6 ms·
OpenBSD is very elegant and secure; upgrading is as simple as 'sysupgrade'. The developers use it for desktop/laptop usage, so setting up X is supported in the
by brobdingnagians 6y ago
OpenBSD is very elegant and secure; upgrading is as simple as 'sysupgrade'. The developers use it for desktop/laptop usage, so setting up X is supported in the installer. They have a lot of their own lean, minimalistic applications that focus on security and code correctness. Things like httpd, relayd, OpenSSH, their own secure X11 (Xenocara), pf firewall, and lots more. I love setting up servers with OpenBSD because for most things those work very well for my needs. They work well together and do what they do well. I use it for my desktop, application servers, load balancers, and so on.
FreeBSD has noticeably higher performance, more packages, and is great for things like databases, virtualization, or application servers that are behind a load balancer or firewall. It has a lot of the OpenBSD applications ported to it though, so you can run pf or relayd on FreeBSD just fine. It's a bit more convenient to run FreeBSD for some things because of extensive packages (FreeBSD has things like C++ actor framework in packages, doesn't currently compile on OpenBSD). The jetbrains IDEs are better supported on FreeBSD than on OpenBSD too. (I've made some personal modifications to get things working on OpenBSD). Integrated ZFS is really nice for databases and storage servers as well.
I don't have much experience with NetBSD, but it is portable to all kinds of things (e.g. toasters), and they have done some neat things with rump kernels.
Dragonfly BSD has some cool experimental stuff with SMT and hammer filesystem, but I haven't played around with it much.
EDIT: A few nice things in comparing BSD to Linux. ZFS on FreeBSD is nicely integrated w/ the kernel. In general, I think solutions in BSD take longer to come around than Linux, but when they do they are well designed and thought through. Things just seem to fit better. From what I've observed, the community thinks things through and often recommend that someone use Linux if it would work better for the use case. That is a fantastic level of maturity; like when the hardware store guy recommends the competitor store down the street, because they will have what I need.
- valarauko 6y agoIs it possible to use a BSD as a daily driver on your primary computer? Compared to a usual linux disto (eg, Pop! OS, my current driver), what's the drawbacks?
- retro64 6y agoYes, but maybe not 100%, depending. I have been using FreeBSD as my primary driver since 2006, and have been without a Windows box or partition since Win 10 was hatched. But, while I can accomplish 99% of what I want to do in BSD, I use Linux for the rest. I’ll resist the fanboi post and just say the usual things you hear about BSD vs. Linux (good and bad) are true. Personally I appreciate the rock solid consistency (configuration, file system, runtime) I’ve gained from FreeBSD, but it’s not a commercially supported OS and there are times I’ve had to fall back to Linux (GOG games are one example).
- valarauko 6y agoI'm an academic (bioinformatics), and my use case is largely browsing, reading pdfs, drafting scientific reports in markdown (trying to move to emacs and org-mode) & docx, and writing code in python & R. I do rely on many bioinformatics packages, though most are available through conda. Probably 80% of my computer time is spent in Firefox or the command line. I've been linux only for over 10 years now, mostly on Ubuntu or Pop! OS. I'll be moving to a new postdoc position in a few months, and is a opportunity to do a clean install on my creaky Intel Core i3 laptop. I've been leaning towards Arch/Manjaro/Arcolinux, but BSDs have recently popped up in my periphery. Would you suggest FreeBSD for my use case? Or another BSD? Or something else altogether?
- LargoLasskhyfv 6y agoDo you need CUDA? If so, forget it. Because it is not there on any BSD. OTOH creaky i3 suggests you don't. edit: I think one of the most important and convenient things is to get a NAS or build a small fileserver. That way you can decouple most of your personal stuff from the systems you are using via NFS/SMB/CIFS and give a damn about interoperability of filesystems, thereby gaining the ability to try out what works best for you without much hassle.
- valarauko 6y agoI do use CUDA, though not on my laptop. My usual workflow has been to fiddle around with the code on a minimal dataset which takes up most of my time. Once I'm happy with the logic and how things work, the heavy crunching (if required) is offloaded to CUDA workstations/servers. The thing that gives me the most pause is how fractured the academic bioinformatics software scene is, and how poorly they're maintained once published. I've often run across requirements for GCC beyond what's included in the current Ubuntu LTS, for example. In my old lab I kept a CUDA workstation running the latest Manjaro for these eventualities, among others.
- LargoLasskhyfv 6y agoWhen does that effing toaster meme finally die? Why do you repeat it? It may have been true in the early days of Linux, but nowadays it's just a fairy tale. Compare the architectures Linux runs on, vs. NetBSD. And then STOP! edit: I like NetBSD, but that meme is just non-sense.
- anthk 6y agoNetBSD still runs on the Amiga and the Atari.
- LargoLasskhyfv 6y agoSo does Linux, if you absolutely have to. Meanwhile it gained the ability to run on architectures no BSD ever heard of.