3 ms·

Contribute to GNUStep if you want to support a legitimate transition for Mac users. Not yet another aqua rip off distro running reskinned Mate. Just get FreeB

Contribute to GNUStep if you want to support a legitimate transition for Mac users. Not yet another aqua rip off distro running reskinned Mate. Just get FreeBSD with gnome or mate if you’re so inclined. If you’re using Hello as your daily driver, you’re gonna get your hands dirty getting things to work anyway. Might as well start from core. GhostBSD, MidnightBSD, TrueOS, haven’t people realized FreeBSD is too obscure to get a community led distro to gain traction? Ubuntu is the use case for “mere mortals” on Unix-like systems. Anyone tech savvy enough to use FreeBSD on a personally machine successfully (whoever you are) doesn’t need some pre rolled version. It’s a niche use case and this project will ultimately go nowhere.

jwells89 3y ago
Presumably, what technically-minded Mac users who might switch want and what projects like this are aiming to achieve is to have a high level of consistency and "one piece design" not just on the user-facing half, but also under the hood, and the various BSDs have more to offer in this department than mainstream GNU/Linux distributions. It might be worth looking at one of those Linux distros that swaps out GNU userland/toolchain in favor of BSD equivalents wherever possible though.
pacija 3y ago
I also find these BlahBlahBSDs silly. Since when is setting desktop themes or tuning a few sysctls "forking" or worth calling a new OS?
- pacija 3y ago
  Ok, I see downvotes coming and I understand I didn't give enough context so I'll try to clarify. I use BSD, particularly FreeBSD and OpenBSD, for two decades now. For the last 15 years professionally. Four "recognized" members of BSD family are FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD. Each of them pursue different goals - FreeBSD stability, OpenBSD security, NetBSD portability, DragonflyBSD no idea, never tried it. All of them have similar (make) but different way of building (poudriere / dpb) and managing (pkg / pkg_) packages, similar (rc) but different way of managing system services (rc.d/ / rc.conf.local), similar (ifconfig) but different (rc.conf's ifconfig_if / hostname.if) way of setting network interfaces, similar but different ways of containerization and virtualization (jails, chroot, vmm, bhyve) etc. I have reasons why I would choose FreeBSD over OpenBSD for storage server (ZFS), or vice versa for router / firewall (rdomains, pf, bgpd, ospfd, iked / ipsec etc.) I don't have a slightest idea why would I choose HelloSystem or HardenedBSD for my laptop instead of FreeBSD.
  - pipeline_peak 3y ago
    I personally wouldn't dare run any BSD on a daily laptop. I've been down that road with a ThinkPad T410 and all 3 of the major ones. OpenBSD wouldn't support my network card, FreeBSD was easiest but I remember X11 would lag, resorting in having to turn off some hardware accel stuff (thanks to their helpful forum), NetBSD experience was brief but I simply felt like I was in no mans land, maybe i was wrong... Mouse gestures wouldn't work, I think some media buttons, all these annoying little things I had to hunt down and tweak myself. Mind you again, this was on a damn Thinkpad, what better laptop to run FreeBSD! That's probably the use case for what HelloSystem is for, a BSD you don't have to muck around with on a laptop. But I knew damn well when I was 20 I wasn't going to swallow my pride and install some kiddieBSD, at that rate I'd say why BSD at all and go back to Ubuntu where everything is safe. I did and have no regrets lol. I don't remember where, but someone once said FreeBSD is best for computers that you don't have to look at. That and of course as a starting point for companies like Nintendo, Sony, and Apple to derive from with their ACTUAL development teams.
  - rollcat 3y ago
    > I don't have a slightest idea why would I choose HelloSystem or HardenedBSD for my laptop instead of FreeBSD. I haven't actually tried HelloSystem on real hardware as a daily driver, but I can clearly see why people would find it valuable (at least according to their stated goals). The reasons are the same as why you'd choose Ubuntu over Slackware: the base install is intended as a fully functional desktop OS. Focus on the OOB experience, vertical integration, accessibility, polish, simplicity, etc. Even if you're a power user, there is still value to having all of these things: your energy is probably better spent on something more useful than figuring why basic, random stuff isn't working. (Assuming HelloSystem delivers on their stated goals!) It is true that these are all "merely" downstream projects, but I wouldn't dismiss them on these grounds alone. As long as any improvements can be ported back to FreeBSD, it's a win for everyone involved.
  - jwells89 3y ago
    > Each of them pursue different goals - FreeBSD stability, OpenBSD security, NetBSD portability, DragonflyBSD no idea, never tried it. The goal of desktop BSDs are to specialize as desktop OSes, and people keep trying it because the four main BSDs aren't particularly great at it — OpenBSD is probably being the best (mainly thanks to OpenBSD devs dogfooding it on their laptops), but its hardware compatibility and older packages aren't particularly great for most desktop users nor is its functional but spartan setup process.
- danjoredd 3y ago
  Its less setting a new desktop theme, and more maintaining compatibility with a Desktop Environment. Ghost BSD is significant because it is the "easy way" to get BSD working on computers. FreeBSD by itself is about like setting up Arch Linux. Same with most versions of BSD. If you know what you are doing you can get something set up, but if you don't care for needing to set everything up yourself, a distro like GhostBSD is invaluable.
pacifika 3y ago
Your points are addressed here https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/31/hellosystem_08/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/31/hellosystem_08/

jwells89 3y ago

Presumably, what technically-minded Mac users who might switch want and what projects like this are aiming to achieve is to have a high level of consistency and "one piece design" not just on the user-facing half, but also under the hood, and the various BSDs have more to offer in this department than mainstream GNU/Linux distributions. It might be worth looking at one of those Linux distros that swaps out GNU userland/toolchain in favor of BSD equivalents wherever possible though.

pacija 3y ago

I also find these BlahBlahBSDs silly. Since when is setting desktop themes or tuning a few sysctls "forking" or worth calling a new OS?

pacija 3y ago
Ok, I see downvotes coming and I understand I didn't give enough context so I'll try to clarify. I use BSD, particularly FreeBSD and OpenBSD, for two decades now. For the last 15 years professionally. Four "recognized" members of BSD family are FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD. Each of them pursue different goals - FreeBSD stability, OpenBSD security, NetBSD portability, DragonflyBSD no idea, never tried it. All of them have similar (make) but different way of building (poudriere / dpb) and managing (pkg / pkg_) packages, similar (rc) but different way of managing system services (rc.d/ / rc.conf.local), similar (ifconfig) but different (rc.conf's ifconfig_if / hostname.if) way of setting network interfaces, similar but different ways of containerization and virtualization (jails, chroot, vmm, bhyve) etc. I have reasons why I would choose FreeBSD over OpenBSD for storage server (ZFS), or vice versa for router / firewall (rdomains, pf, bgpd, ospfd, iked / ipsec etc.) I don't have a slightest idea why would I choose HelloSystem or HardenedBSD for my laptop instead of FreeBSD.
- pipeline_peak 3y ago
  I personally wouldn't dare run any BSD on a daily laptop. I've been down that road with a ThinkPad T410 and all 3 of the major ones. OpenBSD wouldn't support my network card, FreeBSD was easiest but I remember X11 would lag, resorting in having to turn off some hardware accel stuff (thanks to their helpful forum), NetBSD experience was brief but I simply felt like I was in no mans land, maybe i was wrong... Mouse gestures wouldn't work, I think some media buttons, all these annoying little things I had to hunt down and tweak myself. Mind you again, this was on a damn Thinkpad, what better laptop to run FreeBSD! That's probably the use case for what HelloSystem is for, a BSD you don't have to muck around with on a laptop. But I knew damn well when I was 20 I wasn't going to swallow my pride and install some kiddieBSD, at that rate I'd say why BSD at all and go back to Ubuntu where everything is safe. I did and have no regrets lol. I don't remember where, but someone once said FreeBSD is best for computers that you don't have to look at. That and of course as a starting point for companies like Nintendo, Sony, and Apple to derive from with their ACTUAL development teams.
- rollcat 3y ago
  > I don't have a slightest idea why would I choose HelloSystem or HardenedBSD for my laptop instead of FreeBSD. I haven't actually tried HelloSystem on real hardware as a daily driver, but I can clearly see why people would find it valuable (at least according to their stated goals). The reasons are the same as why you'd choose Ubuntu over Slackware: the base install is intended as a fully functional desktop OS. Focus on the OOB experience, vertical integration, accessibility, polish, simplicity, etc. Even if you're a power user, there is still value to having all of these things: your energy is probably better spent on something more useful than figuring why basic, random stuff isn't working. (Assuming HelloSystem delivers on their stated goals!) It is true that these are all "merely" downstream projects, but I wouldn't dismiss them on these grounds alone. As long as any improvements can be ported back to FreeBSD, it's a win for everyone involved.
- jwells89 3y ago
  > Each of them pursue different goals - FreeBSD stability, OpenBSD security, NetBSD portability, DragonflyBSD no idea, never tried it. The goal of desktop BSDs are to specialize as desktop OSes, and people keep trying it because the four main BSDs aren't particularly great at it — OpenBSD is probably being the best (mainly thanks to OpenBSD devs dogfooding it on their laptops), but its hardware compatibility and older packages aren't particularly great for most desktop users nor is its functional but spartan setup process.
danjoredd 3y ago
Its less setting a new desktop theme, and more maintaining compatibility with a Desktop Environment. Ghost BSD is significant because it is the "easy way" to get BSD working on computers. FreeBSD by itself is about like setting up Arch Linux. Same with most versions of BSD. If you know what you are doing you can get something set up, but if you don't care for needing to set everything up yourself, a distro like GhostBSD is invaluable.

pacifika 3y ago

Your points are addressed here https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/31/hellosystem_08/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/31/hellosystem_08/