3 ms·

I've heard this 'base' package argument before, but still don't understand it. What true benefit does having the kernel maintainer also maintain ls and userland

I've heard this 'base' package argument before, but still don't understand it. What true benefit does having the kernel maintainer also maintain ls and userland utilities? The ports system is just an install time package optimization. For most users I don't see it having a benefit over pre-compiled binaries supplied by the distro. Sure it's nice to tune your system to it's optimal and build against current libs instead of updating, but I don't see how it's "that much greater" than .debs or .rpms which is the attitude that I see BSDers take. I've used Gentoo, a little FreeBSD and never felt like it was that much different than .debs. I like that BSD is out there doing it's thing. I've even used it from time to time, but I always come back to Linux. Linux just feels more open to ideas, more open to anyone playing around and crazy having ideas that end up working even though we laughed at them when we first heard. Whereas BSD seems more like a walled garden with the inner circle of kernel committees and secret rites. Linux always felt like it was moving forward, taking the pragmatic approach, and BSD was being dragged into future implementing things when they had to. Just my opinion.

bobbyi 16y ago
Just because they integrate everything into one source tree doesn't mean they have kernel developers maintaining the userland utilities.
Bjoern 16y ago
> I've used Gentoo, a little FreeBSD and never felt like it was that much different than .debs. There is quite a difference in speed of the standard stuff compared to customized optimization, e.g. via USE flags. I found that actually bootup as well as system speed is faster. (tested that on Asus eeepc)
martinp 16y ago
One of the things I like best about FreeBSD is the ports collection, since it allows me to keep software updated and current as opposed to pre-compiled packages (only Arch Linux comes close) in the Linux world. At the same time, the base system (kernel+world) stays stable. This is also why I would choose FreeBSD over source-based Linux distros, since the latter updates everything to bleeding edge, even the kernel. Also, sometimes I get the feeling that the FreeBSD world is less about politics and more about getting stuff to work. This makes porting software easier (ZFS for example).
dmm 16y ago
I've run OpenBSD for a few years. Before that I ran Debian for many years. I prefer OpenBSD for most purposes. OpenBSD's base system is really nice. It truly is a complete system. It has everything I need: text editors, build toolchain, version control, openssh, tmux, etc. And all of this is built together and configured with sane defaults. By default sudo insults you if you type your password wrong. If you have a key in your .ssh dir and you launch xdm it automatically runs ssh-agent and ssh-addkey and so on. Everything in the base system is documented and documented very well. The OpenBSD man pages are incredible. They are so good I use them even if I am currently on a linux system. Nothing is allowed in the CVS tree if it is not documented. OpenBSD has fewer drivers, certainly, but the ones they do have are excellent quality. Check out the driver for a device supported by both sometime. Often the OpenBSD driver will be 3-5x smaller and far clearer to read. This is especially the case with wifi drivers. The userland is simpler too. To setup a wpa connection on OpenBSD I just type: # ifconfig wpi0 nwid my_net wpa wpapsk \ `wpa-psk my_net my_passphrase` On linux you'd have to call ifconfig, iwconfig, and run wpasupplicant after configuring it. I've never been able to get my 3945ABG to work under linux but it works out of the box with OpenBSD, etc. > Linux just feels more open to ideas, more open to anyone playing around and crazy having ideas that I don't know about that. Do you really have enough experience with both communities to make such broad statements? If you want a great example of a walled garden check out GLIBC sometime.

bobbyi 16y ago

Just because they integrate everything into one source tree doesn't mean they have kernel developers maintaining the userland utilities.

Bjoern 16y ago

> I've used Gentoo, a little FreeBSD and never felt like it was that much different than .debs. There is quite a difference in speed of the standard stuff compared to customized optimization, e.g. via USE flags. I found that actually bootup as well as system speed is faster. (tested that on Asus eeepc)

martinp 16y ago

One of the things I like best about FreeBSD is the ports collection, since it allows me to keep software updated and current as opposed to pre-compiled packages (only Arch Linux comes close) in the Linux world. At the same time, the base system (kernel+world) stays stable. This is also why I would choose FreeBSD over source-based Linux distros, since the latter updates everything to bleeding edge, even the kernel. Also, sometimes I get the feeling that the FreeBSD world is less about politics and more about getting stuff to work. This makes porting software easier (ZFS for example).

dmm 16y ago

I've run OpenBSD for a few years. Before that I ran Debian for many years. I prefer OpenBSD for most purposes. OpenBSD's base system is really nice. It truly is a complete system. It has everything I need: text editors, build toolchain, version control, openssh, tmux, etc. And all of this is built together and configured with sane defaults. By default sudo insults you if you type your password wrong. If you have a key in your .ssh dir and you launch xdm it automatically runs ssh-agent and ssh-addkey and so on. Everything in the base system is documented and documented very well. The OpenBSD man pages are incredible. They are so good I use them even if I am currently on a linux system. Nothing is allowed in the CVS tree if it is not documented. OpenBSD has fewer drivers, certainly, but the ones they do have are excellent quality. Check out the driver for a device supported by both sometime. Often the OpenBSD driver will be 3-5x smaller and far clearer to read. This is especially the case with wifi drivers. The userland is simpler too. To setup a wpa connection on OpenBSD I just type: # ifconfig wpi0 nwid my_net wpa wpapsk \ `wpa-psk my_net my_passphrase` On linux you'd have to call ifconfig, iwconfig, and run wpasupplicant after configuring it. I've never been able to get my 3945ABG to work under linux but it works out of the box with OpenBSD, etc. > Linux just feels more open to ideas, more open to anyone playing around and crazy having ideas that I don't know about that. Do you really have enough experience with both communities to make such broad statements? If you want a great example of a walled garden check out GLIBC sometime.