Why haven't you moved to *BSD yet, /g/?
>no systemd/other Linux bullshit
>clean code, everything works perfectly
The Linux world is a mess, time to switch.
>>54682056
Ok, I just abandon every piece of software, which is closed source and Linux-only just to use this time-sink operating system on my desktop.
Because it's in no state to be a daily driver.
>>54682056
I use the most recent version of *BSD
>>54682088
You can enable Linux binary compatibility on FreeBSD.
>time-sink operating system
You've clearly never used it.
Being a BSD user in 2016 is like being a Linux user in 2006. Some Debian faggot was using my laptop and couldn't figure out tcsh. Feels good that I can still be smug to normies after all these years.
>>54682056
Because I wish not to associate myself with people like you.
>>54682088
>using closed source software
>>54682088
BSD is the opposite of a timesink. It's offered as a complete package where devs actually took their time to make shit work rather than rushing out the latest gimmick.
It's the antithesis of Arch/Gentoo philosophy.
Part of work is Music/Audio production and other various creative software is used
>>54682166
this
>tfw is just works
>tfw no unnecessary shit
>>54682056
But I've been running *BSD systems for years. OS X on desktop and OpenBSD on laptops
>>54682056
I use it for some things, but the hardware support is somewhat lacking compared to Linux. Hopefully my graphics card is fully supported soon.
I should have gone with Nvidia.
>>54682558
>I should have gone with Nvidia.
But then you could guarantee OpenBSD won't support your GPU
>>54682056
Hear, hear!
>>54682137
Does tcsh have much over zsh?
>>54682616
it's completely different
it's a shell with C-like syntax
>>54682056
>no systemd/other Linux bullshit
But I like systemd. We migrated our servers from CentOS 5 to 7 and didn't have to worry about our modified initscripts since systemd is smart enough to clean up runtime directories when a service dies.
>>54682717
Even if you like systemd the Linux world is a mess.
>>54682126
ok, show me running skype without fixing/tweaking OSS or ALSA in a extremely-time-consuming fashion then.
>>54682126
> Linux binary compatibility
Great having compatibility with linux 2.6.18 when mainline linux is 4.6...
>>54682857
because you aren't supposed to use it unless you absolutely have to
freebsd assumes you aren't retarded and use proprietary linux software
Can I do programming and music mixing shit with a *bsd installed in my flash drive which will work on every computer? If so I wanna try it. Also only Linux is the Slackware Linux. Others are like a joke.
I tried installing FreeBSD, OpenBSD and PC-BSD on my hp2730p a couple of years ago and driver support wasn't very good. The tocuhscreen didn't work, when I would rotate my screen i'd have to run a terminal command to make it work.
On Debian it all works out of the box. Has BSD support for it improved? Because i might try dual-booting it. Thats why i always leave a spare 20G partition.
>>54682997
I do know you can apparently install OpenBSD directly to a flash drive.
Never bothered to actually try it myself though.
>>54682717
The FreeBSD chief had a spech where he said that the way systemd does things is generally right.
Still I'm pretty sure FreeBSD will have it's own version which the benefits of systemd but without it's problems. For me the devellopers behind systemd are enough reason to not use it. They way they did things in the past just doens't appeal to me.
>>54682997
Mang, BSD runs even on toasters:
>https://www.embeddedarm.com/software/arm-netbsd-toaster.php
>>54683141
>>54683170
Well my main concern is does it have a music mixing software and driver support
>>54683199
I do know OpenBSD apparently has great MIDI support.
As for the music software it's pretty much on par with Linux. If it's open source, it'll probably be ported. I'm sure there's a port of shitty lmms.
>>54683217
That's enough I think. Anyway I was already planning to try it sometime.
>>54683249
Yeah, just checked and there's a lmms package.
http://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/5.9/packages/amd64/lmms-0.4.8p3.tgz
I've got no idea how old this version is, however.
>>54682056
Tried it.
Absolute garbage.
Never again.
Please drink all the bleach.
>>54682056
Fuck unix philosophy. Systmd is superior in every way.
No one uses you OS anyway.
>>54683402
>Fuck unix philosophy. Systmd is superior in every way.
Yeah, bloated shit that often has a lot of problems is much better than something that's simple and works, I totally agree.
>No one uses you OS anyway.
Source: your ignorant opinion
>>54682056
Because I love LVM and BSD hasn't got it. Because logind will become what systemd is.
Remember, GPL is a cuckold license. Use BSD if you want true freedom.
I recently moved to FreeBSD and I'm liking it.
There is one annoying as fuck problem though, and I can see how it would negatively affect someone's workflow: linux executables often segfault.
For the rest, I'm happy with it, really happy
BSD is for bourgeois faggots
>>54682997
you can always install an operating system in a flash drive and boot from it. Always. (unless of course your computer is (really) old and doesn't boot from a usb drive).
Just plug an empty usb drive (not the one from where you're installing) and tell bsd to install everything there.
Watch out though, a lot of the low level disk operations work differently on BSD, one confusing aspect when coming from linuks is that /dev/sd{a,b,c...} is not /dev/ada{0..} for hard disks and /dev/da{0..} for flash drives
>>54684408
BSD is cuck license you moron.
Please enjoy your corporate assrape.
Linux has left BSD in its rear view mirror because GPL.
>>54685172
always go with native binaries first
linux emulation should be your very VERY last resort
>>54685398
You don't emulate, you add a compatibility layer. Emulating is running shit meant from one architecture in another
>>54685258
>one confusing aspect when coming from linuks is that /dev/sd{a,b,c...} is not /dev/ada{0..} for hard disks and /dev/da{0..} for flash drives
depends how long you've been using linux for, linux didn't always put most types of disk onto "sd"
>>54685578
well that's semantics at this point, i've seen some BSDs even refer to it as the "linuxulator"
Why aren't you running Arch Linux on your phone yet?
>>54685578
the word "emulate" simply means "to be/act like", while commonly used in computing to refer to cpu emulation, that not all it can mean
the linux emulator in freebsd works somewhat like wine (from what i've read), they are emulators, just not cpu/machine emulators
>>54685655
Because I'm not a virgin
>>54685323
Lie
>>54685655
Can't
>>54682166
tfw the Antergos (Arch) distro on my linux workstation just segfaulted from last update
I run BSD full time on my regular workstation however I need a linux distro for virtualization/testing cross platform builds. The problem is finding one that can survive an update and not need constant maintenance
Time to look into vmm(4)
>>54685948
is vmd and vmm even done?
i thought it was a -current/6.0 thing
>>54685958
Some stuff works, like vmctl will run firefox in a VM (amd64), it will generally look like KVM when done.
Roadmap is
- full OpenBSD install amd64 first
- legacy i386 BSD install
- other systems, like ARM
>>54685674
Do you even know what WINE stands for?
>clean code, everything works perfectly
>everything works perfectly
>everything works
>>54686094
im glad you didn't post that epic nothing werkz pasta again because you were too autistic to get the GNU/Linux pasta in the first place
>>54686079
originally WINdows Emulator, changed because people kept confusing it for a machine emulator
Always been curious about BSD.
Could I get maven working on it without much hassle? JDK? MySQL/MariaDB? I feel at home on linux, but I wouldn't mind trying it.
>>54685948
>using linux in something resembling a production environment
Why the hell aren't you using Debian stable?
>>54686267
http://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/5.9/packages/amd64/
ctrl+f and the name of your packages here
chances are that if it's open source, it'll be here
>>54686275
i've been using arch on a production web/mail server for 2 years
>>54686309
and that is why both of your arms are in casts desu~
>>54685948
>needs a distro that can survive an update and doesn't need constant maintenance
>installs literally the worst distro in those aspects
>>54686347
that's one reason why i picked that image
>>54686309
>using arch on a production web/mail server for 2 years
if 50 Shades of Grey had been set in an IT department this would have been the plot synopsis
>>54682832
>Skype
There's your problem
>>54682832
Isn't skype for linux a barely maintained buggy piece of shit too though? I think Microsoft just doesn't care about other platforms.
Fuck it I'll try a BSD. Which one shall I start with? Will be on a T410 if that makes any difference.
>>54686686
OpenBSD or FreeBSD.
Hope you don't have a Nvidia GPU.
>>54686726
FreeBSD has proprietary Nvidia drivers.
>>54686686
FreeBSD
>>54686761
>proprietary anything
>>54686726
>>54686838
Guess it's FreeBSD then. Just out of curiosity, why not a different one?
>>54686914
If you have nvidia hardware you're kinda screwed on any platform unless you use the proprietary drivers. Nouveau only works decent at best and generally only on really old shit.
>>54686929
Because Nvidia sucks.
Even Linux kernel devs hate dealing with them, and OpenBSD certainly doesn't want to deal with them.
>>54686914
Go suck on Richard Stallman
Not every proprietary program is malware
>>54682056
I like linux bullshit.
>>clean code, everything works perfectly
Everything works even perfectlier on linux because we have drivers.
>>54686980
>Not every proprietary program is malware
But all malware is proprietary
>>54682056
I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as BSD, is in fact, Nothing-werks/BSD, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Nothing-werks plus BSD. BSD is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Nothing-werks system made useful by the Nothing-werks corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the Nothing-werks system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of Nothing-werks which is widely used today is often called BSD, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Nothing-werks system, developed by the Nothing-werks Project.
There really is a BSD, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. BSD is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. BSD is normally used in combination with the Nothing-werks operating system: the whole system is basically Nothing-werks with BSD added, or Nothing-werks/BSD. All the so-called BSD distributions are really distributions of Nothing-werks/BSD!
>>54687237
>haha look i swap words without understanding meanings xD
>>54687294
>haha look i unironically use bsd
>>54687294
that you Theo?
>>54687330
how do you ironically use an operating system, you fucking retard
>>54687371
If you're using Arch in a production environment you're using it ironically
>MIT license
discarded
>>54687506
>discarding software because it gives you more freedom
Found the fascist. Go back to Windows.
>>54687237
The BSDs are different operating systems, they have different kernels, APIs/ABIs, and system level utilities. They're about as closely related to one another as they are to any other Unix-like system. Comparing the BSDs to Linux distros is not really possible because the BSDs aren't made up of individual components that are maintained by various groups, the BSDs are an entire unit.
>>54682056
>>no systemd/other Linux bullshit
systemd > system v init bullshit
>>clean code, everything works perfectly
Go home Theo. Nobody cares about how pure your code is when it's slow, buggy and doesn't even support a fraction of the hardware in a normal laptop.
>The Linux world is a mess, time to switch.
Mess? Nothing is more messy than the fractioned BSD camp, where you have 142 different versions trying to essentially be the same thing: an OS that was outdated 25 years ago.
No, I'll stick to Linux. At least they don't have any pretentious goals of being a "hurr durr true UNIX".
>these fucking threads all day long
Do you guys even have an argument other than the obvious systemd one? Not that I dislike BSDs, because they do work, on the limited fucking range of hardware they support. BSDs are horribly slow to catch up with the latest developments, mostly due to the small community and zero corporate interest.
>>54687595
>Do you guys even have an argument other than the obvious systemd one?
Yes, but at this point I'm pretty sure the same guy's always making these threads just to shitpost in them.
>>54687170
So what?
>>54682056
You mean OpenBSD.
FreeBSD is like Mac OS X.
>>54687589
>code is when it's slow, buggy
top kek
>Nothing is more messy than the fractioned BSD camp, where you have 142 different versions trying to essentially be the same thing
That's literally the Linux world
>>54687589
>At least they don't have any pretentious goals of being a "hurr durr true UNIX".
not exactly a goal when it's already achieved
>>54687661
>top kek
I don't know why you would "kek" about it? It's true, OpenBSD doesn't even consider local exploits to be real exploits.
>That's literally the Linux world
Are you seriously implying that different versions of X window system is the same thing as completely different kernels, ABIs, utilities, bootstrappings, etc?
>>54687675
>achieved
I wasn't aware that any of the BSDs were UNIX 03 certified.
>>54687687
>doesn't understand that each of the BSD OSes is less fragmented than the single GNU/Linux OS
Remember, GNU/Linux is one single operating system.
I don't like waiting 5 years for my system to boot.
>>54687687
>he thinks that different versions of X window system is the only thing that's messy about Linux
>>54687702
Means literally nothing.
It's just an excuse for The Open Group to make money.
>>54687702
UNIX the trademark and Unix the OS are two different things. BSDs are Unix descendants.
>>54687710
>less fragmented
GNU/Linux has
>the exact same kernel
>virtually the same userland
The only differences between the distros are basically
>package management system
>default window management system / desktop environment
>default software and configuration
Meanwhile, the different BSDs have to introduce compatibility layers that translates executables for each other.
>>54687714
Linux isn't messy at all.
>>54687730
Which confirms my original point: Trying to be a "true" UNIX is a waste of time and money. It's not a brand of quality.
>>54687764
It IS true UNIX, they just can't say it is. It's a trademark.
>Linux isn't messy at all.
yeah all that freedesktop shit isn't a mess
>>54687710
>less fragmented
Are you stupid? Every time a neckbeard BSD developer is upset about some minuscule detail, he forks the project. Now do this over 25 years and you end up with the current situation, 142 unices that don't agree on a single way of doing things.
There is a reason why this joke exist:
What do you get if you lock up 12 BSD developers in a room for two weeks with a copy of BSD?
>12 dead developers and 14 different forks of BSD
I may try FreeBSD when I get comfortable with Gentoo and want to try something new. Not right now, though.
>>54687782
>freedesktop
Again, this is X shit. And btw, Linux is moving away from X (Wayland), BSD is still stuck with that hell.
>>54687804
>BSD is still stuck with that hell
Good thing it's not as bad in the BSD world as it is in Linux
>>54687795
>there's only 4 BSDs
>142
0/10
>>54687842
That's because all the other ones faded into obscurity.
>>54687842
Just counting the FOSS BSDs there's 4 big ones but there's an untold number of smaller ones. Usually they're just forked from FreeBSD but with a DE on top or some shit.
OSX is forked from NeXTSTEP which was a 4.3BSD/4.4BSD derivative and it includes some components from FreeBSD as well. It's technically a BSD itself, it's not all FOSS though.
>>54682056
Linux is a downgrade from Windows
BSD is a downgrade from Linux
Why would I want to put myself on suicide watch deliberately?
>>54687237
>current year
>soul patch
What the fuck?
>everything works perfectly
>use pc-bsd usb
>install this shit
>oh hey, it lets me choose my DE, let's go with gnome 3
>takes a year to install for some reason
>after it's finally done, log in
>gnome 3 crashed, can't do shit
Yeah.
BTW I know what you're about to say: don't use Gnome 3. You see, if you're going to include DEs on the list there, accessible to everyone, why the fuck do you add something that doesn't work?
>>54688030
>gnome 3
>on a bsd
>when it depends on systemd
You shouldn't lie on the internet, anon.
>>54688043
No lie, it was on the installer
I could choose anything else yes, I could also choose that and expect it to fucking work but I guess not
>>54688030
Because Unix is a clusterfuck which is why BSD and Linux suck balls. Windows is the only OS that made PC usable but it is so shit compared to OSX. Meanwhile OSX has such selective hardware options, I had to buy an older model of printer to match with OSX version and the components cost a fortune to replace.
There is not a single usable OS that I can feel enthusiastic about. They are all plagued.
>>54688030
>PC-BSD
Found the problem.
>>54685398
or maybe it's not linux emulation? Maybe software merely segfaults in *BSD which is even worse. All I've been using is from the repos, but it's software that never ever failed on linuks but it does on FreeBSD is not so good after all.
im living in the 21th century
>>54688030
>PC-BSD
>>54682056
>Why
cuck license
>>54688470
Nice meme
>>54688470
epik
If BSD is so great than why did Gabe Newel build SteamOS on top of GNU?
>>54687842
The joke is, there's 5,000 BSDs, because of all the times it's been stolen by corporations. Fucking turbo interstellar battleship taco autistic losers.
>>54687804
Freedesktop isn't X shit. So is PulseAudio.
dbus, too.
>>54688580
Oops, meant to say systemd, not Freedesktop.
>>54688546
*Linux
>>54688546
can't believe i didn't filter you yet
>>54688608
SteamOS uses the GNU license but also has proprietary binaries.
Its almost like the BSD people are lying about GNU restricting freedom !?!
>>54688662
My god I know you should just assume tripfags are retarded but you really take the cake
>>54682056
OP doesn't use BSD either.
>>54688689
Why didn't you filter him yet? His posts are always shit
>>54688736
I don't filter tripfags unless they piss me off, he's just hilariously stupid.
>>54682111
This
>>54682111
Me too, OS X is best BSD.
>>54683402
The BSDs are literally the most used operating systems in the world you moron.
>>54686914
They massively outperform the Linux drivers.
>>54687574
>They're about as closely related to one another as they are to any other Unix-like system.
This isn't true, they share common roots and descend from the original Unix codebase by way of Berkeley. They are substantially similar even today and there is a lot of cross-pollenation between FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, and Darwin (which is a BSD hosted on Mach).
>>54687595
>an argument other than the obvious systemd one
_______
>ZFS
>source code to entire system (kernel, userland, compiler) is smaller than source for Linux kernel
>barely anything ever changes
>single sensible Unixy way of administering the system, all you need is your favorite text editor
>can run your Linux and Windows programs easily
>jails are easy to set up and use
>performance is better than Linux
>can use decent quality proprietary drivers
>stable ABI, can use binary drivers from 10-20 years ago
>no GPL3 cancer
>>54689558
>This isn't true, they share common roots and descend from the original Unix codebase by way of Berkeley.
Except they don't because the original BSD was proprietary and using that source code would have meant a massive lawsuit.
>and Darwin (which is a BSD hosted on Mach).
The name of the Mac OS kernel Is XNU. Mach is the name of the design.
While it is true that Apple sometimes share upwards with FreeBSD (and 90% of Darwin core is basically FreeBSD), there is nothing but hostility between FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
NetBSD is just a curiosity, and hardly has a community at all and DragonflyBSD is even more so.
>>54689514
Nvidia's Linux drivers are written by Nvidia too you fucking idiot.
>>54689624
>Mach is the name of the design.
Mach is the name of the microkernel XNU is based on.
>>54682137
you can install tcsh in any linux distro, i don't get your point.
>>54689680
>Mach is the name of the microkernel XNU is based on.
>based on
Exactly, the design.
Even Hurd is a Mach-based kernel.
>>54689558
The original BSD devs eliminated all of the original Unix code throughout the 80s and 90s either because the code was inferior or because it was encumbered and the devs wanted to attract more people. BSDs aren't directly based on Unix anymore but they have the Unix philosophy at their center. It really depends on what you consider to be "Unix", I mean does it honestly matter that certain segments of code were written by devs in Bell Labs or not?
>>54689697
And kFreeBSD
>>54689697
You're a fucking moron
>>54689734
It's true you fucking imbecile
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Mach
I want to use BSD because too many tweens/kiddies use linux now.
Then i realize literally not a single program i need would work.
>>54689758
I never said Hurd wasn't Mach based you goddamned dipshit.
>>54689624
>Except they don't because the original BSD was proprietary and using that source code would have meant a massive lawsuit.
What? You're on crack. AT&T and Berkeley shared code back and forth in those days.
>The name of the Mac OS kernel Is XNU. Mach is the name of the design.
No, Mach is the name of the family of operating systems that XNU's source code is quite literally largely based on. It's a Mach microkernel in the same way that, say, FreeBSD is Unix.
>While it is true that Apple sometimes share upwards with FreeBSD (and 90% of Darwin core is basically FreeBSD), there is nothing but hostility between FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
This doesn't affect the truth of my statement, which is that the BSDs share a lot of code back and forth.
>NetBSD is just a curiosity, and hardly has a community at all and DragonflyBSD is even more so.
NetBSD is massively used as an embedded OS, but is popular among retro enthusiasts as well. It's about the only modern OS that will run on such a wide array of truly ancient and weird machines.
>>54689646
However the FreeBSD drivers massively outperform the Linux drivers.
They can't let the secret sauce out, this is why GPL drivers will always be lame.
>>54689828
>However the FreeBSD drivers massively outperform the Linux drivers.
Source.
Nvidia has no incentive on making their FreeBSD drivers work smooth. They have every intention to make their Linux drivers good though (CUDA, Steam, etc).
>They can't let the secret sauce out, this is why GPL drivers will always be lame.
Nvidia's Linux drivers isn't GPL'd you idiot.
>>54682056
I do, just not on the machine I'm making this shitpost from.
NEXT MEME PLEASE!
>>54689704
>The original BSD devs eliminated all of the original Unix code throughout the 80s and 90s either because the code was inferior or because it was encumbered and the devs wanted to attract more people.
Except for what, the six files? I'm familiar with the history here.
>BSDs aren't directly based on Unix anymore but they have the Unix philosophy at their center.
I never claimed they are running original AT&T code, but just that they are descended from it. This is totally true.
>It really depends on what you consider to be "Unix", I mean does it honestly matter that certain segments of code were written by devs in Bell Labs or not?
BSD is considered Unix by pretty much everybody with an informed opinion on the subject, even the AT&T guys who invented it.
>>54682997
>Slackware Linux
>Uses bare email to track bugs
get real
>>54689857
>Source.
Yes this is what they can't give you, certain proprietary source.
It's why your drivers will always be shit on Linux. Companies can't give out the source.
>>54689903
Okay, so you admit that you're just pulling this out of your ass and have no comparison study or benchmarks to show for it.
Got it.
Also, you seem to be under the impression that Nvidia's Linux drivers are GPL'd; they're not. They are proprietary as fuck, which is why they're not included in mainline.
>>54689929
Why don't you prove Linux has better drivers? You simply can't, this is why you're taking this tack.
And also probably you're:
>
3
Anyway I'm talking about the Nouveau you cuck, obviously.
I installed FreeBSD once, and it was alright. Booting seemed cleaner, but most of the applications that I like were ports from Linux. So you run into bizarre things that come from that, like weird directory structures and such. A lot of times, things won't work because they weren't ported 100% correctly so they expect things you'd find in a Linux environment but not in BSD. I used it for like 2 days and went back to Debian.
>>54689980
>Why don't you prove Linux has better drivers? You simply can't, this is why you're taking this tack.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvidia-win10-ubuntu15&num=2
tl;dr Nvidia's Linux drivers runs better than their Windows drivers
>Anyway I'm talking about the Nouveau you cuck, obviously.
In what world would that be a reasonable comparison? If you do this, you should compare it to the FreeBSD equivalent of Nouveau
>OH WAIT THERE ARE NONE!
Loonix 324
FreeBSD -100
>>54690049
>OH WAIT THERE ARE NONE!
No you'd rather not post how shit the GPL Nvidia drivers are because it's embarrassing.
>>54682056
No drivers for my laptop or desktop's wifi card.
>>54690249
>GPL Nvidia drivers
There is no such thing Nvidia have never written a GPL'd driver.
>>54690249
>nouveau is shit
I'd like to see you reverse engineer Nvidia's GPUs and write a functional graphics driver for them that works so well that it is released as the default driver.
>>54686671
Yeah, you can barely run skype on linux in the first place.
>>54689612
It's sad you're the only one who mentioned ZFS.
Proper ZFS alone is worth the switch.
>>54690443
- ZFS
- Per-application audio control by default
- Upstream changes don't horribly break the OS, since FreeBSD is its own distribution of itself
-
>>54689704
>The original BSD devs eliminated all of the original Unix code throughout the 80s and 90s either because the code was inferior or because it was encumbered and the devs wanted to attract more people. BSDs aren't directly based on Unix anymore but they have the Unix philosophy at their center.
This may surprise you, but this semantics game is silly. You can't say "contains code from X, so it's X". There are "cerified" "unix" OSs with zero original unix code; meanwhile there are programs which have individually replaced each line of code from their original versions over time, but are still "the same program". I highly doubt doom 4 has any substantial code left from quake 1, but it's still the "new, derived version" of id tech, step by step. Meanwhile, it's certain that source 2 still has some code left from quakeworld. It's the identity paradox.
You can only meaningfully talk about heritage, and BSD very clearly has a direct linear heritage with the original unix systems. That's the only thing people are talking about when they say that linux isn't a unix system: it's not based on "unix" code, regardless of "having unix code in it" at all, which might happen even though it's not derived from original unix systems.
>>54690557
Linux is just as Unix as BSD.
>>54690745
Enjoy your delusions.
>>54690557
You forgot jails
>>54690770
>DELETE THIS
Are you so insecure?
>>54690804
No, are you?
>>54690814
>yes
ok
>>54690835
Hey man I'm not the one saying that two OSs with objectively different relationships to a third OS don't have objectively different relationships to the third OS.
>>54690305
It's not like that's a $5 fix or anything
>come to BSD thread
>degenerated into nerds having a slappy slap fight over semantics
Never change, /g/
>>54682056
Can someone break down for me which BSD I should take?
As I read it, OpenBSD is for specialized stuff (i.e. firewalls) while FreeBSD is more directed at "all purpose"?
>>54691050
pretty much
>>54690839
both are just as much unix
>>54682056
>recently moved to a systemd-like init system
>slow as balls
>proprietary blobs all over the kernel
>shit driver support anyway, have to wrap windows drivers most of the time
>nothing works without tons of fiddling
>unclean cuck code
>>54691069
1+1=3
>>54691050
>all purpose
all purpose = server only
>>54691071
This is a BSD thread the linux general is elsewhere if you want to complain about gnu/linux.
>>54691071
>>recently moved to a systemd-like init system
> FreeBSD uses the traditional BSD-style init
>>slow as balls
BFS-like scheduler by default
>>proprietary blobs all over the kernel
>>>>linux
>>shit driver support anyway, have to wrap windows drivers most of the time
It's not "wrap windows drivers", it's "natively run windows drivers".
>>nothing works without tons of fiddling
>>>>linux
>>unclean cuck code
>>>>linux
>>54691050
OpenBSD is actually more general purpose than you'd believe.
NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are the truly specialized ones.
>>54691050
For a desktop? OpenBSD
>>54691078
>I'm literally retarded
>>54691137
>>>>>linux
Has fully blob-free kernels, unlike mainline BSDs. There's one BSD distro based on freebsd (?) that removes the blobs, and that's it.
>"natively run windows drivers".
>if I pretend it isn't what it is, it is it!!1 ndis is a native driver runner you guys!
>>>>>linux
Lol butthurt
>>>>>linux
Lol cuckhurt.
>>54682056
>everything works perfectly
I nearly choked to death laughing.Good one!
>>54691175
Top kek
>>54691181
>There's one BSD distro based on freebsd (?) that removes the blobs, and that's it.
There isn't.
OpenBSD also doesn't have blobs, but you'll just conveniently ignore that fact and call me a cuck.
>>54691181
>Has fully blob-free kernels, unlike mainline BSDs.
> The Linux kernel started to include binary blobs in 1996
>if I pretend it isn't what it is, it is it!!1 ndis is a native driver runner you guys!
> if I pretend it is what it isn't, it is!!! dis isn't native execution guise!!!
>Lol butthurt
Troll slain
>>54691195
What's so funny?
>>54691208
>OpenBSD also doesn't have blobs
there's no need to lie on the internet
>>54691227
Show me the blobs, then.
I'll be waiting.
>>54691227
Good thing he's not.
>>54691208
The bsdtards changed the meaning of words so they could lie about what's in their kernel. When they say "blob", they mean "driver". I.e. it is true that they don't have closed-source drivers in their kernel. What is not true, however, is that there are no closed-source blobs in the kernel. But hey, if they change the meaning of words so that there's no valid word to refer to what everyone else calls blob in relation to BSD, they can lie about it to your face and you can drink the koolaid!
>>54691264
>implying linux doesn't contain blobs
>>54691220
OpenBSD shills.
>>54691264
Show me the blobs that run in the kernel in OpenBSD.
>>54691272
Blob-free versions of the kernel, as well as deblobing patchsets, are readily available for linux kernels. The same isn't true for any BSD except that one BSD distro I forgot the name of.
>>54691285
The release is available for you to see for yourself at openbsd.org.
>>54691300
>Blob-free versions of the kernel, as well as deblobing patchsets, are readily available for linux kernels.
"It's free because people remove the nonfree parts"
No shit sherlock. That doesn't mean the original case doesn't contain blobs.
>>54691315
Nope, you make a claim, you back it up.
Fuck off.
>>54691283
Right? An alarming number of men want Theo's micropenis in their mouth.
>>54691327
Your claim: BSDs contain blobs.
Time to back it up, mate.
>>54691283
Nobody's shilling here, I'm telling him how it is. OpenBSD is actually intended for desktop use, and it works great at that.
>>54691264
OpenBSD is blob free, and ships that way. If you have hardware that requires firmware blobs to function, it downloads them, because otherwise said hardware doesn't function. Solution: Don't use hardware that requires firmware blobs.
>>54691327
I have backed up my claim with source. You have only been denying reality.
>>54691337
No, show me proof that OpenBSD runs blobs in the kernel.
My claim is that it doesn't and you claim that it does. Show me proof and I'll eat a shoe.
>>54691319
OpenBSD retards, everyone. This is basically why you shouldn't touch OpenBSD: every single thing they say OpenBSD does, actually the opposite is true. For example, it's the least secure operating system out there this side of DVL and it contains proprietary binary blobs from the get-go. It always breaks whenever you try to do anything and its performance is awful.
>>54691363
Sorry, I lost track of who was who, I only looked two posts back and assumed the guy pointing to the website was the guy saying it didn't have any.
>>54691377
You forgot to call it OpenMemeSD and link FUD blogs ;^)
>>54691363
See: openbsd.org
Livestream yourself eating a shoe right now.
>>54691377
>>54691340
>works great for desktop use
>unreadable fonts
>vanilla Ubuntu is better in every way and takes five minutes to install and doesn't involve coming out of the closet
>>54691393
Try harder.
Go to their CVS and show me exactly where the blobs are.
Tell me, what do you gain out of this?
>>54691407
>unreadable fonts
Sure thing bud
>vanilla Ubuntu is better
4u
>doesn't involve coming out of the closet
epik meme, shouldn't you be shitting up an Apple thread?
>>54691066
>>54691080
>>54691143
>>54691175
Thanks guys, but what are the actual differences?
Do you have more drivers or different possibilities?
>>54691377
Not sure what side you're shilling for but FreeBSD is nearly as shit,imho.I wanted to like BSD's,but the performance is horrible across the whole lot of them.
>>54682056
>install OpenBSD
>no wifi drivers
>can't install them without internet
no thanks
>>54689770
>Then i realize literally not a single program i need would work.
Which specific programs do you need?
Let me guess, Skype and Solidworks.
>>54682089
Use OSX for your daily driver.
>>54691436
>sure thing bud
Are you blind or just delusional?
>>54691446
He is shilling for FreeBSD.
He has been posting in these threads for a year or two. Recently he tried changing his tactics but he's still as transparent as ever. It's sad, really.
>>54691469
>implying I'm some conspiracy shill
>implying I'm not a crossboarder
>>54691440
OpenBSD has literally nothing, it's plain unusable.
FreeBSD is a standard desktop BSD and has (buggy) compatibility layers with linux, which allows you to get pretty much everything you want (if you don't mind the crashes).
NetBSD works on pretty much any hardware, including toasters, but if you don't need an OS on special-purpose hardware, you don't gain much from it. Dragonfly has HammerFS "I guess".
>>54688074
underrated post
>>54691469
>anyone I don't like is the same person
>>54691448
>plug in Ethernet cable
>holy shit that was hard
>>54691467
Neither. If OpenBSD had unreadable fonts I wouldn't have been able to use it for the last few years that I have been.
>>54691483
OpenBSD's actually intended to be a desktop OS. FreeBSD devs will laugh at you for such a thing.
>>54690443
Yep, there is no reason to use anything else especially for server duties.
>>54690557
>Upstream changes don't horribly break the OS, since FreeBSD is its own distribution of itself
Linux's pace of development and the lack of a stable branch are two reasons why it's so enormous.
Remember, the Linux kernel is bigger than the kernel, userland, and compiler sources for FreeBSD combined.
>>54691509
>implying my laptop has an ethernet port
>>54691509
>OpenBSD's actually intended to be a desktop OS
Yes, but it fails critically at it. It's an option on single-purpose hardware such as routers, but on anything else it's masochism.
>>54691483
>it's plain unusable.
Then I must be a fucking wizard because it's running fine here.
>>54691481
Yeah that explains why cuck is your favorite word.
>>54691504
Yes, yes it is. I'm surprised you didn't go "MUH MACs" yet.
>>54691511
>the lack of a stable branch
LTS is technically its stable branch, but it's generally so outdated that it's unusable on modern hardware.
>>54691532
>Yeah that explains why cuck is your favorite word.
The funny part is I never posted cuck.
>>54691509
>fonts blah blah I'm gay
Post a screen cap? I'm curious.
>>54691523
muh 2016
>>54691557
>muh 2016
pretty much, new laptops are shit
>>54691523
Sucks to suck
>>54691528
Nah it works great.
>>54691557
I only use it on my laptops and a few desktops at home, where I am not.
>>54690745
>no STREAMS
>>54691448
You sure you just didn't forget to set them up with a file in /etc?
Or do you actually need a firmware? Pretty sure you could manually do it with a USB flash drive.
>>54691581
Yup. Having an Ethernet port and DVD drive makes me feel safe.
>not at home
Cool, cool. Email me when you get back from your boyfriend's house: [email protected]
>>54691533
>LTS
>two years
>"long term"
For FreeBSD that's about the lag time between CURRENT and STABLE. LOL 'long term.'
>>54691598
Don't bother, if anon can't get the proper with from the machine he's currently shitposting from and stick them on a USB stick and copy them, actually installing and using a Unix OS with a default interface which expects familiarity with the command line will be far beyond his capabilities.
Most Linux users can't use the command line, go look at the Ubuntu forums and see for yourself.
>>54682056
Because I actually like using my computer.
>>54691340
>OpenBSD is blob free
>requires firmware blobs
m8...
>>54691728
>m8...
Oh, it's you.
>>54691728
>requires
Yeah, same as hurd does.
>>54691728
>I can't into English
m8....
systemd is a problem only for people who make it a problem.
Because I'm not a programmer or autist and all my games are on Windows 7. I'd like to switch and try some of these other operating systems out for a bit, but I'm too stupid. The closest I ever got was running Ubuntu for a month back in 2010, then formatting the drive and reinstalling Windows because I didn't see a real point in making myself suffer by using mpv.
>>54686914
>proprietary hardware is fine
>proprietary drivers give me hives, though
wat
>>54691794
>mpv
>suffer
Get out.
>>54691728
>>requires firmware blobs
Ships* with firmware blobs, it the same with GNU/Linux. Whether they're used depends on your hardware. Stop buying proprietary hardware if you care so much about it.
They never denied they have them either.
>>54691843
OpenBSD doesn't even ship with them. I think it would actually be illegal for them to do.
It just detects if your hardware needs them and downloads them.
>>54688662
all right, there we go, tripfag filtered!
fuck you
