5 ms·
I run FreeBSD for my home storage server, have for almost a decade now. I've also used it for various other things here and there, but that's my major personal
by _lqaf 3y ago
I run FreeBSD for my home storage server, have for almost a decade now. I've also used it for various other things here and there, but that's my major personal use.
The best thing about it is that it is boring, completely predictable outside of hardware faults, and dependable. If you know how to competently manage it, which isn't hard, it is a rock.
Also nice is that FreeBSD isn't involved in vendor tugs-of-war that result in the constant stream of bullshit changes* - the network config format doesn't change every version, people aren't playing political games with init, etc. All of which mean far fewer goofy make-work surprises.
And the quality of their releases is still very high. I consider them one of top open source projects, period, in terms of qualities others should emulate for better results.
As with anything, it isn't for everything. If you need the latest version of whatever is trendy this month, you should run Linux. But if your use case benefits from stability and ease of administration, FreeBSD rocks.
* What is bullshit in my environment may not be in yours, etc.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoI don't think it's any more stable, dependable or predictable than any similarly mature Linux distro. It's just a preference, perhaps with a sliver of contrarianism.
- hedora 3y agoCan you name any production-quality / daily-driver linux distros that have used the same network config, init, logging, etc for the last 5 years, let alone the last 3 decades (like the BSDs have)? I never felt comfortable managing openbsd, but linux has repeatedly and gratuitously changed all the management tools, so now it’s easier for me to get around an openbsd box, despite using Linux daily, and openbsd maybe twice a year. (It’s a serious question. I’m strongly considering switching to one of the bsd’s at this point.)
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago> Can you name any production-quality / daily-driver linux distros that have used the same network config, init, logging, etc for the last 5 years, let alone the last 3 decades (like the BSDs have)? Are you not so subtly referring to the systemd fiasco? That was about, if not over 10 years ago. I also don't think it matters. Change is not a bad thing, and that change is not as hectic or constant as you seem to imply. If you really want a Linux distro that hasn't changed at all in the past 30 years, Slackware might be your bets bet, but I don't think that 'having not changed in the past 30 years' really makes sense as a metric. Personally, I'm a fan of Alpine and Void Linux, and I also run NetBSD. FreeBSD seems too 'messy' as someone that likes minimalism, and OpenBSD's security focus is misplaced IMO.
- hedora 3y agoIt’s not just systemd. Wayland broke the world. ifconfig doesn’t work anymore. File permissions don’t reliably work thanks to acls. There’s also the selinux vs cgroups vs ???, etc, etc.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoifconfig got replaced just as OpenBSD's pf replaced whatever it replaced. Wayland, ACLs, SELinux and cgroup are all just options, none are forced.
- throwaway7356 3y ago> ifconfig Was deprecated ~20 years ago. Not a recent change. > selinux vs cgroups vs ??? This doesn't make any sense? It's like writing "network drivers vs. X11" in OpenBSD.
- happymellon 3y agoFedora switched to Systemd in 2011. That's over 5 years?
- hedora 3y agoSystemd has changed stuff continuously ever since. For instance, some systemd-login thing broke compatibility with xscreensaver on my manjaro box 6 months ago.
- abwizz 3y agoimho rhel is a close second, but bsd's being vastly less complex inherently means less assumptions and changes and more robustness