3 ms·

I switched my startup’s whole infra to FreeBSD a couple months ago. Found a use after free bug that Linux’s memory management was just fine with in Gnome XSLT l

I switched my startup’s whole infra to FreeBSD a couple months ago. Found a use after free bug that Linux’s memory management was just fine with in Gnome XSLT lib that FreeBSD properly refused. Other than that smooth sailing, jails work great. After IBM destroyed CentOS, all the Xorg politics nonsense, the list goes on with Linux, not interested. I just want something quiet and boring and stable and correctly designed. NetBSD would be my first choice but they don’t get the $ they need for drivers.

manuelabeledo 8mo ago
You don’t need to follow the news cycle to use an operating system.
- user3939382 8mo ago
  I do follow the news cycle and if I’m hearing about a software package in it, something is wrong with the people making the software and I don’t trust them. Software is an engineering discussion or at least it’s supposed to be. Here’s my community guidelines: everyone be nice and respectful engage in good faith and focus on the math. Being social is fine so long that it doesn’t become a diversion from the engineering discussion. We’re talking about code not a philosophical treatise. There are civil ways to settle disagreements. I’m so sick to death of the politics.
  - manuelabeledo 8mo ago
    It sounds like software projects are built by humans. Nothing wrong with that. Unless we’re assuming here that the BSD community is free from that.
    - user3939382 8mo ago
      The engineers I’ve worked with my whole career had no problem getting the work done without getting into giant political debates. If your politics comes before the engineering I don’t want anything to do with it.
      - manuelabeledo 8mo ago
        Can you give any examples of the type of politics that ruined XOrg or Linux?
        user3939382 8mo ago
        Guy tells you he dislikes political discussions around engineering so you ask to engage in exactly that discussion?
        manuelabeledo 8mo ago
        I’m just trying to understand exactly what led you to make that decision. I don’t follow tabloid style news around software projects, maybe I’m missing on something.
ajross 8mo ago
> all the Xorg politics nonsense Uh... Xorg is packaged by FreeBSD too... Really the whole theme that (from the article) "FreeBSD ships as a complete, coherent OS" is belied by this kind of nonsense. No, it's not. Or, sure, it is, but in exactly the same way that Debian or whatever is. It's a big soup of some local software and a huge ton of upstream dependencies curated for shipment together. Just like a Linux distro. And, obviously, almost all those upstream dependences are exactly the same. Yet somehow the BSD folks think there's some magic to the ports stuff that the Linux folks don't understand. Well, there isn't. And honestly to the extent there's a delta in packaging sophistication, the Linux folks tend to be ahead (c.f. Nix, for example).
- rednb 8mo ago
  The key thing is that on freebsd you do not risk bricking your system by installing a port. Even though this guarantee has become less true with PkgBase
  - ajross 8mo ago
    > The key thing is that on freebsd you do not risk bricking your system by installing a port What specifically are you trying to cite here? Which package can I install on Debian or Fedora or whatever that "bricks the system"? Genuinely curious to know.
    - rednb 8mo ago
      I was referring to the need to be careful to not modify/update packages also used by the base system. Since all packages are treated the same on Linux, you often can't tell which package can put you in trouble if you update it along with the dependencies it drags with it. This kind of problem happens frequently when users add repositories such as Packman on Linux providing dependencies versions different from the ones used by the base system of the distro. Experienced people know how to avoid these mistakes, but this whole class of problem does not exist on FreeBSD.
      - 8mo ago
rednb 8mo ago
Done the same since 2018 circa, never looked back. For a while even used it on the desktop, but was too much trouble due to specific tools we need that weren't supported properly. so we're using Linux on the desktop. FreeBSD is stable, lightweight, gets out of the way, and without drama.

manuelabeledo 8mo ago

You don’t need to follow the news cycle to use an operating system.

user3939382 8mo ago
I do follow the news cycle and if I’m hearing about a software package in it, something is wrong with the people making the software and I don’t trust them. Software is an engineering discussion or at least it’s supposed to be. Here’s my community guidelines: everyone be nice and respectful engage in good faith and focus on the math. Being social is fine so long that it doesn’t become a diversion from the engineering discussion. We’re talking about code not a philosophical treatise. There are civil ways to settle disagreements. I’m so sick to death of the politics.
- manuelabeledo 8mo ago
  It sounds like software projects are built by humans. Nothing wrong with that. Unless we’re assuming here that the BSD community is free from that.
  - user3939382 8mo ago
    The engineers I’ve worked with my whole career had no problem getting the work done without getting into giant political debates. If your politics comes before the engineering I don’t want anything to do with it.
    - manuelabeledo 8mo ago
      Can you give any examples of the type of politics that ruined XOrg or Linux?
      - user3939382 8mo ago
        Guy tells you he dislikes political discussions around engineering so you ask to engage in exactly that discussion?
        manuelabeledo 8mo ago
        I’m just trying to understand exactly what led you to make that decision. I don’t follow tabloid style news around software projects, maybe I’m missing on something.

ajross 8mo ago

> all the Xorg politics nonsense Uh... Xorg is packaged by FreeBSD too... Really the whole theme that (from the article) "FreeBSD ships as a complete, coherent OS" is belied by this kind of nonsense. No, it's not. Or, sure, it is, but in exactly the same way that Debian or whatever is. It's a big soup of some local software and a huge ton of upstream dependencies curated for shipment together. Just like a Linux distro. And, obviously, almost all those upstream dependences are exactly the same. Yet somehow the BSD folks think there's some magic to the ports stuff that the Linux folks don't understand. Well, there isn't. And honestly to the extent there's a delta in packaging sophistication, the Linux folks tend to be ahead (c.f. Nix, for example).

rednb 8mo ago
The key thing is that on freebsd you do not risk bricking your system by installing a port. Even though this guarantee has become less true with PkgBase
- ajross 8mo ago
  > The key thing is that on freebsd you do not risk bricking your system by installing a port What specifically are you trying to cite here? Which package can I install on Debian or Fedora or whatever that "bricks the system"? Genuinely curious to know.
  - rednb 8mo ago
    I was referring to the need to be careful to not modify/update packages also used by the base system. Since all packages are treated the same on Linux, you often can't tell which package can put you in trouble if you update it along with the dependencies it drags with it. This kind of problem happens frequently when users add repositories such as Packman on Linux providing dependencies versions different from the ones used by the base system of the distro. Experienced people know how to avoid these mistakes, but this whole class of problem does not exist on FreeBSD.
    - 8mo ago

rednb 8mo ago

Done the same since 2018 circa, never looked back. For a while even used it on the desktop, but was too much trouble due to specific tools we need that weren't supported properly. so we're using Linux on the desktop. FreeBSD is stable, lightweight, gets out of the way, and without drama.