/bsd/ - *BSD General Thread
Discuss FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFlyBSD, FreeNAS...
IRC -- #baot @ irc.rizon.net
News: http://dragonflydigest.com - http://undeadly.org - http://freebsdnews.com
Ask questions, get answers.
Can someone help me install cde on freebsd. I follow the instructions at https://sourceforge.net/p/cdesktopenv/wiki/FreeBSDBuild/ but when I start it, it won't start up, it just keeps me at the login screen
Nobody cares. Go back to your irc circlejerk. Linux won over 10 years ago.
>>54894162
It's not a competition, shithead. OpenBSD is not a product being sold.
And even if it was, most Linux distros today include (depend on?) software authored by the OpenBSD project.
Well, this is interesting. Someone told me bsd is only good for servers. Was he right? What do you use bds for? Their website says it's portable safe and fast, but i can just run ubuntu on my pc and debian on my server.
>>54894039
Are you trying to run dtlogin or startx? If dtlogin, are you running it as root? Have you verified that CDE works when launched by startx?
>>54894452
No it's good for desktops as well, thiugh this varies somewhat between BSD's. FreeBSD is more focused on servers, because several of the main devs work for companies with FreeBSD datacenters.
But there are spins of FreeBSD for desktops, most notably PC-BSD which has historically primarily supported KDE and Gnome, and with the rise od systemd on Linux has recently begun work in a more BSD-appropriate desktop system called Lumina. Though even on PC-BSD the server-orientation comes through with the use of the ZFS filesystem by default.
OpenBSD has always been a desktop/workstation focused project. KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment, XFCE etc are available, as well as PC-BSD's new Lumina desktop. There is a tendency for OpenBSD users towards minimalism, frequently eschewing desktop managers for simpke sindow mangers like CWM or FVWM.
>>54894452
BSD is only good when you got into Linux because it isnt mainstream and then one of your friends downloads Ubuntu and you flip hipster shit
I'm not sure which distribution of FreeBSD to go with for regular desktop and development use. I was thinking PC-BSD but can I get more opinions? Thank you.
>>54895718
PC-BSD *is* FreeBSD, it just has a more desktop oriented installer. I'd go with PC-BSD unless you just want to set up X and your desktop/window manager yourself. Either path gets you to the same destination.
>>54894452
FreeBSD's slogan is "The Power to Serve"
Think about that. I love BSD but FreeBSD is obviously designed for serving and nothing more.
>>54894550
I've tried dtlogin and startx and yes I was using dtlogin as root. When I use dtlogin I can't get past the login screen when I use startx it just goes dark and crashes
>>54896838
Does it print any error to the console?
>>54896838
What is your base system? FreeBSD or PC-BSD? Which version?
Have you double checked to make sure you didn't miss a symlink or create a directory or link under the wrong account, or forgot to set your fully qualified hostname into your hosts file? I had a few issues a few days ago getting it to work on OpenBSD 5.9 and double checking everything helped find the issues.
>>54896838
>>54897408
>>54894550
>>54894039
because whatever shitty DE bsd comes with was already too mainstream and good, right? What a contrarian timesink.
>>54897514
here i'll give you a (you) because you've been so desperate for one
>>54897127
I can't even get to the console after I start it up. I can't even change ttys
>>54897408
Base is freebsd
>>54897540
Surely X must've logged something.
Look around in /var/log/.
>>54894232
>OpenBSD is not a product being sold
Ahahahahaaa
>OpenBSD version 5.9
>Price: $60.00
>Sixty
>Fucking
>Dollars
>>54894452
You can consider each BSD to be nearly as different from one another as they are from other Unix-like system. They have common ancestry and similar beliefs regarding licensing but their software is quite different. The software they do have in common is mostly userland stuff that would also probably run on GNU/Linux or illumos/solaris, etc with few changes.
>>54897614
You can download it for free. If you buy a CD, the money goes towards funding the project.
>>54898048
It's cute the way you believe that trolls are interested in actual rational discussion.
>>54898048
>>54898207
yeah watch this, his next post is gonna be something like:
>bwahaha BSDfags THIS delusional
or something
>>54897540
>I can't even change ttys
Lets me ask you: Are you use Syscons instead VT, aren't it?
>>54896838
I've found a spare machine. I'll install freebsd on it and see if i can get cde going. Probably tomorrow at the earliest.
I was looking to create a fork of a BSD and develop it as a platform for FOSS/Libre gaming, something like Steam but free. I was hoping to compile games when they're installed, but also have a binary for shitty hardware.
What BSD would I be looking at to avhieve these goals? I saw Gentoo BSD as a possible solution but I wanted /g/s opinion.
Also, I was thinking BSD's init system was better than OpenRC, is that something I should obsess over is it of minimal importance?
>>54901468
Playstation 4
So if I were to get one of those SBCs with GPIO, how easy would it be to program it with NetBSD? I'm looking at using C for it.
>>54894452
>Force10 Networks uses NetBSD as the underlying operating system that powers FTOS (the Force10 Operating System).[21] In 2013 the name FTOS will be replaced by DNOS as the generic operating system name for all Dell Networking portfolio. Force10 made a donation to the NetBSD Foundation in 2007 to help further research and the open development community.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force10
How the fuck do you people handle the dependencies? I used openbsd for like 2 days and then went back to arch.
>>54904983
pkg and pkg_add seem to do fine with them.
What happened?
>>54904983
We don't have to handle the dependencies, the openbsd package system handles them just fine (all BSDs package managers). Are you sure you aren't confusing openbsd and slackware? That's the only unixy system I know whose package manager doesn't handle dependencies, and its otherwise the most bsd-ish of the linux distros.
>>54897540
Which version of freebsd are you using? Did you compile cde with clang or gcc? Did you have all updates applied? I tried with a fully updated 10.3, using clang, and the build failed partway through.
>>54894836
>minmalism
Yeah sure thing bro. I was expecting dependencies to be the same as arch but instead it's the same as debian just that the overall system is more slower.
>>54909171
OpenBSD maybe but not FreeBSD.
