NetBSD: The BSD nobody talks about

Say something nice about it.
Say something bad about it.
Say something comparing it to the other BSDs.

Other urls found in this thread:

csoonline.com/article/3250653/open-source-tools/is-the-bsd-os-dying-some-security-researchers-think-so.html
netbsd.org/ports/history.html
netbsd.org/ports/
netbsd.org/people/CSRG-contrib.html
wiki.netbsd.org/users/ryoon/netbsd_vs_isas/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>The BSD nobody talks about
Wouldn't that be dragonfly or mir?

It runs on a toaster and code is clean af, pretty comfy.

I honestly hear anons bring up dragonfly more than Net. Mir also gets some attention for its shell, although it's used on other systems.

>code is clean af
how much compared to OpenBSD?

I'm upset fail0verflow ported Linux to the Switch, rather than NetBSD.

Wouldn't NetBSD get a mention for ash/dash then?

wait NetBSD made ash?
also,
>dash
>DEBIAN Almquist Shell

I've heard it's the system the ISS uses.
I haven't tried It since already GNO/Lunatic has no drivers, I wonder this

same as an autism distro like arch/void, os with no purpose

I like the focus on portability

It's used by millions daily and they don't even know it.

Never once have I heard of mir so that's definitely a bsd no one talks about.

It's pretty much on life support at this point

csoonline.com/article/3250653/open-source-tools/is-the-bsd-os-dying-some-security-researchers-think-so.html

>The NetBSD response to van Sprundel's bug reports was both strikingly good and bad. On the one hand, he says, "They fixed virtually all bugs submitted, pretty much overnight!". On the other hand, those patches have yet to be shipped to users six months later. "Unless you run your own builds from recently checked-out code, your NetBSD machine is still vulnerable."

>something nice about it
It's pretty much the only third-party operating system that runs on my weirdo MIPS microserver.
pkgsrc is a godsend.
>something bad about it
The last fully working binary is 5.2.2 unless you want to waste hours trying to kludge 7.x together from outdated documentation and broken makefiles.

i really like using the NetBSD Disk Image Tool to install make linux live USBs on windows.

pkgin's the best package manager I've ever used, only had limited experience with it on NetBSD though, I use it on OS X regularly.

Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying.

kek

Daily reminder Linux supports way more platform than "super-portable" NetBSD.
Daily reminder the last time a new platform support was added was in 2011: netbsd.org/ports/history.html .
Daily reminder NetBSD doesn't even support aarch64 and RISC-V.

In other words, it's the Stale Meme: the OS, it has been on life support for the last 15 years and should have been put out of misery long ago.

>Nice
Extremely clean system in terms of its HW handling and building.
Seriously it's the best I've seen.
>Bad
It doesn't have enough maintainers, so a lot it is in various states of decay.
>Comparing
Can't be beat when it's running on obscure hardware. Every other BSD has issues. It just works. (tm)
Plus pkgsrc > *

>Daily reminder Linux supports way more platform than "super-portable" NetBSD.
This means absolutely nothing.
>Daily reminder the last time a new platform support was added was in 2011: netbsd.org/ports/history.html .
Maybe officially. I have SBCs released well after 2011 that NetBSD's been ported to.
>Daily reminder NetBSD doesn't even support aarch64 and RISC-V.
Maybe officially. Also, source?

Even linux just started the risc-v support with 4.15.
>This means absolutely nothing.
That's summed up your post.

>That's summed up your post.
Not an argument.

>On the other hand, those patches have yet to be shipped to users six months later.
Basically the same as the obsd's approach to "security" patches.

An OS with zero industrial support (you know trust and liability doesn't grow on the trees) flagging something as unofficial, should be a black flag for everyone.

>This means absolutely nothing.
That means a lot when you try to compensate for the horrible lack of features by claiming better portability and it turns out it's shit as well. There's no reason to use NetBSD over Linux, unless you're running VAX.
> I have SBCs released well after 2011 that NetBSD's been ported to.
So what, you can run it on a modern x86 PC a well, that doesn't mean new platform support.
>Maybe officially.
What does that even mean? It either supports a platform or not, and you can see on the download page it doesn't.
>Also, source?
netbsd.org/ports/ , it's not even Tier III.

Is this some kind of deeper statement about personal computers where the user instead of the vendor is fundamentally in control?

>zero industrial support
netbsd.org/people/CSRG-contrib.html

>That means a lot when you try to compensate for the horrible lack of features by claiming better portability and it turns out it's shit as well.
Explain how it's shit.
>So what, you can run it on a modern x86 PC
No, a modern MIPS SBC.
>What does that even mean?
That while NetBSD doesn't officially support the platform it has been ported to said platform.
>netbsd.org/ports/
That's rather surprising

The support is something you buy, and if it doesn't work they will solve it or pay penalty based on the contract.

It's possible to build a functional 200KB kernel, without really trying, by just disabling shit you don't need/use.
Runs well on exotic hardware, like Amiga with MMU-enabled accel boards.
Very friendly developer community.
Clean AF code that doesn't change much in structure, so it's often used as a base for research projects or commercial products (Dell does NAS devices with it).

> netbsd.org/people/CSRG-contrib.html
> The Computer Systems Research Group 1979 — 1993
> - 1993
... what are you even trying to say?
>Explain how it's shit.
It supports fewer platforms than Linux, and a large part of the catalog is some outdated shit from the 80s and 90s with no use. Basically, this is why no one uses NetBSD for anything, IoT meme is 100% Linux.
>That while NetBSD doesn't officially support the platform it has been ported to said platform.
What's the point if there's no official support? Where's the code? How do you use it? How good is it tested? Again, it's either supported or not.

>no one uses NetBSD for anything
Everyone who uses Apple's Time Machines use NetBSD, not to mention other projects that also use it.

Comfy as fuck on my high end Amiga.

I envy you

> Say something nice about it.
Definitely best UNIX-like for retrocomputing purposes.
> Say something bad about it.
Testing is pretty much terrible on anything else than mainstream. Although recent GSoC project has improved the situation a bit.
> Say something comparing it to the other BSDs.
Other BSDs don't support my VAXen, Amigas, etc.

>Say something nice about it.
runs on a literal toaster
>Say something bad about it.
Doesn't save your network mirror from installation. Who the FUCK thought this is a good idea? Nope nigger, export your fucking variables.
>Say something comparing it to the other BSDs.
It really runs on everything, other BSDs don't.

Stop repeating stale memes from the late 90s.
>It really runs on everything, other BSDs don't.
It doesn' (officially) run on aarch64 and RISC-V, while even FreeBSD does.

>a far larger OS has more support
Whoa

more like "it really cross-compiles to everything, and goes to the boot prompt in an emulator"

at least with openbsd they constantly run full bulk builds on all the platforms, so you know the kernel is stable enough to actually be useful for something rather than freezing after five minutes of uptime

ash was made for the original BSD, not NetBSD, but dash specifically is forked from NetBSD's ash

Disgusting piece of shit os that mocked a superior nation with the war flag of a brainlet country

>2018
>not using the perfect example of CISC architecture with NETBSD

wiki.netbsd.org/users/ryoon/netbsd_vs_isas/

People are working on Nios II, LM32, and AVR32

Daily reminder IPv6 was developed exclusively on NetBSD.

It's the best BSD imho.

I'd really rather use linux or even openbsd.