7 ms·

I have been trying out FreeBSD 12 as a desktop using the "TrueOS" distribution[1], as a UNIX user it has been very refreshing. I did this because the Ubuntu 18.

I have been trying out FreeBSD 12 as a desktop using the "TrueOS" distribution[1], as a UNIX user it has been very refreshing. I did this because the Ubuntu 18.04 experience felt to me strongly that the Linux community was focused on turning the desktop into a Windows clone. [1] https://www.trueos.org/ https://www.trueos.org/

mixmastamyk 8y ago
You don't say exactly why a clone is bad, but I enjoy the BSDs as well as Ubuntu Mate.
iagovar 8y ago
Does BSD have a packet system like APT? How about troubleshooting? I guess there is way less info out there than in Linux.
- kryptiskt 8y ago
  FreeBSD has the pkg package manager. There is also a ports system if you want to build from source. There's no shortage of info or places to seek help about BSDs on the net, FreeBSD has an active forum at https://forums.freebsd.org https://forums.freebsd.org
  - trasz 8y ago
    Note that those two are not really disjoint - packages are built from ports; ports are a bit like source packages in the Linux world.
    - floatboth 8y ago
      deb/rpm source packages are a bit weird. AUR and Gentoo Portage are very closely inspired by Ports though.
- zozbot123 8y ago
  The only resource you need is here: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ This is the first and only resource you have to hit when the question is: "how do I do that in FreeBSD?" Section 4. answers your second question. There is no less information about BSD than "Linux", it is simply that BSD has no advertisement or companies behind pushing it...
  - ChuckMcM 8y ago
    The handbook is also part of the 'refreshing' part of using this system. Lots of documentation even for the more obscure parts (not saying that package management is obscure though)
  - siffland 8y ago
    "There is no less information about BSD than "Linux", it is simply that BSD has no advertisement or companies behind pushing it.." Which is ironic since huge companies like netflix, sony, citrix, netapp and others make appliances based on FreeBSD and contribute a ton of code (Note, i am not at all disagreeing with your statement, i just find it ironic). IX Systems does push behind it a lot and does advertise it: https://www.ixsystems.com https://www.ixsystems.com I have heard people complain because the handbook needs updating in some areas, but to be fair it is an open source handbook and people can make submissions to help make it better.
    - zozbot123 8y ago
      Maybe I am wrong, but as far as I remember IXsystems is pushing TrueOS and some other appliances like FreeNas. My point was simply aiming to underline that there is no analogue of RHEL or Centos in the BSD world. If you decide to endorse BSD you know you are on your own and you have to contribute to the project. The BSD license seems a bit more appealing to this huge giants than the GNU one. Fixing bugs and contributing to the code base is the reason why I love the project. For purely educational reasons you can learn more in 5 minutes using BSD, than in 10 years with Ubuntu (what is it that one learns with Ubuntu actually?). The handbook is just awesome. If people complain about it, it is just because they never looked at how documentation is written in the average in computer science (is software documented at all?).
- Koshkin 8y ago
  To be fair, there is very little difference between Linux and BSDs these days, and the choice between them is mostly the matter of personal preference. Yes, Linux is more popular and enjoys somewhat better support by third-party vendors (which could in some cases be limited to a small set of distributions), which is why it is usually a safe choice; otherwise there not much reason to choose one over another.
  - siffland 8y ago
    FreeBSD is an entire operating system. Linux is just a kernel used in hundreds of different distros. It is correct that they are both UNIX like derivatives. FreeBSD is based on the BSD license, Linux on the GPL (this is important if you want to make something proprietary, like the PS4). Most major Linux distros have different package managers and you download binary updates. They supply their own kernel with backports and custom compiled to stay in sync with the rest of their userland. In FreeBSD the kernel and userland are in sync so you dont have this issue. Linux has better driver support due to more exposure to hardware. You can go one for quite a while about how different they are, so they are very different. But you are right it is user preference. (I excluded systemd and init to avoid a holy war)
    - Koshkin 8y ago
      > Linux is just a kernel Well, this mantra is really getting old - because when people say "Linux" they almost never talk about Linux-the-kernel. Which is also why, for instance, nobody calls Android "Linux", but when referring to Ubuntu, Slackware, etc., they do.
      - umanwizard 8y ago
        You are misunderstanding. It actually makes a huge difference. Let's compare apples to apples: Ubuntu vs. FreeBSD. In Ubuntu there is a kernel made by one group (the Linux project), a bunch of userland tools and C compiler made by another group (the GNU project), desktop environment made by the GNOME project, etc. etc. Whereas FreeBSD is just FreeBSD. It is one project, in one source tree, maintained by one group of people. (The biggest exception to this is the C compiler -- it is a third-party project which gets imported into the main tree. But that's a minor thing compared to Ubuntu which does this for everything.)
- clan 8y ago
  As others mention there is PKG (and ports). The important thing is however that even though there might be less info it is much more consistent! It is even so old fashioned that you can work without Internet how-to's - it is all there in the "man" pages.
- Nux 8y ago
  It has something, but nowhere near apt/yum. Troubleshooting is fine, it's a good OS with a great range of tools at your disposal.
- pbalau 8y ago
  bsd is a family of operating systems, not one. I'm going to answer based on FreeBSD, the system I have more experience with. 1) yes it does, both as source and as binaries (and the same for the base system itself) 2) not sure what you mean, but... (see next answer) 3) https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ and the man pages. Back in 2000s, the FreeBSD handbook was the best documentation for unix based systems. I could bet a fiver this is still the case.
- ori_b 8y ago
  1) https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/pkgng-intro.html https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/pkgng-intro.html 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gfctgb1mfM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gfctgb1mfM
jhcl 8y ago
That's it? You felt that one desktop manager of one specific Linux distribution was like Windows and decided to extrapolate it to all desktop managers of all distributions of Linux and go for a non-Linux version? Or from the TrueOS handbook: "TrueOS® uses several similar, but different elements to their counterparts on Windows." I hope that you and your Windows' will be happy together.
- ChuckMcM 8y ago
  I have run a lot of different desktops for Linux. I don't know precisely how much of the space I've covered but all of the more "mainstream" ones. Prior to loading TrueOS and its desktop I was using xfce. Prior to that my most common desktop was KDE. I've used different Gnome variants, Unity variants, bare bones variants.
  - jhcl 8y ago
    And non of that is used as an argument. You just yell Ubuntu 18.04 with an unspecified desktop and conclude that you like none of the Linuxes with whatever Desktop and decide without argument that you do like FreeBSD. My advise to you is to be more specific because it still doesn't make any sense.
    - ChuckMcM 8y ago
      The issues for Ubuntu 18.04 were several; Changing networking once again, additional encroachment of systemd on otherwise solved problems, new (and unneeded to me) cloud extensions that required research to turn off, Etc. My post here was not to 'slam' Ubuntu, it was to share that I had tried a Desktop version of FreeBSD (those are rare) and found it quite refreshing and familiar.
      - jhcl 8y ago
        I am running Xubuntu 18.04 and unless one is running some cloud image one has little to adjust. I am not even defending (x)ubuntu or over TrueOS. I had been running a FreeBSD Desktop when it was called PCBSD and found it to be lacking very early on. My opinion is that it is a nice OS for email and browsing but a developer should not have to endure the pain of the constant fight to keep up with tooling.
Koshkin 8y ago
I don't think being "a Windows clone" is necessarily a bad thing. If anything, this could help to show people that Linux is not as "user-hostile" as they might have thought.
- ChuckMcM 8y ago
  I don't think Linux becoming a "Windows clone" is necessarily a bad thing either, it is a user preference on my part. My background is UNIX workstations, which was the 'feel' that Linux had for a long time. But open source is by definition a function of those who can commit to the source base. As the Linux community has evolved so have the design tastes. I hate systemd, I understand the argument made by the systemd team for why they think it is a superior solution to what existed before, but it doesn't change my distaste for the architecture style. I look for alternatives and TrueOS was suggested and I tried it out, so far I like it.
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago
    You're accessing a single distro, which is targeted at Windows switchover users and complaining that they cater to them more?
- umanwizard 8y ago
  Does it matter whether random people think Linux is user-hostile? Why is it important that grandma be able to use Ubuntu instead of macOS or Windows on her desktop?
  - Koshkin 8y ago
    > random people A.k.a. your “customers.”
  - loeg 8y ago
    Yes! How do you think you bring new people in to the Linux community? Everyone starts somewhere, and no one is teaching Linux desktop to primary school students. Anecdotally, the first Linux experience that I was able to install and operate myself, after a handful of prior failed attempts, was Ubuntu (2005). And a big part of that was that it was friendly to absolute beginners like myself. Now I am a FreeBSD developer and have patches in a plethora of open source projects, including Linux. Everybody starts somewhere!
akerro 8y ago
Yes, TrueOS is really refreshing experience, IMO Ubuntu became windows XP with release 8.10, when I just switched away and never looked back. One thing I wish TrueOS did better was desktop integration, they decided to develop their own DE - Lumia, IMO they would do much better with Plasma5 integration.
jimpudar 8y ago
I love FreeBSD, so I don't think you made a bad choice, but if you ever want to try Ubuntu again go with Lubuntu instead of the Gnome based Ubuntu. It's a far better UX IMHO.
- umvi 8y ago
  Some of the Ubuntu flavors are really nice. My current favorite is Xubuntu, though I have Lubuntu on an old laptop and I like it too.
thomastjeffery 8y ago
TrueOS = PC-BSD It's been ~10 years since I used PC-BSD, but it was certainly a nice distro.
- JdeBP 8y ago
  Not quite. The desktop-specific portion of PC-BSD and TrueOS of earlier this year can now be found at Project Trident. TrueOS is built on FreeBSD, adding in OpenRC, LibreSSL, and the rest; and Project Trident is built on TrueOS. Roughly. * http://project-trident.org./ http://project-trident.org./ * https://trueos.org/blog/trueosdownstream/ https://trueos.org/blog/trueosdownstream/
petre 8y ago
I switched back to Debian/Devuan on my laptop. I also use FreeBSD and OpenSuSE on servers, along with Debian. OpenSuSE was not my choice but company policy. I've grown to like it though because it just works and zypper is quite a breeze. Not so many packages as Debian or FreeBSD though, sometimes you have to compile more exotic stuff. FreeBSD is rock solid and much more consistent than Linux, because it's a full blown OS, as opposed to a kernel with GNU software slapped over it. Linux distributions also made some questionable choices like systemd adoption.

mixmastamyk 8y ago

You don't say exactly why a clone is bad, but I enjoy the BSDs as well as Ubuntu Mate.

iagovar 8y ago

Does BSD have a packet system like APT? How about troubleshooting? I guess there is way less info out there than in Linux.

kryptiskt 8y ago
FreeBSD has the pkg package manager. There is also a ports system if you want to build from source. There's no shortage of info or places to seek help about BSDs on the net, FreeBSD has an active forum at https://forums.freebsd.org https://forums.freebsd.org
- trasz 8y ago
  Note that those two are not really disjoint - packages are built from ports; ports are a bit like source packages in the Linux world.
  - floatboth 8y ago
    deb/rpm source packages are a bit weird. AUR and Gentoo Portage are very closely inspired by Ports though.
zozbot123 8y ago
The only resource you need is here: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ This is the first and only resource you have to hit when the question is: "how do I do that in FreeBSD?" Section 4. answers your second question. There is no less information about BSD than "Linux", it is simply that BSD has no advertisement or companies behind pushing it...
- ChuckMcM 8y ago
  The handbook is also part of the 'refreshing' part of using this system. Lots of documentation even for the more obscure parts (not saying that package management is obscure though)
- siffland 8y ago
  "There is no less information about BSD than "Linux", it is simply that BSD has no advertisement or companies behind pushing it.." Which is ironic since huge companies like netflix, sony, citrix, netapp and others make appliances based on FreeBSD and contribute a ton of code (Note, i am not at all disagreeing with your statement, i just find it ironic). IX Systems does push behind it a lot and does advertise it: https://www.ixsystems.com https://www.ixsystems.com I have heard people complain because the handbook needs updating in some areas, but to be fair it is an open source handbook and people can make submissions to help make it better.
  - zozbot123 8y ago
    Maybe I am wrong, but as far as I remember IXsystems is pushing TrueOS and some other appliances like FreeNas. My point was simply aiming to underline that there is no analogue of RHEL or Centos in the BSD world. If you decide to endorse BSD you know you are on your own and you have to contribute to the project. The BSD license seems a bit more appealing to this huge giants than the GNU one. Fixing bugs and contributing to the code base is the reason why I love the project. For purely educational reasons you can learn more in 5 minutes using BSD, than in 10 years with Ubuntu (what is it that one learns with Ubuntu actually?). The handbook is just awesome. If people complain about it, it is just because they never looked at how documentation is written in the average in computer science (is software documented at all?).
Koshkin 8y ago
To be fair, there is very little difference between Linux and BSDs these days, and the choice between them is mostly the matter of personal preference. Yes, Linux is more popular and enjoys somewhat better support by third-party vendors (which could in some cases be limited to a small set of distributions), which is why it is usually a safe choice; otherwise there not much reason to choose one over another.
- siffland 8y ago
  FreeBSD is an entire operating system. Linux is just a kernel used in hundreds of different distros. It is correct that they are both UNIX like derivatives. FreeBSD is based on the BSD license, Linux on the GPL (this is important if you want to make something proprietary, like the PS4). Most major Linux distros have different package managers and you download binary updates. They supply their own kernel with backports and custom compiled to stay in sync with the rest of their userland. In FreeBSD the kernel and userland are in sync so you dont have this issue. Linux has better driver support due to more exposure to hardware. You can go one for quite a while about how different they are, so they are very different. But you are right it is user preference. (I excluded systemd and init to avoid a holy war)
  - Koshkin 8y ago
    > Linux is just a kernel Well, this mantra is really getting old - because when people say "Linux" they almost never talk about Linux-the-kernel. Which is also why, for instance, nobody calls Android "Linux", but when referring to Ubuntu, Slackware, etc., they do.
    - umanwizard 8y ago
      You are misunderstanding. It actually makes a huge difference. Let's compare apples to apples: Ubuntu vs. FreeBSD. In Ubuntu there is a kernel made by one group (the Linux project), a bunch of userland tools and C compiler made by another group (the GNU project), desktop environment made by the GNOME project, etc. etc. Whereas FreeBSD is just FreeBSD. It is one project, in one source tree, maintained by one group of people. (The biggest exception to this is the C compiler -- it is a third-party project which gets imported into the main tree. But that's a minor thing compared to Ubuntu which does this for everything.)
clan 8y ago
As others mention there is PKG (and ports). The important thing is however that even though there might be less info it is much more consistent! It is even so old fashioned that you can work without Internet how-to's - it is all there in the "man" pages.
Nux 8y ago
It has something, but nowhere near apt/yum. Troubleshooting is fine, it's a good OS with a great range of tools at your disposal.
pbalau 8y ago
bsd is a family of operating systems, not one. I'm going to answer based on FreeBSD, the system I have more experience with. 1) yes it does, both as source and as binaries (and the same for the base system itself) 2) not sure what you mean, but... (see next answer) 3) https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/ and the man pages. Back in 2000s, the FreeBSD handbook was the best documentation for unix based systems. I could bet a fiver this is still the case.
ori_b 8y ago
1) https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/pkgng-intro.html https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/pkgng-intro.html 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gfctgb1mfM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gfctgb1mfM

jhcl 8y ago

That's it? You felt that one desktop manager of one specific Linux distribution was like Windows and decided to extrapolate it to all desktop managers of all distributions of Linux and go for a non-Linux version? Or from the TrueOS handbook: "TrueOS® uses several similar, but different elements to their counterparts on Windows." I hope that you and your Windows' will be happy together.

ChuckMcM 8y ago
I have run a lot of different desktops for Linux. I don't know precisely how much of the space I've covered but all of the more "mainstream" ones. Prior to loading TrueOS and its desktop I was using xfce. Prior to that my most common desktop was KDE. I've used different Gnome variants, Unity variants, bare bones variants.
- jhcl 8y ago
  And non of that is used as an argument. You just yell Ubuntu 18.04 with an unspecified desktop and conclude that you like none of the Linuxes with whatever Desktop and decide without argument that you do like FreeBSD. My advise to you is to be more specific because it still doesn't make any sense.
  - ChuckMcM 8y ago
    The issues for Ubuntu 18.04 were several; Changing networking once again, additional encroachment of systemd on otherwise solved problems, new (and unneeded to me) cloud extensions that required research to turn off, Etc. My post here was not to 'slam' Ubuntu, it was to share that I had tried a Desktop version of FreeBSD (those are rare) and found it quite refreshing and familiar.
    - jhcl 8y ago
      I am running Xubuntu 18.04 and unless one is running some cloud image one has little to adjust. I am not even defending (x)ubuntu or over TrueOS. I had been running a FreeBSD Desktop when it was called PCBSD and found it to be lacking very early on. My opinion is that it is a nice OS for email and browsing but a developer should not have to endure the pain of the constant fight to keep up with tooling.

Koshkin 8y ago

I don't think being "a Windows clone" is necessarily a bad thing. If anything, this could help to show people that Linux is not as "user-hostile" as they might have thought.

ChuckMcM 8y ago
I don't think Linux becoming a "Windows clone" is necessarily a bad thing either, it is a user preference on my part. My background is UNIX workstations, which was the 'feel' that Linux had for a long time. But open source is by definition a function of those who can commit to the source base. As the Linux community has evolved so have the design tastes. I hate systemd, I understand the argument made by the systemd team for why they think it is a superior solution to what existed before, but it doesn't change my distaste for the architecture style. I look for alternatives and TrueOS was suggested and I tried it out, so far I like it.
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  You're accessing a single distro, which is targeted at Windows switchover users and complaining that they cater to them more?
umanwizard 8y ago
Does it matter whether random people think Linux is user-hostile? Why is it important that grandma be able to use Ubuntu instead of macOS or Windows on her desktop?
- Koshkin 8y ago
  > random people A.k.a. your “customers.”
- loeg 8y ago
  Yes! How do you think you bring new people in to the Linux community? Everyone starts somewhere, and no one is teaching Linux desktop to primary school students. Anecdotally, the first Linux experience that I was able to install and operate myself, after a handful of prior failed attempts, was Ubuntu (2005). And a big part of that was that it was friendly to absolute beginners like myself. Now I am a FreeBSD developer and have patches in a plethora of open source projects, including Linux. Everybody starts somewhere!

akerro 8y ago

Yes, TrueOS is really refreshing experience, IMO Ubuntu became windows XP with release 8.10, when I just switched away and never looked back. One thing I wish TrueOS did better was desktop integration, they decided to develop their own DE - Lumia, IMO they would do much better with Plasma5 integration.

jimpudar 8y ago

I love FreeBSD, so I don't think you made a bad choice, but if you ever want to try Ubuntu again go with Lubuntu instead of the Gnome based Ubuntu. It's a far better UX IMHO.

umvi 8y ago
Some of the Ubuntu flavors are really nice. My current favorite is Xubuntu, though I have Lubuntu on an old laptop and I like it too.

thomastjeffery 8y ago

TrueOS = PC-BSD It's been ~10 years since I used PC-BSD, but it was certainly a nice distro.

JdeBP 8y ago
Not quite. The desktop-specific portion of PC-BSD and TrueOS of earlier this year can now be found at Project Trident. TrueOS is built on FreeBSD, adding in OpenRC, LibreSSL, and the rest; and Project Trident is built on TrueOS. Roughly. * http://project-trident.org./ http://project-trident.org./ * https://trueos.org/blog/trueosdownstream/ https://trueos.org/blog/trueosdownstream/

petre 8y ago

I switched back to Debian/Devuan on my laptop. I also use FreeBSD and OpenSuSE on servers, along with Debian. OpenSuSE was not my choice but company policy. I've grown to like it though because it just works and zypper is quite a breeze. Not so many packages as Debian or FreeBSD though, sometimes you have to compile more exotic stuff. FreeBSD is rock solid and much more consistent than Linux, because it's a full blown OS, as opposed to a kernel with GNU software slapped over it. Linux distributions also made some questionable choices like systemd adoption.