4 ms·

Arch used to be more BSD-like but since it’s adopted systemd it’s felt very much more mainstream Linux than it used to when it had a BSD-inspired rc.conf. That

Arch used to be more BSD-like but since it’s adopted systemd it’s felt very much more mainstream Linux than it used to when it had a BSD-inspired rc.conf. That said, it’s still my preferred desktop OS. FreeBSD definitely supports binary packages as well. It’s a great system to use too. In fact if there wasn’t a few Linux-specific tools I needed and FreeBSDs hardware support was on a par with Linux, then I would use FreeBSD as my primary system - without a doubt. But as it is I still run FreeBSD for all of my personal servers.

2trill2spill 8y ago
Have you tried the FreeBSD Linux emulator? It can be annoying grabbing the required libraries off a Centos box but once you do it's been pretty reliable for me.
- laumars 8y ago
  Not recently. About 10 or 15 years ago I used to use the Linux binary compatibility layer but when I last looked - 5ish years ago? - it seemed support for that had languished. To be honest the tool I’d most want would be Docker and I couldn’t see that working even with binary compatibility. On the FreeBSD servers I run, I just fire up a VM for the rare occasions I do require Linux (and it is extremely rare that happens), but Arch is a better compromise for me on my laptop.
sureaboutthis 8y ago
While Linux may support 10,000 devices, FreeBSD support 9734 of them. And you only need one. FreeBSD probably supports every piece of hardware you use. Source: me. A FreeBSD workstation user for 16 years who has built his own machine with off the shelf parts since the beginning with a current machine running the latest and greatest.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]