> Currently, FreeBSD lags behind in key areas such as [...] laptop-specific functionalities like suspend/resume
Many years ago I migrated to FreeBSD and absolutely loved it. I was forced to migrate back to Linux once I started a job and ended up staying with Linux to this day.
A few months back I decided to give FreeBSD another shot. The one thing that was an immediate deal breaker was being unable to suspend/resume on my desktop computer. For my workflow, that's an unnecessary waste of power / energy.
Just wanted to share this testimonial to outline the importance of suspend/resume for non-laptop hardware. Almost every time I see this discussion, it's focused on laptops.
By the way, I'm extremely excited about this initiative to make FreeBSD more attractive to non-server users in general (not only new ones). That will surely be a huge benefit to the entire community. If I can't run FreeBSD on my machine, I won't runt it on my servers.
Am I the only one that never uses suspend/resume? If I'll be away from my laptop, I save everything and shut it down. If something is running, I plug it in and lock the screen.
> If I can't run FreeBSD on my machine, I won't runt it on my servers.
How does offering a laptop or desktop OS experience relate to being a great server OS?
Anyway, the last time I was using FreeBSD on a client was in the late 90s. I am still running FreeBSD servers. It never bothered me that running that particular OS on a laptop maybe could be a challenge. The FreeBSD project has limited resources in terms of money and developers and I'm quite content seeing that going towards building a great server OS.
Diverting people and money towards a better laptop support just means competing with Linux and I don't see FreeBSD bringing something really compelling to the table. At best it'll just do everything Linux already does.
I use to be a FreeBSD user ages ago, but stopped at v5. I tried again at v8 and loved it, but back then I had to remove it due to disk space.
But one think bothered me. They love to patch some packages, a notable one is ssh. I wish at least in that case they trust the OpenBSD folks :)
But one thing I like a lot is jails and I had a jail for GIMPS and an ssh portal to transfer files to/from work. I think jails are much better than Linux docker and friends. I wonder if creating jails have gotten easier since v8 ?
Now all I have is laptops, and I have stayed away because of I heard of poor laptop support. I toy with giving FreeBSD a shot again, but will wait for the outcome of the Laptop project they started.
It really depends hard on the quality of the systems firmware, i.e. the BIOS/UEFI, no matter if laptop or desktop/thinclient.
I recently got some obsolete/EOL thinkcenters for homelabbing fun. They do S3(suspend to RAM) with everything I've thrown at them. Even most exotic stuff like https://genode.org/ (though only running 'live' from the USB-Image that they offer, didn't install so far). FreeBSD did it, NetBSD did it, various Linux Distros did it, without exception. The one currently running does it, too, without having had to setup anything.
Be it via the little power-button on the front, or some hot-key combination choosable from the UEFI, OR simply another hot-key delivered by the keyboard. In my case that blue thing between ALT-GR and right-CTRL+F12, then slapping any key afterwards turning it back on. (might by undesirable if you have cats, kids, whatever)
Anyways, WITHOUT exception! I did try this like mad, off'n on off'n on like a stroboscope, at least a 100 times.
One of the problems with suspend/resume is simply: nobody is looking at it or trying to improve it. There is no progress because nobody has tried. The current recommendation is "if suspend/resume doesn't work, disable all of the drivers until you work out which one (of many?) is causing the issue, and work on a fix - sure, people could do that, but most won't - and not even knowing which driver is the issue is annoying.
Until recently, rc scripts (think initd on Linux) had functionality that could be executed on system resume, but not on system suspend - like stopping a service on suspend. Why? Simply because nobody added that functionality for ages [0].
Similarly, drivers often have suspension but not resume capabilities (why?) which means they need to be added by someone who actually tries to use suspend/resume. [1] is an example of this (around midway through the section).
I recently took the time to get FreeBSD set up on my MacBook Pro from 2015, and it took quite a few kernel patches to get it working - many of which I don't think should have been missing already [2].
Webcam support is another issue; at the moment, webcamd is unmaintained because the developer passed away. Even then, it is just an emulator for Linux's USB subsystem and relies on some random person's GitHub for v4l2-loopback support using a branch called "my-build"[3].
Wifi is also an issue, with the best option for fast wifi support being the usage of a nano Alpine Linux VM, and using Linux's drivers [4]. If your wifi device is even supported, it's probably quite slow.
If all three of these things ever progress, I can see FreeBSD being more accepted by the masses. It is a great OS, but for personal computing, there are clear issues.
Suspending desktop systems is unusual, but these days traditional ACPI S3 (and S4) suspend is missing from more and more systems in favor of the far less efficient modern suspend just so your notification terror continues around the clock.
I think what FreeBSD and any other systems need is either compatibility or something similar to NixOS. Declarative systems management seems ripe for BSD derivatives.
But it has to be done right. As much as I love GUIX for example, GUIX is hampered by not being able to support a lot of hardware by design.
- Native (and modern) ZFS, you don't have to worry about a kernel update breaking your filesystem as with ZFS on Linux
- Containerization in the form of Jails
- A high quality type-2 hypervisor
I personally think the effort of getting better desktop support is a lost cause, it really shines on the server and should really double down in that area with improvements to things like CPU microcode updates (I really like the way SmartOS handles those) maybe pull in some things from OpenBSD like unveil and pledge (FreeBSD has Capsicum but it's not as good IMHO.) Perhaps also some kind of smartmon-like tool integrated into base.
They also need to fix the long standing issues with ports vanishing. It's that issue where you update all your packages and some port you once used has some dependency that prevented it from building and now you're stuck without that essential port until it gets fixed. I don't know how to fix this but Linux does not have this problem but I've been bitten by it on FreeBSD a couple of times and it hurts.
I'm a Linux user who has never used BSD. I'm not attached to Linux specifically, but it's still hard to imagine switching. It just feels like whatever motivations might exist to switch are at the wrong layer.
It's easy to imagine trying a new flavor of ice cream, but switching to BSD is more like trying a new brand of spoon.
These days I'm a Linux user mostly because it's the best place to use nix. So along those lines if BSD wants new users then I think it should start by attracting the kind of user who is going to do something noteworthy with it. Be the foundation for an attraction, don't try to be the attraction.
I'm not sure what that'll be specifically, but it's probably currently the ambition of someone who is a die hard BSD user who needs help bringing BSD with them to someplace cool and not the casual preference of somebody looking for a place to write hello world.
* Docker is important, I don’t want ‘experimental’ support that breaks all the time. I need it to just work.
* Headsets need to work. Bluetooth never works and my USB headset just screeches every boot because it seems to open the mic and play it back through the speakers.
* Wayland support is iffy at best. Screen sharing just doesn’t work.
* webcams are supported by webcamd which is maintained by one guy who unfortunately died suddenly a couple of years back.
You have to clearly and honestly answer "Why BSD and not Linux?" Does anyone here have a concise answer that could apply to many?
The 2nd question is what do folks get with Linux which they don't get with BSD? For me choosing Linux is somewhat off the beaten path, choosing BSD is like vacationing on Mars. There's going to be very little/sparse support living there.
I specifically choose an OS/distro that's well used/tested. That used to be Ubuntu but I don't trust Canonical leadership, so now it's Debian (or at least Debian repository-based). I don't have such a choice with BSD (unless it's a Mac).
If you want a desktop, it may or may not be for you.
If you rely on VPSes, it may not be for your because your options for providers here are somewhat limited.
However, if you are running your own hardware for your own server, and you are of a sysadmin temperament that likes to know exactly what's going on (because you put it there), then FreeBSD is excellent. Stable, reliable, everything works like the Unix you wanted and signed up for.
I have several decades of experience working through the commandline, and that's how I prefer to do things. FreeBSD makes this a first-rate experience. And I have to say that the deep integration of ZFS on a server under your control is life-changing.
I use a Macbook for the everyday things, like making presentations or playing games or movies. It is by far the best experience, since everything just works. (A Windows machine may be the same for others, I just prefer MacOS.) So a Linux desktop has no particular value for me.
But if you want to keep a stable of servers, each running under your specific control, to the point you have a poudriere machine to provide specifically built packages for your herd of machines and a bevy of automation scripts to keep them under control, FreeBSD is certainly something to look at.
Ironically, these were the kinds of issues keeping Mac/Windows folks from Linux 15-20 years ago. The difference now is that Linux is the incumbent. Users were willing to suck it up—not so much anymore.
There were clear reasons why people wanted an alternative, general-purpose operating system back then, but now that Linux completely owns the niche, what are the reasons to use FreeBSD?
As a user since around 4.10, I'd argue that it's easier to use, has a better community, and has better documentation. However, these points have to contend with the enormous market share and proliferation of GNU/Linux, which makes problem solving on the platform just as easy, if we're being honest (especially with AI-driven tools that can resolve many day-to-day needs).
I can connect to wifi on my old Thinkpad running Haiku. There's no reason FreeBSD shouldn't have full support for wifi out of the box. Even OpenBSD has better wifi support. After many years, reasons start to look like excuses. Make it work.
But at the end of the day, if I work a long time at it I can get FreeBSD to do everything Linux can do. But that's kind of the problem. New users are casual users. What does FreeBSD offer that Linux, MacOS and Windows don't that isn't related to running services on big hardware?
FreeBSD just ends up being like another distro people hop to occasionally, find it doesn't support all their hardware or the software they're used to, and they hop to something else.
To me, the BSDs are zen gardens to Linux's Kowloon chaos. I use both, lovingly.
A lot of what I build and manage I expect to touch maybe once a release. Even between LTSes, that can require a lot of catch up on Linux. With the BSDs, knowledge and practices are generally transferable, even decades later.
As for your front end, my advice is to use whatever shiny sparks your joy. Local (desktop) resources are a solved problem on every platform, hence why I still use an inexpensive 4GB Chromebook. If I need to serve any particular desktop environment from a remote host, that's trivial. Why would I try to limit myself?
- something simple like ufw where you can get a good, safe base set of firewall rules without having to be an expert. Or at least a clear set of pf rules people can use for web servers etc, like the default/base rules for ufw.
- Docker support. I understand why people don't like it, but it's just a reality now that people need to use.
Lifetime Linux user here (desktop and server) - FreeBSD has always been off my radar because I never had a real reason to care about it. Why should someone like me consider it over the cornucopia of perfectly good Linux distros out there?
I don’t think there’s a good reason. BSD has comparatively poor hardware support, and software availability, while generally ok, is worse than Linux. BSD is simpler to modify because it’s all one stack and it has a license that benefits selfish users. That’s about it. Linux mopped the floor with BSD and it’s probably in large part due to a license that prohibits selfish users. Everybody needs an operating system and the GPL benefits everyone who uses Linux, including those who compete with each other. I wonder how many BSD modifications and drivers never see the light of day because developers aren’t required to share.
In April this year we had to move a FreeBSD server to another colo: Uptime 3172 days, just rebooted, did not bother with an update and ever since it has been
serving some high traffic sites. All relevant security patches are applied but in all this time there was not a single vulnerability we had to fix that required a reboot.
FreeBSD doesn't suffer from the bazaar complex that linux does, in that for each given system there is generally only one way to do things, and the documentation is both succint and comprehensive. One of the most frustrating things about Linux to me is that every flavor requires its own understanding and it doesn't seem like anyone can agree on standards (gnome vs kde, systemd vs init.d, rpm vs deb vs snap etc etc)
It does have a Linux compatibility layer that sort of works, but not enough to run everything I tried to run on it.
Can't speak to FreeBSD, but I've run OpenBSD on firewalls for like 30 years, mostly because it is actually good at this, and the syntax, while changing, did so more slowly, and was more sensical to use than all of the linux ipchains/iptables/nftables menagerie (which, I will admit has improved - nftables isn't half bad).
It's also good from an ecosystem perspective to have a few parallel implementations of the same thing, as it avoids a bugs/flaws that could affect all of a monoculture.
Also, I'd rather have something made by people who are more paranoid than me, and are driving forward unix implementations - for example, the work done on 64 bit time_t.
It just works better for my specific use case. If you have a use case where FreeBSD works better, go for it.
Some BSDs are known for having more performant network stacks, and more cohesive software libraries. Each BSD seems to stake out a niche: OpenBSD is security, NetBSD runs everywhere, and (IIRC) FreeBSD started free when others cost money.
I’ve messed with it as as a desktop OS and always found it not worth the setup when fedora/ubuntu just work on most systems I’ve used them on. FreeBSD is an outstanding server though, I run several services on cheap VPS out in the cloud and it’s rock solid and security issues see to come up far less often which is very important to me for anything outward facing to the wild and wooly internet
> OpenBSD gets this right, they have clearly defined their global audience as being the “secure OS”.
True but what's funny is I use OpenBSD on my laptop because it "just works" and is super simple to configure and maintain. The security part is a nice side effect! I don't have to fiddle with Xorg.conf, suspend/sleep just work right out the box, lovely.
Another angle to look at this is ravynOS, a desktop OS that could attract people interested in MacOS. The project is based on FreeBSD and has lots of customization to provide a familiar desktop experience. While the main site hasn't been updated for a while, the GitHub has a release from this year.
That project misses the forest for the trees. What matters is that I have a setup I can buy that just works. Applications behave consistently. I don’t have to worry that some major software isn’t compatible.
That’s a much higher barrier but it’s the important one.
I am very worried that as soon as ravynOS gets popular, a giant lawsuit from Apple, possibly over the UI or something else, will force it to stop development forever.
If I was working on a project like that I would be doing it completely anonymously.
I'm not sure if NomadBSD offers a "live" desktop experience, but like GhostBSD, it is another attempt at a complete FreeBSD desktop: https://nomadbsd.org/
Docker, Proton, and with the exception of creating a password it should be possible to do a full install by doing nothing but pressing enter throughout the entire install process.
Speaking on that, the install process is weird when trying to add a user. It always fails because the group does not exist (it should probably create the group at this time).
What kind of new users do you want to go after? Are you targeting the demographic of users who are tired of windows and microsoft's shenanigans and who are looking towards switching to Linux, for example?
I’ve been using FreeBSD occasionally for about 20 years. I like FreeBSD; it’s a no-nonsense operating system with excellent documentation and high-quality source code.
There is a question that affects all of the BSDs: what does it mean to be a non-Linux Unix in the 2020s? 20 years ago, there were many commercial Unixes that were in use, such as Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, and IRIX. POSIX was the main interface that the Unix world, commercial and open source, had in common. The BSDs benefitted in this ecosystem by being able to run software that kept portability in mind, since there were so many Unixes to support.
20 years later, commercial Unix seems to be largely dead, and Linux has become the dominant Unix-like OS. I get the sense that some software developers are less concerned about compatibility across Linux, *BSD, and macOS and are instead singly targeting Linux. This leads to software with many “Linuxisms.”
Should there be an updated POSIX to tackle new technologies, or should the BSD world recognize that Linux has become the standard and thus focus on implementing interfaces to technology from the Linux world?
I love the BSDs, but I’m concerned that the FOSS ecosystem is increasingly ignoring them.
On a related note, the BSDs are respected by its users for its conservative, deliberate approaches to new technologies. There is a tendency in the Linux ecosystem for solutions to be pushed before they are fully formed, and there is also a tendency to prioritize features over adherence to the Unix philosophy. I see pushback from the BSDs when it comes to Linux containers, systemd, and Wayland. However, if Linux technologies become the standard by application developers, then the BSD world will either be forced to write compatibility layers or will have to do without those applications.
For me, integrate an init system that allows for proper dependency management between services. Also, one that keeps track of all processes spawned by a service, allowing me to shut down a service, even if it isn't a well-behaved one with a single daemon process.
That's more or less the only thing stopping me from using FreeBSD (on servers).
Seems like there's quite the uptick in posts about the various types of BSDs out there. I wonder why that is. Cool group of OSes though, they feel pretty well engineered.
Personally I still often find myself wanting to use something that makes running OCI/Docker containers for mostly-contained workloads as easy as possible.
Better Wifi and the ability to control AMD-GPU Fans, makes not sense that i can play Eldenring on FreeBSD for 2 minutes, then full crash because of GPU overheat ;)
GPU's are getting more important every day, not just for workstations but servers too (LLM's for example)
[+] [-] napsterbr|1 year ago|reply
Many years ago I migrated to FreeBSD and absolutely loved it. I was forced to migrate back to Linux once I started a job and ended up staying with Linux to this day.
A few months back I decided to give FreeBSD another shot. The one thing that was an immediate deal breaker was being unable to suspend/resume on my desktop computer. For my workflow, that's an unnecessary waste of power / energy.
Just wanted to share this testimonial to outline the importance of suspend/resume for non-laptop hardware. Almost every time I see this discussion, it's focused on laptops.
By the way, I'm extremely excited about this initiative to make FreeBSD more attractive to non-server users in general (not only new ones). That will surely be a huge benefit to the entire community. If I can't run FreeBSD on my machine, I won't runt it on my servers.
[+] [-] acheong08|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] redprince|1 year ago|reply
How does offering a laptop or desktop OS experience relate to being a great server OS?
Anyway, the last time I was using FreeBSD on a client was in the late 90s. I am still running FreeBSD servers. It never bothered me that running that particular OS on a laptop maybe could be a challenge. The FreeBSD project has limited resources in terms of money and developers and I'm quite content seeing that going towards building a great server OS.
Diverting people and money towards a better laptop support just means competing with Linux and I don't see FreeBSD bringing something really compelling to the table. At best it'll just do everything Linux already does.
[+] [-] jmclnx|1 year ago|reply
But one think bothered me. They love to patch some packages, a notable one is ssh. I wish at least in that case they trust the OpenBSD folks :)
But one thing I like a lot is jails and I had a jail for GIMPS and an ssh portal to transfer files to/from work. I think jails are much better than Linux docker and friends. I wonder if creating jails have gotten easier since v8 ?
Now all I have is laptops, and I have stayed away because of I heard of poor laptop support. I toy with giving FreeBSD a shot again, but will wait for the outcome of the Laptop project they started.
[+] [-] LargoLasskhyfv|1 year ago|reply
I recently got some obsolete/EOL thinkcenters for homelabbing fun. They do S3(suspend to RAM) with everything I've thrown at them. Even most exotic stuff like https://genode.org/ (though only running 'live' from the USB-Image that they offer, didn't install so far). FreeBSD did it, NetBSD did it, various Linux Distros did it, without exception. The one currently running does it, too, without having had to setup anything.
Be it via the little power-button on the front, or some hot-key combination choosable from the UEFI, OR simply another hot-key delivered by the keyboard. In my case that blue thing between ALT-GR and right-CTRL+F12, then slapping any key afterwards turning it back on. (might by undesirable if you have cats, kids, whatever)
Anyways, WITHOUT exception! I did try this like mad, off'n on off'n on like a stroboscope, at least a 100 times.
[+] [-] mmsc|1 year ago|reply
Until recently, rc scripts (think initd on Linux) had functionality that could be executed on system resume, but not on system suspend - like stopping a service on suspend. Why? Simply because nobody added that functionality for ages [0].
Similarly, drivers often have suspension but not resume capabilities (why?) which means they need to be added by someone who actually tries to use suspend/resume. [1] is an example of this (around midway through the section).
I recently took the time to get FreeBSD set up on my MacBook Pro from 2015, and it took quite a few kernel patches to get it working - many of which I don't think should have been missing already [2].
Webcam support is another issue; at the moment, webcamd is unmaintained because the developer passed away. Even then, it is just an emulator for Linux's USB subsystem and relies on some random person's GitHub for v4l2-loopback support using a branch called "my-build"[3].
Wifi is also an issue, with the best option for fast wifi support being the usage of a nano Alpine Linux VM, and using Linux's drivers [4]. If your wifi device is even supported, it's probably quite slow.
If all three of these things ever progress, I can see FreeBSD being more accepted by the masses. It is a great OS, but for personal computing, there are clear issues.
0: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/commit/2cf8ef5910fd37...
1: https://joshua.hu/FreeBSD-on-MacbookPro-114-A1398#building-w...
2: https://joshua.hu/FreeBSD-on-MacbookPro-114-A1398
3: https://github.com/swills/v4l2loopback/tree/my-build
4: https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=wifibox&apropos=0&...
[+] [-] crest|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] rootnod3|1 year ago|reply
But it has to be done right. As much as I love GUIX for example, GUIX is hampered by not being able to support a lot of hardware by design.
[+] [-] IWeldMelons|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] mcflubbins|1 year ago|reply
- Native (and modern) ZFS, you don't have to worry about a kernel update breaking your filesystem as with ZFS on Linux
- Containerization in the form of Jails
- A high quality type-2 hypervisor
I personally think the effort of getting better desktop support is a lost cause, it really shines on the server and should really double down in that area with improvements to things like CPU microcode updates (I really like the way SmartOS handles those) maybe pull in some things from OpenBSD like unveil and pledge (FreeBSD has Capsicum but it's not as good IMHO.) Perhaps also some kind of smartmon-like tool integrated into base.
They also need to fix the long standing issues with ports vanishing. It's that issue where you update all your packages and some port you once used has some dependency that prevented it from building and now you're stuck without that essential port until it gets fixed. I don't know how to fix this but Linux does not have this problem but I've been bitten by it on FreeBSD a couple of times and it hurts.
[+] [-] rs_rs_rs_rs_rs|1 year ago|reply
Can you share "jail images" in a similar way you would share a docker image?
[+] [-] Gud|1 year ago|reply
I welcome any improvements.
Regarding your last comment with vanishing ports, it’s not something I’ve experienced with 20 years of FreeBSD usage.
[+] [-] __MatrixMan__|1 year ago|reply
It's easy to imagine trying a new flavor of ice cream, but switching to BSD is more like trying a new brand of spoon.
These days I'm a Linux user mostly because it's the best place to use nix. So along those lines if BSD wants new users then I think it should start by attracting the kind of user who is going to do something noteworthy with it. Be the foundation for an attraction, don't try to be the attraction.
I'm not sure what that'll be specifically, but it's probably currently the ambition of someone who is a die hard BSD user who needs help bringing BSD with them to someplace cool and not the casual preference of somebody looking for a place to write hello world.
[+] [-] EasyMark|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] badgersnake|1 year ago|reply
* Docker is important, I don’t want ‘experimental’ support that breaks all the time. I need it to just work.
* Headsets need to work. Bluetooth never works and my USB headset just screeches every boot because it seems to open the mic and play it back through the speakers.
* Wayland support is iffy at best. Screen sharing just doesn’t work.
* webcams are supported by webcamd which is maintained by one guy who unfortunately died suddenly a couple of years back.
[+] [-] karmakaze|1 year ago|reply
The 2nd question is what do folks get with Linux which they don't get with BSD? For me choosing Linux is somewhat off the beaten path, choosing BSD is like vacationing on Mars. There's going to be very little/sparse support living there.
I specifically choose an OS/distro that's well used/tested. That used to be Ubuntu but I don't trust Canonical leadership, so now it's Debian (or at least Debian repository-based). I don't have such a choice with BSD (unless it's a Mac).
[+] [-] deltarholamda|1 year ago|reply
If you rely on VPSes, it may not be for your because your options for providers here are somewhat limited.
However, if you are running your own hardware for your own server, and you are of a sysadmin temperament that likes to know exactly what's going on (because you put it there), then FreeBSD is excellent. Stable, reliable, everything works like the Unix you wanted and signed up for.
I have several decades of experience working through the commandline, and that's how I prefer to do things. FreeBSD makes this a first-rate experience. And I have to say that the deep integration of ZFS on a server under your control is life-changing.
I use a Macbook for the everyday things, like making presentations or playing games or movies. It is by far the best experience, since everything just works. (A Windows machine may be the same for others, I just prefer MacOS.) So a Linux desktop has no particular value for me.
But if you want to keep a stable of servers, each running under your specific control, to the point you have a poudriere machine to provide specifically built packages for your herd of machines and a bevy of automation scripts to keep them under control, FreeBSD is certainly something to look at.
[+] [-] vehemenz|1 year ago|reply
There were clear reasons why people wanted an alternative, general-purpose operating system back then, but now that Linux completely owns the niche, what are the reasons to use FreeBSD?
As a user since around 4.10, I'd argue that it's easier to use, has a better community, and has better documentation. However, these points have to contend with the enormous market share and proliferation of GNU/Linux, which makes problem solving on the platform just as easy, if we're being honest (especially with AI-driven tools that can resolve many day-to-day needs).
[+] [-] michrassena|1 year ago|reply
But at the end of the day, if I work a long time at it I can get FreeBSD to do everything Linux can do. But that's kind of the problem. New users are casual users. What does FreeBSD offer that Linux, MacOS and Windows don't that isn't related to running services on big hardware?
FreeBSD just ends up being like another distro people hop to occasionally, find it doesn't support all their hardware or the software they're used to, and they hop to something else.
[+] [-] washadjeffmad|1 year ago|reply
A lot of what I build and manage I expect to touch maybe once a release. Even between LTSes, that can require a lot of catch up on Linux. With the BSDs, knowledge and practices are generally transferable, even decades later.
As for your front end, my advice is to use whatever shiny sparks your joy. Local (desktop) resources are a solved problem on every platform, hence why I still use an inexpensive 4GB Chromebook. If I need to serve any particular desktop environment from a remote host, that's trivial. Why would I try to limit myself?
[+] [-] adamddev1|1 year ago|reply
- Docker support. I understand why people don't like it, but it's just a reality now that people need to use.
[+] [-] adamddev1|1 year ago|reply
- An easier way for writing services/daemons with logging! Writing your own rc.d scripts is just so much harder than doing systemd .service files.
[+] [-] temporallobe|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] jm4|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] jlg23|1 year ago|reply
In April this year we had to move a FreeBSD server to another colo: Uptime 3172 days, just rebooted, did not bother with an update and ever since it has been serving some high traffic sites. All relevant security patches are applied but in all this time there was not a single vulnerability we had to fix that required a reboot.
[+] [-] pdntspa|1 year ago|reply
It does have a Linux compatibility layer that sort of works, but not enough to run everything I tried to run on it.
[+] [-] zdw|1 year ago|reply
It's also good from an ecosystem perspective to have a few parallel implementations of the same thing, as it avoids a bugs/flaws that could affect all of a monoculture.
Also, I'd rather have something made by people who are more paranoid than me, and are driving forward unix implementations - for example, the work done on 64 bit time_t.
It just works better for my specific use case. If you have a use case where FreeBSD works better, go for it.
[+] [-] paulryanrogers|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] EasyMark|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] tiffanyh|1 year ago|reply
OpenBSD gets this right, they have clearly defined their global audience as being the “secure OS”.
Note: they have not defined their audience as “BSD”. It’s just the “secure OS”.
——-
FreeBSD problem is they haven’t defined their audience.
People use FreeBSD because “it’s the performant BSD”.
But that then begs the question, “why use BSD”?
They need to define their audience.
No list of features will do that for you.
[+] [-] mcflubbins|1 year ago|reply
True but what's funny is I use OpenBSD on my laptop because it "just works" and is super simple to configure and maintain. The security part is a nice side effect! I don't have to fiddle with Xorg.conf, suspend/sleep just work right out the box, lovely.
[+] [-] evanjrowley|1 year ago|reply
https://ravynos.com/
https://github.com/ravynsoft/ravynos
[+] [-] ebiester|1 year ago|reply
That’s a much higher barrier but it’s the important one.
[+] [-] ranger_danger|1 year ago|reply
If I was working on a project like that I would be doing it completely anonymously.
[+] [-] haunter|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] evanjrowley|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] kwanbix|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] internet101010|1 year ago|reply
Speaking on that, the install process is weird when trying to add a user. It always fails because the group does not exist (it should probably create the group at this time).
[+] [-] drooopy|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] linguae|1 year ago|reply
There is a question that affects all of the BSDs: what does it mean to be a non-Linux Unix in the 2020s? 20 years ago, there were many commercial Unixes that were in use, such as Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, and IRIX. POSIX was the main interface that the Unix world, commercial and open source, had in common. The BSDs benefitted in this ecosystem by being able to run software that kept portability in mind, since there were so many Unixes to support.
20 years later, commercial Unix seems to be largely dead, and Linux has become the dominant Unix-like OS. I get the sense that some software developers are less concerned about compatibility across Linux, *BSD, and macOS and are instead singly targeting Linux. This leads to software with many “Linuxisms.”
Should there be an updated POSIX to tackle new technologies, or should the BSD world recognize that Linux has become the standard and thus focus on implementing interfaces to technology from the Linux world?
I love the BSDs, but I’m concerned that the FOSS ecosystem is increasingly ignoring them.
On a related note, the BSDs are respected by its users for its conservative, deliberate approaches to new technologies. There is a tendency in the Linux ecosystem for solutions to be pushed before they are fully formed, and there is also a tendency to prioritize features over adherence to the Unix philosophy. I see pushback from the BSDs when it comes to Linux containers, systemd, and Wayland. However, if Linux technologies become the standard by application developers, then the BSD world will either be forced to write compatibility layers or will have to do without those applications.
[+] [-] luto|1 year ago|reply
That's more or less the only thing stopping me from using FreeBSD (on servers).
[+] [-] bloqs|1 year ago|reply
The name, logo, aesthetic and general priorities of freeBSD are essentially unchanged from its era and clientele from that era: 90s nerds
Decide where you want to go, and who to
[+] [-] hsbauauvhabzb|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] tsegratis|1 year ago|reply
1. mascot change. demons are not my thing
2. suspend/resume
[+] [-] KronisLV|1 year ago|reply
Personally I still often find myself wanting to use something that makes running OCI/Docker containers for mostly-contained workloads as easy as possible.
[+] [-] BSDobelix|1 year ago|reply
GPU's are getting more important every day, not just for workstations but servers too (LLM's for example)