ports, and installs from source, they don’t use the same kind of package management as Linux. Stop embarrassing yourselves.

GNU/Linux is more :
-do release
-"oh there are bugs let's report them !"
-fix the bugs

BSD are more like :
- we can't release for now there are bugs
- wait til all bugs are fixed
- it's 2042 there are still bugs, fuk it let realese it anyway
- "hey there are bugs !
- ohno.jpg

Not only is that entirely irrelevant, its also wrong. Its a feedback loop with the same baseless claims and philosophies that I just pointed out were idiotic.

BSD is for people who have better things to do than post on Sup Forums. I don't use it.

Thanks retard, for another useless post

u retards , you tell that BSD are think as a all thing and pretends linux distro isn't.
Do you think that linux distro are just a fixed kernel realese that we just throw random package on it ?
No, distro like Debian will try to consolidate a release before calling it stable, and will be realese once it's stable, if a package like firefox is buged, it won't be release till it's fixed.
So there is no difference between BSD and Debian on this

I'll switch to BSD when linus dies

There is a huge difference.
BSD has no support and Linux does.

Too dumb, didn’t read. Gnutards get so fucking butt hurt at the implication that there may be any practical application where a non-Linux system might have an advantage over a Linux one that its fucking embarrassing. You retards are worse fanboys than Apple faggots

People that prefer GNU don't get butthurt about you claiming BSD has practical applications, we already know its only practical use, which is making proprietary binaries for commercial use.

>hey Netflix use BSD
>that must be it's better than loonix am I right

BSD are use because of the default filesystem wich is better for network stuff
AND THAT'S ALL

freebsd.org/support.html
openbsd.org/support.html
trueos.org/handbook/helpsupport.html
discourse.trueos.org/c/help-support
dragonflybsd.org/commercial/

I really hope no one on this site takes advice from you, ever.

I spent 5 posts trying to say this, but the retards still can't stop flailing and screaming as their brains explode over this and they give in to the urge to purposely misinterpret everything I've said.
Sigh.

>hey lets make desktop BSD, it will be worse than linux because of no diver but at least it will be BSD
>true UNIX experience am i right ?

Too bad you're too fucking retarded to read the above post where I already said that BSD is a shit user experience and it's got the worst GUI implementation of all OS.

Well, it's been fun, dipshits, but I'm done with this spergfest of a thread.

i don't fucking care about you, i just saw a post sharing trueos stuff

That was by me, it is a support page, to show that your faggot weeb friend is literally just spewing random exaggerated bullshit. "Has no support" means no support. It's a false statement.

I think by support he means hardware supports, driver stuffs

When you care about having a stable, well designed system. Read these:
over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/01

blog.tintagel.pl/2015/01/03/code-rot-openbsd.html

"Linux has by far superior driver support" means Linux has driver stuff.
"Has no support" means, quite literally, there is no support if shit goes wrong and possibly even no documentation.
If some faggot weeb wants me to take him seriously, he can take the extra 2 seconds to say what he means.

and every niche project have a .html called support page or a forum, it doesn't mean it has support

Empirically autistic response, its quite obvious to 99% of people, by inference, what I actually meant when I said no support.

You aren't any different from some special needs kid that screams liar at a teacher for replying on a phone that she was sitting around while she was actually standing.

Its fucking sad but at the same time I'm glad you are that incapable because it lets me squashpost.

ya know, its worse to mistake "your" with "you're" than to not put all the "'"s everywhere and incorrectly capitalize letters, so just give it up you brainlet

dragonflybsd.org/commercial/
>While specialising in security, BackWatcher handles installation and configuration, systems integration, performance tuning, disaster recovery, network architecture, programming and general system administration of DragonFly BSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Linux and many commercial UNIX flavors.
??

BSD is Big Swinging Dick OS

Holy fuck you're retarded. This literally some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard, and I've heard some pretty dumb ass shit before. Congratulations, kys.

Thank God, I was starting to think I was the only one who saw it.

yep this project has support for commercial stuff
If I want to do BSD stuff for my company I'll call them.
But I will keep my Debian on my laptop

stop tripfagging you tripfag
also
are right

Yes, that is what I would also suggest, and never implied otherwise in any of my above posts. In fact, I recall quite explicitly stating it was a terrible OS for personal use.

yeah sure, that's why you're all here babbling like a bunch of butthurt idiots defending yourself from literally nothing.

>
>making proprietary binaries for commercial use
what the fuck are you talking about? you really should just shut up

Not just terrible, but *the worst* OS for personal use and GUI implementation.

yes but OP post is just another "my OS is better than your" thread so don't get upset if they are shitposting

here is a dog that play guitar

They are wrong.
I can pick a free open source software at random from an extremely large pool, compile it on both Linux and BSD, and more often than naught it will function improperly on BSD.

While I'm not willing to back up this statement with any evidence, I will say that you are just echoing opinions and your perception of the stability of BSD is skewed heavily by nonsense.

I think by stability they talk about the base system, wich is wide on BSD concept, but didn't include your random software of course

I see your dog playing guitar, and raise you one cuck getting his lineage stolen by a sperm donor, because I'm fresh out of hot memes.

he's baiting you. The point of BSD is not to install random packages and he knows that.

thats exactly the same with winshit vs linux! "linucks haz no gaymes" etc
if w.e. software youre using doesnt "just work" its because the author didnt give enough shits to support it
its the software that have to support the OS, not the other way around!
e.g. the GLibC many C extensions available on GNU that arent on BSD, because they rely on platform specific things (linux)

>thinks compiling successfully = stability
look here retard, most software is buggy as shit, and the thing BSDs have on Linux, is requiring that programs running on top of them are actually programmed correctly, and won't cause a bunch of stupid bugs or break shit. That's why a lot of programs ""'don't compile"""', it's because they're either actually broken, or because they depend heavily on bloated gnu shit or poorly designed Linux api cruft. What you're doing is like complaining that you can't just walk into a fancy neighborhood and start crapping in the streets like it's your poo-in-the-loo home village.

>If you want a desktop OS
What does everyone mean by this. I keep hearing people say that BSD can't be used as a desktop OS. What does this mean? What vital software is missing? Am I unable to visit google maps, youtube, email, a text editor, watch anime DVDs? What is missing?

"sperm donor" lmao

drivers

Go BSD if you need even more obscure OS with even less program compatibility than most obscure linux distros.

>drivers
Surely one can find the drivers, yes? Or pick the correct hardware ahead of time for a BSD build, yes? Or maybe its no?

>why
netmap

>when
when you need to send 10 million packets per second per cpu

Anime is for pedophiles.

>cuck license
but I do actually like running freebsd in a situation like a VPS on digital ocean etc. where it's easiest to just pick one of their OS images. Freebsd is way better than running some bloated systemd cancer like ubuntu. It's secure and BSD is known to just run forever without any problems. Definitely less buggy in production than linux can be.

There is literally nothing wrong with being a pedophile.