4 ms·
You are spot on. And now, try OpenBSD. It's the next step in removing useless abstractions.
by enriquto 6y ago
You are spot on. And now, try OpenBSD. It's the next step in removing useless abstractions.
- bopbeepboop 6y agoWhat are the BSD options these days?
- fordsmith 6y agoI'm an avid Linux user, completely unfamiliar with BSD. Could you shed some light on how it further removes abstractions? I don't mind trying it out by booting it from a usb
- enriquto 6y ago> Could you shed some light on how it further removes abstractions? By not running hundreds of useless programs, I guess. If you launch htop inside OpenBSD, it'll fill half of your terminal, and the rest is empty. The easiest way to try it is to install it on a virtual machine. You'll see that not much is needed to get to a point to launch firefox from an xterm.
- anthk 6y agoTop itself is enough, you don´t need htop.
- enriquto 6y agoTotally agree. But I'm somewhat used to silly things about htop, like selecting a process to kill using the arrow keys, or a default refresh rate of less than 1 second.
- secondcoming 6y agoI find htop's ability to view the tree structure of a process quite useful. Name your threads!
- horlux 6y agobut that's the case for some linux distros too, e.g void
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- GeorgeTirebiter 6y agoLinux is a large ecosystem, supporting many different functions (embedded to some extent; desktop; server; supercomputer clusters, etc). For any one of these, the other 'stuff' represents cruft. The BSDs (I am partial to NetBSD) tend to give you a basic substrate of 'the system', and you add what you need via 'packages'. It's a different philosophy, but no less valid.