5 ms·

Could you please list a few examples of these 3rd party FreeBSD applications that you have in mind? Thanks!

by sigjuice 9y ago

PeCaN 9y ago
Have 27,569 examples: https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html
CyberDildonics 9y ago
Do you realize that you can compile open source programs for FreeBSD and FreeBSD can run linux binaries?
- sigjuice 9y ago
  Yes I know open source programs compile and run on FreeBSD and other Unix-like systems. And also that FreeBSD can run at least some Linux binaries. I mistakenly assumed that OP was referring to 3rd party applications that were exclusive to FreeBSD.
  - ianai 9y ago
    It's a FOSS project. Typically, FOSS operating systems differentiate on system features/applications and not on 3rd party applications. Things like package management, file system support, etc.
    - Koshkin 9y ago
      Sure, but that's not what makes a computer useful in the first place.
paultownsend 9y ago
The FreeBSD Ports Collection[1] is the main means of installing 3rd party software on FreeBSD. Precompiled packages are available, too. You can view a list of available ports on FreshPorts[2]. Of course you can always just compile and build your own software if you choose. [1] https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html [2] http://www.freshports.org/categories.php http://www.freshports.org/categories.php
- ianai 9y ago
  In my experience, the design of FreeBSD makes compiling projects much more easy. The standardized system really helps at many tasks.
  - Koshkin 9y ago
    But few projects are designed to only support FreeBSD. In the UNIX world, Autoconf still reigns supreme.
    - rleigh 9y ago
      Autoconf is completely orthogonal to the base/ports split and FreeBSD vs Linux or any other UNIX. All the ports are simply automatically configured with "--prefix=/usr/local".
- petre 9y ago
  Lately, since pkg was introduced I find myself installing stock packags most of the time. Only if I want X compile time feature enabled I'd use the ports system. Updates are faster as well. I used to `make world`, now I just do `freebsd-update -r <release> upgrade`.
  - kqr 9y ago
    I'm still a new user so I deliberately choose to compile ports to learn the FreeBSD way of thinking about stuff, understand how packaging works under the hood, and not fall into the trap of thinking it's "almost a Linux". Compiling ports is surprisingly convenient (at least after I learned the config-recursive make target...) and works most of the time. But that said, letting the compilation of JDK 1.8 run overnight isn't exactly convenient, and for the next install I'm likely to use precompiled packages, confident that I do know how to compile ports on my own should I want to.
    - petre 9y ago
      Yes, cases similar to building jdk from the ports collection are exactly why prebuilt packages exist. It's now very easy to provision a new system since the new package manager was introduced in 10R, pretty much like in Linux. Yet you also have the option of using ports tree and customizing packages yourself using `make config` and the building and installing them using `make` and `make install`. This is easier than installing source rpms or debs and customizing your build mainly because it's menu driven and all the popular options are on the menu. FreeBSD provides a quartely branch (enabled by default since 10.2) with prebuilt packages that are supported up to 3 months, to avoid moving too fast and breaking things. There's also the latest branch, with the latest and greatest stuff. https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/pkgng-intro.html https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/p...
fasquoika 9y ago
List some well known ones for Linux. There's a 95% chance there's a FreeBSD port
- thatzerodude 9y ago
  https://www.wireguard.com/ https://www.wireguard.com/
barkingcat 9y ago
The Ports collection is similar in scope to any of the application databases maintained by Linux distros such as Redhat and Ubuntu. In fact, many of the packages are exactly the same from the same upstream. The differences are freebsd specific patches to fix small (like enabling or disabling different compile flags) or large (for example in the case of gnome or openjdk which requires effort to port) issues, but the packages are all there.
- sigjuice 9y ago
  Yes, I have used FreeBSD and ports. I thought OP's message implied that there are 3rd party applications that are available exclusively for FreeBSD.
  - ianai 9y ago
    For a while there, one such feature was ZFS. I know ZOL is a thing, and the pool versions are the same, but I'd bet ZFS on FreeBSD is still more stable/standard than ZOL. (It's been a while since I tried to learn the differences between ZOL/ZFS under FreeBSD so that could be out of date)
    - sigjuice 9y ago
      ZFS on FreeBSD does not fit the definition of 'third party'.
      - ianai 9y ago
        It’s as third party as I imagine a production file system should be.

Could you please list a few examples of these 3rd party FreeBSD applications that you have in mind? Thanks!

PeCaN 9y ago

Have 27,569 examples: https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html

CyberDildonics 9y ago

Do you realize that you can compile open source programs for FreeBSD and FreeBSD can run linux binaries?

sigjuice 9y ago
Yes I know open source programs compile and run on FreeBSD and other Unix-like systems. And also that FreeBSD can run at least some Linux binaries. I mistakenly assumed that OP was referring to 3rd party applications that were exclusive to FreeBSD.
- ianai 9y ago
  It's a FOSS project. Typically, FOSS operating systems differentiate on system features/applications and not on 3rd party applications. Things like package management, file system support, etc.
  - Koshkin 9y ago
    Sure, but that's not what makes a computer useful in the first place.

paultownsend 9y ago

The FreeBSD Ports Collection[1] is the main means of installing 3rd party software on FreeBSD. Precompiled packages are available, too. You can view a list of available ports on FreshPorts[2]. Of course you can always just compile and build your own software if you choose. [1] https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html https://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html [2] http://www.freshports.org/categories.php http://www.freshports.org/categories.php

ianai 9y ago
In my experience, the design of FreeBSD makes compiling projects much more easy. The standardized system really helps at many tasks.
- Koshkin 9y ago
  But few projects are designed to only support FreeBSD. In the UNIX world, Autoconf still reigns supreme.
  - rleigh 9y ago
    Autoconf is completely orthogonal to the base/ports split and FreeBSD vs Linux or any other UNIX. All the ports are simply automatically configured with "--prefix=/usr/local".
petre 9y ago
Lately, since pkg was introduced I find myself installing stock packags most of the time. Only if I want X compile time feature enabled I'd use the ports system. Updates are faster as well. I used to `make world`, now I just do `freebsd-update -r <release> upgrade`.
- kqr 9y ago
  I'm still a new user so I deliberately choose to compile ports to learn the FreeBSD way of thinking about stuff, understand how packaging works under the hood, and not fall into the trap of thinking it's "almost a Linux". Compiling ports is surprisingly convenient (at least after I learned the config-recursive make target...) and works most of the time. But that said, letting the compilation of JDK 1.8 run overnight isn't exactly convenient, and for the next install I'm likely to use precompiled packages, confident that I do know how to compile ports on my own should I want to.
  - petre 9y ago
    Yes, cases similar to building jdk from the ports collection are exactly why prebuilt packages exist. It's now very easy to provision a new system since the new package manager was introduced in 10R, pretty much like in Linux. Yet you also have the option of using ports tree and customizing packages yourself using `make config` and the building and installing them using `make` and `make install`. This is easier than installing source rpms or debs and customizing your build mainly because it's menu driven and all the popular options are on the menu. FreeBSD provides a quartely branch (enabled by default since 10.2) with prebuilt packages that are supported up to 3 months, to avoid moving too fast and breaking things. There's also the latest branch, with the latest and greatest stuff. https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/pkgng-intro.html https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/p...

fasquoika 9y ago

List some well known ones for Linux. There's a 95% chance there's a FreeBSD port

thatzerodude 9y ago
https://www.wireguard.com/ https://www.wireguard.com/

barkingcat 9y ago

The Ports collection is similar in scope to any of the application databases maintained by Linux distros such as Redhat and Ubuntu. In fact, many of the packages are exactly the same from the same upstream. The differences are freebsd specific patches to fix small (like enabling or disabling different compile flags) or large (for example in the case of gnome or openjdk which requires effort to port) issues, but the packages are all there.

sigjuice 9y ago
Yes, I have used FreeBSD and ports. I thought OP's message implied that there are 3rd party applications that are available exclusively for FreeBSD.
- ianai 9y ago
  For a while there, one such feature was ZFS. I know ZOL is a thing, and the pool versions are the same, but I'd bet ZFS on FreeBSD is still more stable/standard than ZOL. (It's been a while since I tried to learn the differences between ZOL/ZFS under FreeBSD so that could be out of date)
  - sigjuice 9y ago
    ZFS on FreeBSD does not fit the definition of 'third party'.
    - ianai 9y ago
      It’s as third party as I imagine a production file system should be.