Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BSD vs. Linux (2005)

over-yonder.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 371 posts

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#311

Post by frabbit »

mjg59 wrote: post #73
teacup50 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's your definition, then FreeBSD and Solaris solved this without paying the systemd tax, via ZFS-based boot environments. https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=beadm&sektion=&man... NeXt->Apple also avoided anything like systemd via a configuration system that supported inheritance across search domains (User, Local, Network, System): https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Cocoa/...

Oh, there's certainly multiple ways to do this. My point is purely that this isn't an inherent Linux/*BSD thing - there are modern Linux distributions that have precisely this property.

And isn't it actually part of the same effort (RH Stateless Linux) which spawned systemd and ostree ?

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#312

Post by kbenson »

ktRolster wrote: post #54
badsock wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One big thing for me is that I trust the FreeBSD devs to not completely reinvent things unless they're sure it's an improvement. I got sick of the churn in Linux, having to relearn things all the time and then find out when I'm done that it's not any better, just different. Things I learned how to do in FreeBSD a decade ago still work. For example, to get a NIC configured I can either put one or two lines of text in…

Watching iptables get replaced was a really depressing example of that, after the developers swore that "this time we got it right" when replacing ipchains......

I haven't had reason to use nftables yet (beyond the default config in a distro), but if it's in any way closer to PF, then it's vastly superior to iptables in my eyes. I spent a while configuring OpenBSD firewall/VPN gateway boxes about a decade ago, and the all around superiority of PF was astounding.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#313

Post by nine_k »

jdefr89 wrote: post #307

This is sort of explains why I have chosen OS X. Its a UNIX operating system that makes for a great modern desktop machine. I don't need to worry about poor and or glitchy hardware support. Its 2016, I don't have the time to play around with finding WiFi drivers or graphics drivers that can hardly support 3D-acceleration. Everything has always worked out of the box. Having had two MacBook Pros, I haven't had one hard…

Such a great illustration!

* You can use great hardware, but the choice of it is rather limited.

* You're OK with upstream making a lot of choices for you, though the upstream is considered good at making the right choices.

* You don't mind running a lot of proprietary stuff (anything above the Darwin level).

People who choose Linux (over OSX and even BSD) look at these bullet points differently, thus the divide.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#314

Post by milcron »

knorker wrote: post #123
dkarapetyan wrote: post #15

I tried freebsd. Gone back to ubuntu. In this day and age not having proper dependency resolution for packages is not acceptable. I've more than once had some tool based on ports just go into an infinite cycle when asked to upgrade some packages. The philosophy laid out in this article seems more like rationalization of historical accidents more than anything else. Linux file system layout is just as predictable as a…

> In this day and age not having proper dependency resolution for packages is not acceptable. It still doesn't? Haha! I remember ranting about this 10 years ago, with a friend who went to a conference in France… that was dedicated to package management in BSDs. I asked him how I "just upgrade all the packages" (apt-get upgrade). I'd found two-three ways, but couldn't get them to work. He said that yeah there are thre…

On OpenBSD, just do `pkg_add -Uu`.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#315

Post by eropple »

criddell wrote: post #298
eropple wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm self-employed, so yes. I've got four grand of Apple gear in my office, and if they sold an xMac I'd buy one tomorrow. I don't consider it to be a moral question, and in practice Apple doesn't seem to really care.

I work for a software company and it's pretty strict about honoring license terms because we want our customers to do the same.

That's a fair position. From mine, Apple gets its vig from me in plenty of other ways. There's zero pirated software, music, videos, etc. in my house or my business; giving Apple another channel through which to sell me stuff, from developer licenses to apps, doesn't trouble me.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#316

Post by milcron »

geff82 wrote: post #88

I have a lot of sympathy for the BSDs. I actually learned Unix with NetBSD in 2004. Problem with BSD nowadays, at least for me, is that all supported desktop hardware is really old. The newest, still available, Laptop that works is the Lenovo X240 (and other x40s....). And when everything works, like on my Samsung NP530, there is strange stuff like a super slow and unreliable Wi-Fi connection. So if you want a great…

OpenBSD 5.9 runs on Broadwell: http://www.openbsd.org/59.html

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#317

Post by milcron »

aceperry wrote: post #76

I'm a total linux user and have tried *Bsd from time to time. For some reason, the bsds have always taken a very long time to boot up and even to start X. The last time I tried FreeBsd (about 3-4 years ago), a friend asked me to help him debug why X windows didn't run. It was taking 15+ minutes to startx on his brand new server class PC that he built up himself. We didn't realize that it took so long to start up unti…

What hardware was in that machine? Multiple minutes bootup sounds very odd.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#318

Post by joelg236 »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #280

When I say "Linux", I mean Red Hat. I mean Slackware. I mean Mandrake. I mean Debian. I mean SuSe. I mean Gentoo. I mean every one of the 2 kadzillion distributions out there, based around a Linux kernel with substantially similar userlands, mostly based on GNU tools, that are floating around the ether. So... do you include Android? It's worth asking, because though it uses a Linux kernel, it's a heavily modified one…

2005. Long before it existed actually.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#319

Post by Sanddancer »

belorn wrote: post #308
Decade wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do a windows reinstallation about once every second year, and I routinely get problems. Network drivers are almost always missing. Looking at the device manager, about 5-10 different devices fails to auto-install, all part of the motherboards. What are you reinstalling, Windows XP every time? Newer versions of Windows are getting better at finding and installing sane drivers for the hardware. It’s still not perfe…

Windows 7, desktop machine, and windows update don't really work without a functioning network connection. But if you don't believe me, and choose to believe those reporting issues with Linux, just do a google search on windows install and network issues. There is plenty of people reporting the same issue. to cite windows own support page: "If Windows can’t find a new driver for your network adapter, visit the PC man…

At this point, Windows 7 is 7 years old. Do an apples to apples comparison here, and try getting your same hardware working on a copy of Ubuntu 9.04 or RHEL 5.3. How hard is it?

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#320

Post by digi_owl »

jdefr89 wrote: post #310
digi_owl wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The base problem there is drivers. Specifically that we have something like 3 suppliers of desktop GPUs. One refuse outright to supply information that allows a proper open driver to be developed. Another have just started providing this information in recent years, and there is still delays between the latest hardware hitting the market and the proper information reaching relevant hands. The third only recently star…

Perhaps that is the core complaint. But at the end of the day support for those cards is what we need for our everyday computing. I don't think anyone is trying to undermine the work that Linux/BSD communities are putting forth in attempt to supply end users with software support for uncooperative hardware vendors. But again, they don't have control over that situation. So, in the mean time it shouldn't come as a sur…

Thing is that when one aim the complaint in the wrong place, effort goes to waste fixing the wrong problem (or a non-existent problem).
Post reply on HN