2 ms·

I'm tired reading about this. It seems to boil down to politics, mostly and features less... The team with the better players will win this. What is interestin

by atmosx 13y ago

I'm tired reading about this. It seems to boil down to politics, mostly and features less... The team with the better players will win this. What is interesting though, is to see how the BSD ecosystem will handle this. Will they adapt in time or they will lag even further behind this? * NetBSD might reached the point of virtual insignificance long time ago. * OpenBSD is out of funds - which is a shame considering the software they produced (PF, OpenSSH, OpenNTPD), but their indifference for desktop makes them obsolete. * FreeBSD (I use it in both my servers) is the most up-to-date but now with system-d/upstart not supported, I think they will run into trouble relative soon. Darwin said it best: the ones most adaptable to change survive. Of course, the other happy scenario is that given the fact that these OSes power some big-corp servers, these big-corps will step in and fund these projects, I wouldn't hold my breath though.

rodgerd 13y ago
I'm pretty sure that FreeBSD are ressurecting their OS X-derived launchd experiment to get a better init. The argument that sysv "is Unix" is pretty much horseshit at this point. Solaris and OS X don't use a sysv style init, most of Linux doesn't any more (either upstart or systemd). At this point one is redefining "real Unix" down to NetBSD and HP-UX.
- profquail 13y ago
  Here's the link to the port-in-progress of launchd to FreeBSD, if anyone is curious: https://github.com/rtyler/openlaunchd https://github.com/rtyler/openlaunchd
Sssnake 13y ago
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that netbsd and openbsd users demand the lastest in temporary, throw away, bloated, buggy shitware that linux distos are jumping on at any given moment. The fact that they don't use that crap is their main selling point. And no, netbsd is not "virtual insignifance", openbsd is not out of funds (they got over $100k just when they asked for $20k recently, and idiots take that to mean they are dead?). FreeBSD is not the most up to date, it is the most linux-like. Why do you think it is so impossible for them to also start using this pile of shit if that is what their userbase wants?
- ciupicri 13y ago
  > netbsd is not "virtual insignifance" Who uses NetBSD?
sdfjkl 13y ago
The sane init is one of the main selling points of the *BSDs for me. I don't want any of this make-my-desktop-linux-boot-two-seconds-faster bullshit on my servers.

by atmosx 13y ago

rodgerd 13y ago

I'm pretty sure that FreeBSD are ressurecting their OS X-derived launchd experiment to get a better init. The argument that sysv "is Unix" is pretty much horseshit at this point. Solaris and OS X don't use a sysv style init, most of Linux doesn't any more (either upstart or systemd). At this point one is redefining "real Unix" down to NetBSD and HP-UX.

profquail 13y ago
Here's the link to the port-in-progress of launchd to FreeBSD, if anyone is curious: https://github.com/rtyler/openlaunchd https://github.com/rtyler/openlaunchd

Sssnake 13y ago

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that netbsd and openbsd users demand the lastest in temporary, throw away, bloated, buggy shitware that linux distos are jumping on at any given moment. The fact that they don't use that crap is their main selling point. And no, netbsd is not "virtual insignifance", openbsd is not out of funds (they got over $100k just when they asked for $20k recently, and idiots take that to mean they are dead?). FreeBSD is not the most up to date, it is the most linux-like. Why do you think it is so impossible for them to also start using this pile of shit if that is what their userbase wants?

ciupicri 13y ago
> netbsd is not "virtual insignifance" Who uses NetBSD?

sdfjkl 13y ago

The sane init is one of the main selling points of the *BSDs for me. I don't want any of this make-my-desktop-linux-boot-two-seconds-faster bullshit on my servers.