/bsd/ thread
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
All BSD thread, including Darwin.
What is your BSD of choice?
How's NeXTBSD and DragonFly doing?
I want to run openbsd but I run freebsd because I need to actually do shit.
>>52388071
Holy fucking shit, Darwin isn't BSD, it doesn't have a BSD kernel, fucking stop being an Apple shill.
>>52388209
I'd use OpenBSD if I didn't have an Nvidia graphics card. Unfortunately, I do, so I use FreeBSD.
>>52388071
Used to use NetBSD and love it, but let it go because it supported pretty much nothing.
It's sad to see you can't actually run BSD system on modern hardware.
>>52389235
>It's sad to see you can't actually run BSD system on modern hardware.
So the only hardware that matters to you is a graphics card hu?
>>52388071
Is BSD any useful for general consumerist desktop purposes? Windows is windows and linux is in a permanent half-borked state.
>>52390742
I use it as a desktop. It runs the music production and astronomy programs I need.
You can also run Linux programs too if you install a compatibility package, but I avoid doing so.
>>52389091
>kernel with BSD subsystem is non-bsd
ok kid
>>52389607
>you care about an important hardware piece what is wrong with you
grow up m8
FreeBSD is a great system and I enjoyed learning and tinkering with the base but the hardware support (ex you cant switch to a tty if X.org is open) and the filesystem slowness in non-raid configurations is too much for me to bear.
>>52390759
Good to know, I'm seriously considering it at this point. What's a good laptop to stick it on, are the general t420/t520/x220 memepads well supported?
>>52388071
Does Windows count as BSD?
>Windows borrows code from *BSD
>>52390831
How slow is it? My FreeBSD install is on a SSD, so I haven't noticed it.
>>52388071
Why isnt there a reactos for OSX? or a wine? I know about darling, but that is only cli based binaries that are osx only (few and far between).
>>52390857
I'm pretty sure the only thing windows ever borrowed directly from the BSDs was the TCP/IP stack. At least until just recently when Microsoft donated to OpenBSD and started borrowing OpenSSH
>>52390859
you could do some benchmarking yourself with hdparm -Tt (you might have to install the package first tho) but for me it cuts my 550mb/s read to 220mb/read (UFS 4k here) i tried with ZFS and it's even worse.
>>52390902
There's no pkg package for hdparm.
>>52390956
http://bin63.com/how-to-measure-the-io-read-and-disk-performance-on-freebsd
diskinfo -t seems to be an equivalent.
>>52390888
Stuff for OSX already mostly runs on other *nix OSes after recompiling anyway. If you wanted to make a clone something like Darwin + GNUstep + heavy amounts of customization would bring you pretty close.
Darwin doesn't support many hardware platforms though and its code is mostly borrowed from other open source projects anyway. Using GNU/Linux or one the BSDs as a base would make the most sense.
>>52390985
Yeah, found the same info. Gotta take my younger sister somewhere, so take my paste.ada0
512 # sectorsize
240057409536 # mediasize in bytes (224G)
468862128 # mediasize in sectors
4096 # stripesize
0 # stripeoffset
465141 # Cylinders according to firmware.
16 # Heads according to firmware.
63 # Sectors according to firmware.
CVTR545405JS240CGN # Disk ident.
Seek times:
Full stroke: 250 iter in 0.009425 sec = 0.038 msec
Half stroke: 250 iter in 0.010856 sec = 0.043 msec
Quarter stroke: 500 iter in 0.024486 sec = 0.049 msec
Short forward: 400 iter in 0.013940 sec = 0.035 msec
Short backward: 400 iter in 0.014878 sec = 0.037 msec
Seq outer: 2048 iter in 0.077970 sec = 0.038 msec
Seq inner: 2048 iter in 0.073564 sec = 0.036 msec
Transfer rates:
outside: 102400 kbytes in 0.271308 sec = 377431 kbytes/sec
middle: 102400 kbytes in 0.213711 sec = 479152 kbytes/sec
inside: 102400 kbytes in 0.217416 sec = 470986 kbytes/sec
>>52391062
looks like you are being cucked with about 100mb read but eh, might not be noticeable. it's definitely noticeable on my sandisk tho, i'll stick to glorious ext4/lunix for a while
Not running Darwin BSD. Son I am disappoint.
>>52392500
Project been dead for a long time. Apple made it specifically so you can't compile it on non-apple hardware / put together a good base system while screaming "open sores open sores"
I've used Free and OpenBSD over the years.
I have FreeBSD on my rpi right now.
After trying out Debian (still as shit as I always remembered it) and various buggy minimal Lunix distros, it was nice having something that just werks like BSD does.
It's macabre to think, but Linux has probably gotten *worse* since I was using it regularly five years ago. I'm sticking with BSD and OS X.
>>52392515
Fun to use though.
ive been wanting to switch to bsd for a while now but i still use arch because of pacman. is pacbsd any good?
>>52392667
Remember how Debian doesn't have ed in the default install?
>>52393892
No idea what pacbsd is. FreeBSD and OpenBSD are p neat.
>>52391209
Isn't it 377 mb?
>>52390831
Limited filesystem support I can understand getting upset with, but I thought you could do an install on zfs now (even without the raid options). OSX used to use the same ufs as bsd, and abandoned it for HFS+, which is really horrible.
The x vs tty thing never bothered me. I only notice it on any system when something like compiz takes a dump and I have to switch out to kill it. And I usually don't use BSD on a workstation.
BSD has never just worked on my systems like Linux has. I don't know why. If love to try it out though at some point--i just don't think the support is completely there just yet.
I'm not shitposting either, this is completely legitimate.
>>52394154
>No idea what pacbsd is.
It's the arch linux base but uses the freebsd kernel instead of the linux kernel. Because it cannot use systemd it makes use of sysvint/openrc for init and daemon management.
>>52393892
It's kinda obscure, I doubt you'll find many that have used it. Honestly I can't see the need for something like pacbsd. The main draw to the FreeBSD kernel is the support for jails, zfs and dtrace but those are typically workstation features and a workstation isn't really a place for rolling releases where stability isn't ensured.
>>52388071
That old NetBSD logo. My African American. Makes me want to find a T-shirt of it, but I'm not sure they make them in < XL
>>52390856
OpenBSD will surely work on those, at least if they have the correct wireless.
Free and Net, probably as well.
I want to run OpenBSD but I'm a Java developer. How well does Java 8 run?
>>52390856
That's what the OpenBSD devs actually use, I believe.
>>52397743
Subtle, anon
>>52398036
It runs.
http://openports.se/devel/jdk
>>52390856
Yes thinkpads have good support (Touchpad, trackpoint, wifi, brightness, automatic suspend/resume).
OpenBSD devs mainly work on thinkpads and ultrabooks atm.
>>52395814
Give specifics
>>52390831
>(ex you cant switch to a tty if X.org is open)
Are you saying OpenBSD can do this? Do you hit a shortcut key for a tty and it keeps the X session open in the background? Is that even possible?
>>52390831
>can't switch to tty if X.org is open
What? I can switch just fine.
>>52399503
I'm assuming you mean from FreeBSD. Guess I'll give it a try later today.
Running a dev environment, freebsd within freebsd via bhyve. Both have ZFS, and the VM is backed by a ZVOL.
Does it make more sense to enable compression on the ZVOL or within the VM? For io speed? For compression ratio?
Also, what sync options should I use in both the VM and the host's ZVOL? Need to insure data integrity, I don't want a stray kernel panic curdling either system.
>>52390831
>(ex you cant switch to a tty if X.org is open)
This has been fixed, not sure at what point though. Switching to tty no longer gives a black screen.
If you are on an old release that doesn't support it, keep in mind that even though the screen is black that the keyboard still works, so you can login to reboot or startx again or whatever.
