5 ms·

Using FreeBSD -CURRENT on my ThinkPad X240. Mostly works great. Can't resume from suspend on that particular laptop, but I can live without the sleep thing. Fo

Using FreeBSD -CURRENT on my ThinkPad X240. Mostly works great. Can't resume from suspend on that particular laptop, but I can live without the sleep thing. For development, it's excellent! (Favorite things: non-GPL not-breaking-compatibility-every-day libc that doesn't cause any problems ever. Simple init system. Simple configuration files, moving towards using libucl everywhere. And libxo for output. Good documentation. Jails. ZFS. DTrace. Capsicum.) I do get annoyed at people who use linuxisms like "/bin/bash" in their code though >_<

X86BSD 10y ago
We have been dealing with that since Linux was created. And we are still dealing with it today.
voltagex_ 10y ago
Is /usr/bin/env bash good enough? Or should I assume that only a "sh" is available? (I found tcsh tricky when I first started using FreeBSD, and I think a few of my accounts have the default shell set to bash)
- toast0 10y ago
  if you actually need bash, /usr/bin/env bash works; but often something could actually be a sh script with a bit of care. Some Linux distributions have been changing /bin/sh to something other than bash, which helps. if bash is installed; if not, at least it's a fairly clear indication that you should install bash
- VLM 10y ago
  Most times yes. In practice I suspect most deployed servers have something like ln -sf /usr/local/bin/bash /bin/bash Infinitely more entertaining is running unzip at the command prompt results in /usr/bin/unzip which is extremely limited compared to (installed via pkg) infozip at /usr/local/bin/unzip. At least one specific example I ran into was Play/Activate Scala framework can be convinced via "dist" target to make a zip file of all the jars necessary to run a project, and you guessed it, /usr/bin/unzip doesn't understand that zipfile format and /usr/local/bin/unzip works perfectly. So you can't have a script that automatically runs unzip because you need to run /usr/local/bin/unzip specifically. Lack of a Debian-like alternatives system is really the only systemic problem I run into on a regular basis. Then again it creates an inconsistency across multiple servers and I would not enjoy playing "update-alternatives whack a mole" to figure out which of my frontends have infozip provide unzip, and which fail.
  - e12e 10y ago
    > Lack of a Debian-like alternatives system is really the only systemic problem I run into on a regular basis. We'll, there's always Debian/kFreeBSD for that...
    - VLM 10y ago
      Its likely easier to implement a debian-like alternatives system (by hand or by ansible with symlinks if necessary) than to turn a Debian/SystemD non-unix into something unix-like such as Freebsd. Or Freebsd is much closer to what I want, than Debian, so logically it would be easier to change a little bit of Freebsd than a whole lot of Debian.
      - e12e 10y ago
        Of course, Debian/kFreeBSD is an ambitious project - and probably not what you want if you would rather run FreeBSD -- but Debian/kFreeBSD already exists (I'm not sure of the status of Stretch and/or support for the FreeBSD 11 kernel etc): https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/ https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/

X86BSD 10y ago

We have been dealing with that since Linux was created. And we are still dealing with it today.

voltagex_ 10y ago

Is /usr/bin/env bash good enough? Or should I assume that only a "sh" is available? (I found tcsh tricky when I first started using FreeBSD, and I think a few of my accounts have the default shell set to bash)

toast0 10y ago
if you actually need bash, /usr/bin/env bash works; but often something could actually be a sh script with a bit of care. Some Linux distributions have been changing /bin/sh to something other than bash, which helps. if bash is installed; if not, at least it's a fairly clear indication that you should install bash
VLM 10y ago
Most times yes. In practice I suspect most deployed servers have something like ln -sf /usr/local/bin/bash /bin/bash Infinitely more entertaining is running unzip at the command prompt results in /usr/bin/unzip which is extremely limited compared to (installed via pkg) infozip at /usr/local/bin/unzip. At least one specific example I ran into was Play/Activate Scala framework can be convinced via "dist" target to make a zip file of all the jars necessary to run a project, and you guessed it, /usr/bin/unzip doesn't understand that zipfile format and /usr/local/bin/unzip works perfectly. So you can't have a script that automatically runs unzip because you need to run /usr/local/bin/unzip specifically. Lack of a Debian-like alternatives system is really the only systemic problem I run into on a regular basis. Then again it creates an inconsistency across multiple servers and I would not enjoy playing "update-alternatives whack a mole" to figure out which of my frontends have infozip provide unzip, and which fail.
- e12e 10y ago
  > Lack of a Debian-like alternatives system is really the only systemic problem I run into on a regular basis. We'll, there's always Debian/kFreeBSD for that...
  - VLM 10y ago
    Its likely easier to implement a debian-like alternatives system (by hand or by ansible with symlinks if necessary) than to turn a Debian/SystemD non-unix into something unix-like such as Freebsd. Or Freebsd is much closer to what I want, than Debian, so logically it would be easier to change a little bit of Freebsd than a whole lot of Debian.
    - e12e 10y ago
      Of course, Debian/kFreeBSD is an ambitious project - and probably not what you want if you would rather run FreeBSD -- but Debian/kFreeBSD already exists (I'm not sure of the status of Stretch and/or support for the FreeBSD 11 kernel etc): https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/ https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/