6 ms·

I stopped using Ubuntu after Amazon affiliate marketing showed up on the desktop. I stopped using Arch after I read the source code for SystemD. FreeBSD had qui

by Cieplak 10y ago

I stopped using Ubuntu after Amazon affiliate marketing showed up on the desktop. I stopped using Arch after I read the source code for SystemD. FreeBSD had quite a learning curve, but now it's on my laptops and is my preferred server OS. I love DTrace. I love ZFS. I love pf. I love Jails. I love ports, even though I generally use pkg. I love how easy it is to compile a kernel. The FreeBSD handbook is awesome. All the JetBrains IDEs work well with it. Hardware support is spotty and battery life is terrible. The BSD license means you can incorporate FreeBSD into commercial products without infecting yourself with the GPL.

chrisper 10y ago
Can you provide any good entry points to the BSD world?
- Cieplak 10y ago
  Are you coming from Linux, Windows or OSX?
  - chrisper 10y ago
    I am very good with Linux and Windows. So either of the two are fine.
    - Cieplak 10y ago
      I would perhaps spend some time running it in a VM, and then if you decide you like it and think it's worth the time investment, maybe try installing it on your laptop. I run it on a Thinkpad X1. The handbook is a great resource: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ The book, Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System is quite good if you like technical reading.
- JdeBP 10y ago
  There are several, depending from what one wants. TrueOS, formerly known as PC-BSD, is a good entry point if one wants a desktop-style system. Or one can try vanilla FreeBSD. Or OpenBSD. Have some user guides and Handbooks to read: * NetBSD Guide: https://netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/ https://netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/ * FreeBSD Handbook: https://freebsd.org/doc/handbook/book.html https://freebsd.org/doc/handbook/book.html * DragonFlyBSD Handbook: https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/handbook/ https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/handbook/ * TrueOS User Guide: https://www.trueos.org/handbook/trueos.html https://www.trueos.org/handbook/trueos.html * PC-BSD User Guide: http://web.pcbsd.org/doc-archive/10.1.2/html/pcbsd.html http://web.pcbsd.org/doc-archive/10.1.2/html/pcbsd.html (viewable off-line directly in both PDF and HTML forms in /usr/local/share/pcbsd/doc/)
I_am_tiberius 10y ago
May I ask what's so bad with the SystemD source?
- Cieplak 10y ago
  I wouldn't say that it's bad. I just find it to be quite complex, e.g., why does it need its own web server? I was also troubled by the number of Debian maintainers who left the Debian project over the intense controversy, as well as Linus's comments.
  - viraptor 10y ago
    Systemd doesn't embed a webserver. It provides a service separate from both the logger and the main systemd process, which allows remote logs access. There are many issues I have with pulling various projects into one umbrella organisation, but saying systemd integrates webserver is just incorrect.
    - Cieplak 10y ago
      https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-journal-gatewayd.service.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-jou...
      - viraptor 10y ago
        Precisely what I described. It's a web server that serves journald events/entries. It's separate from journald, and it's separate from systemd as a service. It's completely optional. It's no more embedded in systemd than nginx. It does exist in the same umbrella project as systemd, (and I think that is an issue) but embedded is the wrong term.
        magic_quotes 10y ago
        > embedded is the wrong term Don't use it then. Anyway, since systemd-the-project doesn't have a separate name from systemd-the-init, I don't see any problem with Cieplak's statement.
transposed 10y ago
So you came from Arch, and thought FreeBSD had quite a learning curve? Hmm maybe I should rethink FreeBSD and stick with Mint.
- Cieplak 10y ago
  FreeBSD has been a learning curve for me in terms of learning kernel development and things like kqueue and ZFS. I didn't find it difficult in terms of getting started, since it is a lot like Arch in terms of setting up things like X windows.
- boomboomsubban 10y ago
  Neither are that hard, FreeBSD has the additional challenge of overcoming Linuxisms. Just takes a little reading, and the FreeBSD Handbook is an excellent work.
- StreamBright 10y ago
  FreeBSD is actually a much cleaner operating system than other unix-like clones. I have used it for a decade but my work required me to use linux. Best parts already mentioned in this thread (pf, jails, etc.) I would add one thing to the list: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier(7) https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier(7)
  - JdeBP 10y ago
    Since Cieplak mentioned systemd: * https://freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy.html https://freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy....
dump12332 10y ago
Small review of FreeBSD (I used it for a very short period of time, so I could be off the wall, though). PREFACE I've been using linux since the mid-90s. I know how to use the console, I compiled kernels, played with the old xfree86 config files and all that back in the day. THE GOOD OF FreeBSD: * Stable. It feels like a Unix out of the 80s. If you know what you're doing, it'll get the job done. * man pages - Haven't used them much on Linux recently, felt that they were on the level of command --help, but on FreeBSD they felt like reading an authoritative blog post. Clear and concise. * Cross-update versions - better than Debian. I personally never successfully had a seamless update between major releases, while FreeBSD did. * No systemd (for now) - Unfortunately, systemd is taking over Linux because the largest block of user-space OSS programmers work for RedHat, which pushes for systemd. IIRC, the reason Debian went with systemd is because their maintainers simply have no resources to commit to remove it from gnome, etc. However, as systemd grows in scope, FreeBSD will have to either play with it, re-implement it in a normal way (which will let other Linux systems find a way out), or stop being compatible with gtk, gnome, et al. THE IRRELEVANT: * BSD license - unless you're modifying and then distributing your modification, it doesn't matter. * "Fragmantation" - True, "FreeBSD" is less fragmented than "Linux", but "BSD" is more fragmented than "Linux" and "Debian" (or RedHat or Ubuntu or Arch...) is the same not fragmented as FreeBSD. Look at the Distro as the OS rather than the kernel. And it doesn't matter - If you're distributing OSS, then release it as POSIX and configure; make; make install, and let the distro figure out packaging. If you want to make life easier for the distro or releasing closed source software, Linux (on the server) has an order of magnitude more users than FreeBSD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Public_servers_on_the_Internet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste... ), and if your program works with Debian, Ubuntu and RedHat/CentOS, you'll probably cover the vast majority of users. * Ports - Complicated to update, takes a long time (unless you have a fleet of servers), and can't be automated. And pkg is no better than apt. * ZFS - ZFS is being ported to Linux, and btrfs may one day become stable. Either way, in a few years you'll be able to run the same ZFS on Linux as on FreeBSD. THE GOOD IN LINUX * Update - On Debian, you run apt upgrade && apt update. And it updates everything. And if you're on a stable release, updates are only bug-fixes, so (short of bugs/regressions), it can be automated. FreeBSD, on the other hand, doesn't have enough maintainers to keep a stable ports tree, so every update can break your setup. So every update has to be taken care of manually. * Security - Yes, I know that "experts" like the FreeBSD kernel better and everything, but the FreeBSD kernel has bugs of its own, so practically the key to secure both is keeping them up to date. And most of the time you're using ports, which isn't really run by FreeBSD and subject to their code review. So as Linux has an easier time updating (see above), it would be more secure. * Directory structure - Why would you want a "blessed" vi? Why should a distro manager decide that /usr/bin/vi is (say) vim while neovim /usr/local/bin/nvi. If anything, Linux is a lot more "Unixy" (I do know that FreeBSD is the "traditional" way, but I think that Linux is a lot more Unixy) - Why shouldn't I be able to write my own libc without having to maintain my own kernel? On Linux I can replace glibc with muslc. Why can't I do the same on FreeBSD? If anything, this is what everyone's complaining about systemd: "It's not modular". Well, neither is the FreeBSD base. (Though in truth, FreeBSD seems much more careful about basic software hygiene than systemd). * Default software - Maybe I'm unique, but I kind of like bash. I don't see why it shouldn't be my default shell except "Well, if it didn't exist in the 80s, it won't exist now" (It could also be a licensing issue, but as a user I don't really care about that). Others will scream "ShellShock". Well, yes. Though ShellShock shouldn't be a security issue if you don't rely on userspace software to maintain security. The OS should assume that software will break, and defend against it. So things like pledge or SELinux are much more effective (and sustainable) than treating userspace bugs as security holes. Though in truth, I can't see why Apache should ever run bash honestly.
nextos 10y ago
Why not trying any systemd-less Linux distro? E.g. Guix is a very cool Nix-like distro.
- Cieplak 10y ago
  Alpine Linux is pretty awesome as well. https://forum.alpinelinux.org/forum/general-discussion/alpine-plans-systemd https://forum.alpinelinux.org/forum/general-discussion/alpin...
mst 10y ago
OpenBSD seems to do better on laptops driver-wise. (I run Open and Free, and started with Net, I have no dog in this race)
- bostand 10y ago
  I've always been curious about *bsd on laptops. What laptop are you using and exactly what does/does not work for you?
Lintaris 10y ago
Do you Firefox? Because Firefox has Google as the default search engine which got them to receive hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Without that money,firefox would have been a lousy browser mainly by volunteers. Ubuntu tried to do something with amazon but probably did not earn enough money and was scrapped for more than a year.
- pmlnr 10y ago
  You're mistaken, FF is using Yahoo! right now.
  - funnyfacts365 10y ago
    Not in the EU...

by Cieplak 10y ago

chrisper 10y ago

Can you provide any good entry points to the BSD world?

Cieplak 10y ago
Are you coming from Linux, Windows or OSX?
- chrisper 10y ago
  I am very good with Linux and Windows. So either of the two are fine.
  - Cieplak 10y ago
    I would perhaps spend some time running it in a VM, and then if you decide you like it and think it's worth the time investment, maybe try installing it on your laptop. I run it on a Thinkpad X1. The handbook is a great resource: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ The book, Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System is quite good if you like technical reading.
JdeBP 10y ago
There are several, depending from what one wants. TrueOS, formerly known as PC-BSD, is a good entry point if one wants a desktop-style system. Or one can try vanilla FreeBSD. Or OpenBSD. Have some user guides and Handbooks to read: * NetBSD Guide: https://netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/ https://netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/ * FreeBSD Handbook: https://freebsd.org/doc/handbook/book.html https://freebsd.org/doc/handbook/book.html * DragonFlyBSD Handbook: https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/handbook/ https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/handbook/ * TrueOS User Guide: https://www.trueos.org/handbook/trueos.html https://www.trueos.org/handbook/trueos.html * PC-BSD User Guide: http://web.pcbsd.org/doc-archive/10.1.2/html/pcbsd.html http://web.pcbsd.org/doc-archive/10.1.2/html/pcbsd.html (viewable off-line directly in both PDF and HTML forms in /usr/local/share/pcbsd/doc/)

I_am_tiberius 10y ago

May I ask what's so bad with the SystemD source?

Cieplak 10y ago
I wouldn't say that it's bad. I just find it to be quite complex, e.g., why does it need its own web server? I was also troubled by the number of Debian maintainers who left the Debian project over the intense controversy, as well as Linus's comments.
- viraptor 10y ago
  Systemd doesn't embed a webserver. It provides a service separate from both the logger and the main systemd process, which allows remote logs access. There are many issues I have with pulling various projects into one umbrella organisation, but saying systemd integrates webserver is just incorrect.
  - Cieplak 10y ago
    https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-journal-gatewayd.service.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd-jou...
    - viraptor 10y ago
      Precisely what I described. It's a web server that serves journald events/entries. It's separate from journald, and it's separate from systemd as a service. It's completely optional. It's no more embedded in systemd than nginx. It does exist in the same umbrella project as systemd, (and I think that is an issue) but embedded is the wrong term.
      - magic_quotes 10y ago
        > embedded is the wrong term Don't use it then. Anyway, since systemd-the-project doesn't have a separate name from systemd-the-init, I don't see any problem with Cieplak's statement.

transposed 10y ago

So you came from Arch, and thought FreeBSD had quite a learning curve? Hmm maybe I should rethink FreeBSD and stick with Mint.

Cieplak 10y ago
FreeBSD has been a learning curve for me in terms of learning kernel development and things like kqueue and ZFS. I didn't find it difficult in terms of getting started, since it is a lot like Arch in terms of setting up things like X windows.
boomboomsubban 10y ago
Neither are that hard, FreeBSD has the additional challenge of overcoming Linuxisms. Just takes a little reading, and the FreeBSD Handbook is an excellent work.
StreamBright 10y ago
FreeBSD is actually a much cleaner operating system than other unix-like clones. I have used it for a decade but my work required me to use linux. Best parts already mentioned in this thread (pf, jails, etc.) I would add one thing to the list: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier(7) https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?hier(7)
- JdeBP 10y ago
  Since Cieplak mentioned systemd: * https://freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy.html https://freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy....

dump12332 10y ago

Small review of FreeBSD (I used it for a very short period of time, so I could be off the wall, though). PREFACE I've been using linux since the mid-90s. I know how to use the console, I compiled kernels, played with the old xfree86 config files and all that back in the day. THE GOOD OF FreeBSD: * Stable. It feels like a Unix out of the 80s. If you know what you're doing, it'll get the job done. * man pages - Haven't used them much on Linux recently, felt that they were on the level of command --help, but on FreeBSD they felt like reading an authoritative blog post. Clear and concise. * Cross-update versions - better than Debian. I personally never successfully had a seamless update between major releases, while FreeBSD did. * No systemd (for now) - Unfortunately, systemd is taking over Linux because the largest block of user-space OSS programmers work for RedHat, which pushes for systemd. IIRC, the reason Debian went with systemd is because their maintainers simply have no resources to commit to remove it from gnome, etc. However, as systemd grows in scope, FreeBSD will have to either play with it, re-implement it in a normal way (which will let other Linux systems find a way out), or stop being compatible with gtk, gnome, et al. THE IRRELEVANT: * BSD license - unless you're modifying and then distributing your modification, it doesn't matter. * "Fragmantation" - True, "FreeBSD" is less fragmented than "Linux", but "BSD" is more fragmented than "Linux" and "Debian" (or RedHat or Ubuntu or Arch...) is the same not fragmented as FreeBSD. Look at the Distro as the OS rather than the kernel. And it doesn't matter - If you're distributing OSS, then release it as POSIX and configure; make; make install, and let the distro figure out packaging. If you want to make life easier for the distro or releasing closed source software, Linux (on the server) has an order of magnitude more users than FreeBSD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Public_servers_on_the_Internet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste... ), and if your program works with Debian, Ubuntu and RedHat/CentOS, you'll probably cover the vast majority of users. * Ports - Complicated to update, takes a long time (unless you have a fleet of servers), and can't be automated. And pkg is no better than apt. * ZFS - ZFS is being ported to Linux, and btrfs may one day become stable. Either way, in a few years you'll be able to run the same ZFS on Linux as on FreeBSD. THE GOOD IN LINUX * Update - On Debian, you run apt upgrade && apt update. And it updates everything. And if you're on a stable release, updates are only bug-fixes, so (short of bugs/regressions), it can be automated. FreeBSD, on the other hand, doesn't have enough maintainers to keep a stable ports tree, so every update can break your setup. So every update has to be taken care of manually. * Security - Yes, I know that "experts" like the FreeBSD kernel better and everything, but the FreeBSD kernel has bugs of its own, so practically the key to secure both is keeping them up to date. And most of the time you're using ports, which isn't really run by FreeBSD and subject to their code review. So as Linux has an easier time updating (see above), it would be more secure. * Directory structure - Why would you want a "blessed" vi? Why should a distro manager decide that /usr/bin/vi is (say) vim while neovim /usr/local/bin/nvi. If anything, Linux is a lot more "Unixy" (I do know that FreeBSD is the "traditional" way, but I think that Linux is a lot more Unixy) - Why shouldn't I be able to write my own libc without having to maintain my own kernel? On Linux I can replace glibc with muslc. Why can't I do the same on FreeBSD? If anything, this is what everyone's complaining about systemd: "It's not modular". Well, neither is the FreeBSD base. (Though in truth, FreeBSD seems much more careful about basic software hygiene than systemd). * Default software - Maybe I'm unique, but I kind of like bash. I don't see why it shouldn't be my default shell except "Well, if it didn't exist in the 80s, it won't exist now" (It could also be a licensing issue, but as a user I don't really care about that). Others will scream "ShellShock". Well, yes. Though ShellShock shouldn't be a security issue if you don't rely on userspace software to maintain security. The OS should assume that software will break, and defend against it. So things like pledge or SELinux are much more effective (and sustainable) than treating userspace bugs as security holes. Though in truth, I can't see why Apache should ever run bash honestly.

nextos 10y ago

Why not trying any systemd-less Linux distro? E.g. Guix is a very cool Nix-like distro.

Cieplak 10y ago
Alpine Linux is pretty awesome as well. https://forum.alpinelinux.org/forum/general-discussion/alpine-plans-systemd https://forum.alpinelinux.org/forum/general-discussion/alpin...

mst 10y ago

OpenBSD seems to do better on laptops driver-wise. (I run Open and Free, and started with Net, I have no dog in this race)

bostand 10y ago
I've always been curious about *bsd on laptops. What laptop are you using and exactly what does/does not work for you?

Lintaris 10y ago

Do you Firefox? Because Firefox has Google as the default search engine which got them to receive hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Without that money,firefox would have been a lousy browser mainly by volunteers. Ubuntu tried to do something with amazon but probably did not earn enough money and was scrapped for more than a year.

pmlnr 10y ago
You're mistaken, FF is using Yahoo! right now.
- funnyfacts365 10y ago
  Not in the EU...