>tfw on BSD
>tfw no bloated init systems and kernels like Linux, OSX and Windows
Yes, BSD is fairly nice. The base system is beautiful. Well architected, well documented, everything is shockingly simple and flexible and nice.
Support from third parties could be better. It's kind of annoying how much FOSS software follows hardcore Linux-isms and uses Linux-specific APIs, and depends on the systemd Suite of Madness, even when they provide no benefit over plain old POSIX.
I've only come across a couple things I wanted that weren't ported, though, and didn't run perfectly under the Linux compatibility layer (such as Steam). There's always Wine, though.
I use FreeBSD 10.2-RELEASE as my desktop, and I have no complaints. It's a great system.
>>51255676
>tfw not on BSD yet
Maybe once December rolls around I'll check it out (on Arch right now). If it doesn't work out for my desktop due to not having drivers for my audio interface, Non DAW doesn't work etc. it'll probably still go to my server or be a base I run Linux on somehow. Hopefully it turns out as great as I think it'll be.
>>51256296
Well, do you have any questions for BSD users? I'm kinda bored and might be willing to field whatever I'm capable of answering.
Yeah, you don't have a bloated init system, but you lack a lot of drivers for shit that, sadly is going to be proprietary for a while.
>>51255676
OSX is BSD, OP.
>>51256627
Nah, it's Darwin and launchd.
>>51256627
I've been critical of that assessment. OS X is not a direct derivation of BSD. You cannot hypothetically trace the evolution from Berkeley Software Distribution into modern OS X commit-by-commit as you could, say. FreeBSD (ignoring whether that historical commit history is necessarily available).
OS X is more of a UNIX amalgamation. It was built up by borrowing already-developed code from many different projects, cherry-picking here and there. The BSDs sometimes cherry pick things from each other and elsewhere, sure, but the core system can still be cleanly traced back to BSD. OS X's cannot.
OS X is more like a stepchild of BSD. It borrowed a lot of its behaviors and semantics from BSD because it was partially raised by BSD, but it also had its other father that it still saw on the weekends, so it was never really a true BSD.
That said, OS X gets way more hate from you guys than it deserves. I mean, it's still a decent UNIX underneath the commercial interface. You still have access to that underlying system, and to Macports, and Homebrew, and alternative window managers. It even has a few of its own decent contributions -- launchd is a fairly nice init system, for instance,, and some FreeBSD developers have even expressed interest in replacing rcng with it.
I mean, I don't use OS X myself, but I'm kinda surprised you guys don't embrace it. You get a nice UNIX core that you can tamper with as you please, access to most *nix software you'd use on Linux, but also first class support from lots of proprietary applications and games (maybe gaming-wise it isn't super popular yet, but it's improving).
>>51256708
>I mean, I don't use OS X myself
obviously, otherwise you would never have recommended macports
>>51256686
Yes, the kernel is Darwin. But Darwin is based on BSD.
>tfw on OS X
>>51256725
Fair enough. I just know that it has access to lots of POSIX applications that a Linux or BSD user would be accustomed to.
I was considering using it as my PC operating system for a time, because some of FreeBSD's features started to show their age (like the drm system) but those are getting active attention/improvements now, so I never ended up using it.
>>51256729
See my post: >>51256708
Darwin is based on many things. It's partially based on BSD, with many entire software stacks being taken right from BSD basically untouched, and many parts of the POSIX API layer and userland being taken from BSD, but it's also based on other things. It's not a direct derivation of BSD at all. It just shares some semantic similarities.
>>51256729
No, it has more to do with Nextstep and Mach than modern *BSD.
>>51256750
How does one rice OSX?
>>51256750
>being a Macfag
end oneself
>>51256582
Probably not something you'd be able to answer but, does BSD work with the Edirol UA-1000? (even if it requires a workaround). I know ALSA supports it natively. Also my other audio interface is an FA-101 that uses Firewire and it'd be nice if it worked too. On Linux that's done with FFADO, but I don't think they have plans to port over to BSD. How's support for AMD/Nvidia hardware? I'm thinking of trading my gtx 770 for something else AMD since the Noveau drivers are having some issues with freezing right now. Is there support for JACK and Non DAW? I figure JACK would be fine but I'm not sure about Non. Also how's the administration aspect? I'm not a fan of SystemD (going to check out Gentoo also because of that and Portage). Is Weechat on BSD? Any command line tools that have major differences from their GNU versions I should know about? How small is the RAM usage of a base system with an X server running? I think that should be it from the top of my head. If you don't know don't sweat it.
>>51256582
is it easy to make the switch to freebsd as a desktop from linux? is there anything i should know about compatibility between the two?
>>51256582
Few more actually. If you work with MCU's how's the JLink software on BSD? Also to what extent is the Linux compatibility layer able to make things work? Are we talking hardware or just software level? I don't imagine all the Linux applications will work but I want to know the limits if you have experience before I dive in.
>>51256868
A quick look through Google would make me think that FreeBSD and NetBSD (lol) both support your Edirol device.
As for Nvidia, I can't speak for it, but I do know AMD works.
How good is openBSD?
>>51256995
only one way to find out anon
keep in mind it doesnt like virtualbox though and you're better off using a real computer as a guinea pig
that or use vmware
>>51256995
It's the least harmful BSD "distro".
>>51256868
> BSD work with the Edirol UA-1000? (even if it requires a workaround). I know ALSA supports it natively. Also my other audio interface is an FA-101 that uses Firewire and it'd be nice if it worked too.
I cannot say. BSD doesn't use ALSA, that's a very Linux thing. You can probably google around to see which DSP chip it uses, and then consult Google and driver man pages to see if it's supported. If the firewire device uses some standard interface (like USB audio devices do) that's probably supported. I can't say one way or the other.
> How's support for AMD/Nvidia hardware? I'm thinking of trading my gtx 770 for something else AMD since the Noveau drivers are having some issues with freezing right now.
Don't even try to use an AMD GPU. You will probably have a nightmarish time. Nvidia on the other hand, that's just as good as on Linux. Noveau works, I hear. The proprietary Nvidia drivers are available for FreeBSD, and they are basically the same as the Linux ones. Performance is great, stability is great. I use an Intel chip on my desktop, but I have a friend who does both game development and gaming on FreeBSD using the Nvidia proprietary drivers.
> Is there support for JACK and Non DAW? I figure JACK would be fine but I'm not sure about Non.
I have no idea what Non is, but yes, there are packages for JACK and it works. Pulse too.
> Also how's the administration aspect? I'm not a fan of SystemD (going to check out Gentoo also because of that and Portage).
FreeBSD's rcng is right where it should be on the spectrum of power vs simplicity. Basically all administrative tasks on BSD are much easier and more straightforward than on Linux, and abundantly well documented. You will probably find yourself pleasantly surprised how nice the base system is to use, if coming from Linux. I did.
Cont...
>>51256841
Be more specific.
>>51256868
>>51257087
> Is Weechat on BSD?
Yes. You can search FreeBSD's ports here: https://freshports.org Most ports are also available as binary packages.
> Any command line tools that have major differences from their GNU versions I should know about?
There are differences, sure. Mostly, they have avoided the massive feature creep that GNU has succumbed to. The man pages are available. You should be fine.
> How small is the RAM usage of a base system with an X server running?
I just did a fresh bootup, and logged into X (Xfce), I was using 290 MiB. After starting Chromium and my text editor that jumped to 410 MiB.
The usage of the base system is definitely lower than Linux, but really, your RAM usage is going to be dominated by your applications. It's going to depend on what DE/WM setuo you use, what background programs you have running. This is very user-specific. In similar setups to Linux, the RAM usage will probably be largely similar, except in contrived cases.
>>51256898
Yeah. Most common applications are available for FreeBSD. For the most part, they work the same as they would on Linux. You'll find a few applications here and there that don't work, but some of them can even be run through the Linux emulation layer. See https://freshports.org to get an idea if what you want/need is ported.
>>51255676
>what is launchd
Checkmate.
Also, enjoy your firmware binary blobs in-kernel, faggot.
>>51257060
>most harmful
FTFY
>>51256868
ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/5.8/packages/amd64/
Take a look here to see if what you want is available.
Keep in mind that this isn't even the ports collection, which is another way of installing things and has even more applications.
>>51256899
> Few more actually. If you work with MCU's how's the JLink software on BSD?
I don't work with MCUs much, sorry.
> Also to what extent is the Linux compatibility layer able to make things work?
To some extent. Don't expect magic. It implements most of the kernel API, but it's somewhat out of date. Some software will work, other stuff won't. Steam doesn't work, for instance. But Sublime Text works, and so does Linux Flash Player (Linux versions of these are both in ports).
I don't use it for a ton of stuff, since basically everything I need is available natively in ports.
> I don't imagine all the Linux applications will work but I want to know the limits if you have experience before I dive in.
Search freshports to see if what you need is available first.
>>51257060
Most of the supposed benefits of OpenBSD are criminally overstated. For the most part, the four major BSDs (Open, Net, Free, Dragonfly) are roughly on par with each other in many ways. Pretty much all of the supposed security benefits of OpenBSD are achievable everywhere else, even on Linux.
>>51257161
The most wonderful thing about OpenBSD is the solid starting foundation and documentation.
You can learn almost everything just from reading the well written manpages. You can't get that anywhere else.
>>51257111
Like how did you get the blue border around your windows instead of the usual Aqua look? Also does that look apply to all your programs like even Firefox and such?
>>51257177
The documentation on FreeBSD is absolutely stellar. There are a wealth of man pages, not just for specific programs and interfaces, but also more general-purpose man pages for system administration, architecture, design choices, etc.
I can't imagine OpenBSD is significantly better than FreeBSD in this regard.
But BSD in general is lightyears ahead of Linux in terms of documentation.
>>51257087
>>51257115
>>51257161
>>51257197
It seems I lost my tripcode. Woops.
>>51257087
>>51257115
>>51256952
>>51257154
Thanks guys!
>>51257197
The documentation being similarly good is possibly because all the BSDs share some things in common.
Look at azalia(4) for one example. They're almost exactly the same on both Open and Free, because the current implementation seems to be from OpenBSD.
How's gaming on BSD? Life is shitty enough as it is from that perspective since a ton of good games don't support Linux. I can only imagine most developers haven't even heard of BSD.
>>51257179
It's XQuartz and I'm using urxvt with bspwm. That's what displays the borders around the terminals. It doesn't apply to aqua apps though, only to x11's.
>>51257314
Emulators run, I guess. Though MAME performance in OpenBSD is fucking shit, I don't know if running it in a VM is what causes it. Couldn't compile my own version for shit.
Anything that was open source is almost guaranteed to be ported too.
So you have things like Doom, Quake, OpenXCom, etc.
>>51257314
Wine is basically the same. There's very few interfaces which are implemented on Linux, but not also implemented on BSD and OS X.
Linux Steam won't run, and many Linux-native games use tons of Linux-isms and Linux-specific APIs, so that's a whole mess on its own.
If as a gamer you already find Linux lacking, BSD isn't giving you anything new.
That said, I player older games just fine in Wine. Performance is as good as Linux or better.
>>51257121
No BSD uses launchd, you maroon.
>>51257387
Some FreeBSD guys (but not all of them) have expressed interest in using it.
>>51257387
OSX does and NeXTBSD will.
BSD kernel=decent
Linux kernel=bloated shit
OSX kernel=ancient shit
Windows kernel=supreme shit
HURD=vaporware
Minix=academic relic
>>51257402
For the last time, OSX isn't a true *BSD.
>>51257121
>freetard calling anyone else a faggot
Don't you have some toejam to eat off of Stallman-sama's foot?
>>51255676
What makes BSD better?
Pretty sure Linux has had a lot more work put into it and has more software and hardware support.
>>51257341
>>51257356
Thanks. I was contemplating BSD because muh security, but I heard that BSD is to Linux what Linux is to Windows: More secure or otherwise better, but has a much smaller software library.
Makes me wish more devs would write their games to run natively on both.
>>51257492
>Thanks. I was contemplating BSD because muh security, but I heard that BSD is to Linux what Linux is to Windows: More secure or otherwise better, but has a much smaller software library.
Not really. The security is in the hands of the administrator. Similar practices on BSD will yield similar security to Linux, give or take.
Don't expect BSD to be some silver bullet. It's just another OS. Most of the neat features pioneered by BSD are available in Linux by now anyway.
>>51257479
BSD is UNIX Philosophy'd Linux.
Most of what you can do in Linux applies while using BSD.
>Pretty sure Linux has had a lot more work put into it and has more software and hardware support.
Like OpenSSH? Or pf? Or LibreSSL? Or nvi? All originally BSD software.
>>51257514
Well guys, it's been fun, but I'm going to play some vidya gaymes. I hope you try and like BSD.
>>51257060
Why did Uriel recommend openbsd over freebsd?
>>51255676
So compile without initramfs support?
Linux can do anything BSD can do.
Only Linux is less free(libre), with more software compatibility.
>>51257738
>Linux can do anything BSD can do.
Except have a good filesystem like ZedFS. :^)
>>51257777
http://zfsonlinux.org/
Nice quads, but you're wrong. In fact, it was ported to Linux from Sun OS before it was ported to BSD.
>>51257734
Clean code, most likely.
>>51257734
>wonder who he is, look him up
>apparently, he was about 30 when he died
>one discussion says he was 'hellbanned' from somewhere for some opinion about gender crap
>but, he is still 5 years my elder
>>51258156
Sounds like a good reason, but I hope the reason he has so many fanboys isn't pretty much because of human idiocy. What did he accomplish?
>>51258275
Really, I wouldn't trust most of Uriel's opinions as he seems to think Plan 9 is actually an usable operating system in today's world. But some of it is true, I guess. XML is fucking shit, but I didn't need him to tell me that.
>>51257837
Interesting to know..
>>51257478
lol'd
>>51258295
All I know about him is that he died in 2012, and he has a bunch of fanboys, but I guess he's not particularly accomplished, just maybe inspirational to some.. it's better to form one's own opinions than to be anyone's retarded fanboy anyways.
>>51257734
Uriel is either a troll or an idiot. Same with the rest of the "Suckless" dingleberries. You should probably ignore the majority of what they say, or take it for comedy.
>>51258382
But at least Suckless software is great.
>>51258422
Some of it's good, some of it's of questionable value. It's hard to fuck up software when you avoid adding features altogether, even to a fault. dwm is invaluable, and dmenu is cool, but their formula just doesn't translate well to everything.
Anyway, capable coders or not, they're still fucking lunatics.
>>51258438
>dwm is invaluable, and dmenu is cool
Sorry, I got that backwards. dmenu is invaluable. That's a good example of a simple tool with a buttload of flexibility.
dwm is "cool" but it's not like it's revolutionary. It's just another WM.
>>51256582
Actually yes, why in gods name no nvidiot drivers on openbsd? Really hate this poor resolution
>uriel has a bunch of fanboys
>does dennis ritchie have any fanboys?
I'm not obsessed with Dennis Ritchie or anything, but it's weird, I'd have recognized his name and knew who he was when he died, but didn't learn about his demise until a whole few years after the fact. I guess he died of old age, and I guess it's impossible to really predict these things, but I thought he had more time ahead of him. I was tempted in sometime in the second half of last decade to send him an email, I wanted to tell him a joke, but for some reason I hesitated to do so, and never got around to it. Now I don't even remember what I was going to say to him. It can't have been too terribly important, then
>as for uriel, 30 is definitely awful young
(suicides?)
>>51257423
>Linux kernel=bloated shit
How so? I configured my kernel myself and the binary is 6mb. I only have 4 modules as well.
>>51258438
>capable coders or not, they're still fucking lunatics
If this 'sanity' thing people are obsessed with is the same thing as 'being normal', I can only guess that a lot of intelligent people are also lacking this 'sanity' thing.
>>51255676
who is this semen demon?
>>51255676
>tfw on ms-dos 6.0
>tfw instant boot and no ram usage
enjoy your BSD bloat fag
>>51259074
A demon of lust, a succubus, an actual semen demon.
Contrast with more dangerous demons of vengeance and wrath and rage.
>>51257837
I thought ZFS support on Linux was bad, which is why they're pushing Btrfs so hard.
>seriously demons of wrath that battle and punish people vs sexy fantasy demons
>(and I guess to an extent, everyone has different aspects of themselves and they're selective about who they show what to, but the first thing I think of when I think of demons is someone more likely to punish you absolutely horribly for your evil deeds (if you're an evil person) than to want to have sex with you, unless YOU'RE a demon)
If it exists, someone will fetishize it.
>>51259137
Because of the license, ZFS will NEVER be a part of the mainline kernel. I've never used it myself, but I've heard that it actually runs pretty well.
(Also, Beastie is a boy, so, if that's meant to be him..)
>>51259074
..probably a dickgirl.
>>51258850
>does dennis ritchie have any fanboys?
go fuck yourself
>>51259347
>'people' respect this stupid uriel kid more than dennis ritchie
Ok I think I've had enough problems because of this shitty interim period between init.d and systemd that I'm ready to seriously consider free or openbsd, will it install my Intel wireless card and set up a connection for me in the installer and then let me just use that connection when I complete installation?
One thing Debian and Ubuntu server just can't fucking get right is setting up a wireless connection post install using just the command line, systemd doesn't want to do it and the only other way is fucking around with /network/interfaces which I don't mind doing but I hear is going to be deprecated because of fucking systemd
If bsd can just do this one fucking job I'll switch because I've wasted hours trying to look up how this is supposed to be done and got nowhere
>and they probably think this dumb uriel prick is worthy of being the BSD daemon incarnated or some bullshit
>lest they remember, the BSD mascot, Beastie IS a joke
>however, I can think of someone who has earned the honor of being the BSD daemon moreso than that uriel prick
>>51259395
Is this Angela posting?
>>51259347
Dennis Ritchie > Uriel, go be stupid somewhere else.
>>51259404
Why do you care?
And >>51259407.
>>51259416
Because I can't tell if it's a psychotic episode or just someone who can't express thoughts properly.
Probably both.
>>51259426
You're just someone who is too stupid to comprehend anything, no matter how simply I express it, so your opinion doesn't count.
>>51259440
Yep, that's angela.
>>51259426
>telling you the BSD daemon is a joke
>psychotic
Go take your meds.
>tfw on GNU/Linux
>tfw no long ass boot like BSD
>>51259447
>only Angela can think Beastie is a joke
Take your fucking meds, schizo.
FreeBSD aint no Desktop OS.
I tried to install it on a pc made from spare parts and it really fails in the desktop department compared to Linux.
>>51259390
Wifi on BSD is much less painful than it is on Linux.
>>51259447
Also, prove I'm Angela. It's pathetic that Angela has obsessive hate fans.
>Angela
>even worthy of mentioning ITT
Because the insane troll who happens to be named Angela 1337 hasn't accomplished anything but wanting to make a video game, and being a ricer, she has accomplished absolutely nothing and doesn't deserve any special attention.
>>51259447
>>51259404
>November 9th in BSD thread
>bringing up Angela when topic which is not her is discussed
>not forgetting that Angela exists
I bet you even remember it's her birthday today.
>>51259545
thread was already ruined when you went on some tangent about beastie imo
>>51259390
In OpenBSD this won't happen according to the rules you specified, but it's easier to deal with than the /etc/network/interfaces and systemd crap.
Boot the OpenBSD installer, and it takes you to a shell. Run two commands:
ifconfig your-interface-name nwid your-network-name wpa wpakey your-key
dhclient your-interface-name
Then type "install" and go through the install.
I'd like to see a better way to do this. They're working on one but it's still in the design stages.
>>51259556
Then unruin it.
>>51259556
You're like a teenage girl crying that her life is over because of some little thing you could have ignored.
>>51259390
>>51259561
Oh yeah, you said Intel wireless card. Odds are that needs extra firmware. The firmware is available as a package (and gets autoinstalled on the first boot), but it's unavailable in the installer. That sucks.
>>51259458
>ever rebooting
lol pleb
>it just had to be created
GL;HF, /g/uro...
Sorry I picked such a bad time to try to see if anyone would tinfoil over something I had recently noticed.
>>51259611
I don't even mind doing that desu, Debian has the same crap and I can live with supplying firmware at install as long as the post install is not stupid and hindering
I'm thinking of going with dfbsd actually
>thread starts with anime girl daemon
>autistposting about beastie
>????
>thread ruined, autist ragequits and leaves thread, thread dies
But look, all the other threads on /g/ are shit too. So is it entirely the autist's fault or is /g/ stupid anyways?
