Live data from Hacker News

DragonFly BSD 6.4

dragonflybsd.org

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#41

Can somebody explain the niche or role of Dragonfly BSD? I'm only vaguely familiar with BSDs. So far my impression is that OpenBSD is the secure one, FreeBSD is the fast one (for servers). What's DragonFly good at?

The original plan was a SSI, single-system-image operating system, where one cohesive system could span across multiple physical machines. It's quite a long ambitious plan, but it's still up on the project's history page[1]:

> DragonFly BSD has been going through rapid and ever increasing development since the fork. One of the important works included the simplification and general cleanup of the majority of the kernel subsystems. This work was originally intended to support single system image clustering, but has had the effect of making the kernel much more reliable, understandable and easily maintainable. One of the fundamental synchronization concepts that DragonFly uses throughout the kernel, the token, lends itself directly to ease of maintenance and understandability of the kernel.

There's been plenty of neat off-shoot advantages DragonflyBSD has gained along this quest. Great great scalability has been notable; the core coherency construct, the serializing token, targets reducing locking in the system & potentially allows scale-out into SSI. DragonflyBSD has some really cool tricks, like being able to run virtual kernels- running a kernel as a process, for "jail" or just kerneldev reasons.

Still it's impossible to mention DragonflyBSD without mentioning it's filesystem, HAMMERFS, and now HAMMERFS2, which is a great Copy-on-Write & snapshotted fs intended for radical scale out, & ultimately, clustering, where multiple machines can cohesively contribute & operate a single filesystem together, with pooled resources. There is already a good bit of quorumed clustering support in HAMMERFS2.

> The HAMMER filesystem is also intended to serve as a basis for the clustering and other work that makes up the second phase of the project.

There's a StackOverflow question talking to DragonflyBSD as a SSI[2] as well, which mainly cites the same History page, but also has some other links.

[1] https://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/

[2] https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/429464/dragonfly-bs...

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#42
post #38
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FreeBSD doesn’t have 50 active core developers so it’s hard to imagine how Dragonfly could be 1/50th the size.

FreeBSD (402) https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/contributors/#staff-com... vs. DragonflyBSD (67) https://www.dragonflybsd.org/team/ So, correct. Not 1/50th.

The majority of names on the FreeBSD list are relatively inactive.

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#43
post #25
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dragonfly BSD is very good at being bad at taking constructive feedback /s It was born out of disagreement about how SMP should work in FreeBSD around Northwood P4 era (first HyperThreaded consumer CPU). Around that time, every general purpose OS as absolutely horrible at utilizing more than one logical cores. FreeBSD first gained SMP support at 5.0, and it was actually usable at 5.2. DragonFly BSD author had a disag…

A lot of people would consider FreeBSD 5.x a horrible release (especially given how rock solid 4.x was), and things not stabilizing again until 8.x (many years later). Some would argue that in hindsight, Matt was correct at the time for the fork - from a technical standpoint.

I remember explaining why I used FreeBSD instead of Linux back in the day, and just after I said "it's a bit more stable than Linux" the system completely froze. Ouch, embarrassing. Needless to say, no one was especially convinced. That was on 5.0 or 5.1 IIRC.

(These days, there isn't too much of a difference any more; Linux has come a long way in the last 20 years.)

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Originally it was planned to be a distributed OS. The main reason for the fork from FreeBSD was disagreement about what the threading primitives and their semantics should be, IIRC. One major early goal was cache coherency between different machines, though that seems to be abandoned or indefinitely on hold. Other projects have been HammerFS(a filesystem similar to ZFS, and I believe it started before ZFS was ported…

> FreeBSD user of several years either as a server OS, workstation OS Oh, could you give a bit of an overview of the State of FreeBSD on the Desktop (or laptop)? I'm playing with the idea. Tried OpenBSD for a while but it just wasn't very consumer-ready. No bluetooth support at all, videos would have audio and video lag, and other issues. Is FreeBSD more suited to daily consumer laptop use? I use Arch btw

I have been using FreeBSD as my primary OS since version 1.1.5, and I am currently running 12.4 on a Lenovo T480.

This is what works flawlessly on my configuration (SSD, 8G bytes of RAM): gigabit ethernet, second monitor via HDMI, USB mouse and keyboard, sound via audio jack, video playback on both the internal and external monitor. What I have not tried is Wifi, Bluetooth, the fingerprint reader, and the touchpad (disabled via BIOS). The trackpoint and buttons do work.

IMHO, FreeBSD is a nice system for everyday use. Note, though, that I do mostly terminal-based stuff (and some Ghostview, PDF reading, web browsing, occasional video watching, etc), so YMMV.

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#46
post #28
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried iwlwifi?

Yes, it works exactly like I've described: While iwlwifi supports all 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax the compatibility code currently only supports 802.11 a/b/g modes. Support for 802.11 n/ac is to come. 802.11ax and 6Ghz support are planned. We will get wider IPv6 adoption before 802.11n works on FreeBSD in stable way.

You can use WifiBox[1], being a user of FreeBSD myself (Laptop, Workstation and many servers) it would be nice to have "native" ac/ax.

[1] https://github.com/pgj/freebsd-wifibox

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#47
post #3

Can somebody explain the niche or role of Dragonfly BSD? I'm only vaguely familiar with BSDs. So far my impression is that OpenBSD is the secure one, FreeBSD is the fast one (for servers). What's DragonFly good at?

I don't think it has a niche or role anymore. Some years ago they claimed to be fast. [0,1,2] I don't know where did you get that FreeBSD is regarded as the fast one. I think it is considered the popular/general purposed one, without a single aim like openBSD or netBSD have. [0] : https://www.dragonflybsd.org/performance/ [1] : https://www.dragonflybsd.org/features/ [2] : https://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/

>Some years ago they claimed to be fast.

It is fast, maybe the fastest of all BSD's:

https://www.phoronix.com/review/bsd-linux-eo2021/2

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#48
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it has a niche or role anymore. Some years ago they claimed to be fast. [0,1,2] I don't know where did you get that FreeBSD is regarded as the fast one. I think it is considered the popular/general purposed one, without a single aim like openBSD or netBSD have. [0] : https://www.dragonflybsd.org/performance/ [1] : https://www.dragonflybsd.org/features/ [2] : https://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/

Maybe just cause allegedly Netflix uses it for servers.

>allegedly Netflix uses it for servers

Not really "allegedly" as you can read here:

https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/appliances/#software

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#49
post #33

Can somebody explain the niche or role of Dragonfly BSD? I'm only vaguely familiar with BSDs. So far my impression is that OpenBSD is the secure one, FreeBSD is the fast one (for servers). What's DragonFly good at?

DragonFlyBSD is Dillon’s FreeBSD. It’s a fork because of personality disagreements between Dillon and other developers in the FreeBSD 5.0 timeframe. It does some interesting experimental stuff like HammerFS but isn’t really suitable for general use.

>but isn’t really suitable for general use.

Can you tell me why? Because i used it for 3 years regularly in a professional setup (~10 servers). Never had a problem with hammer 1 or 2 or anything else.

Re: DragonFly BSD 6.4

#50
post #8

Can somebody explain the niche or role of Dragonfly BSD? I'm only vaguely familiar with BSDs. So far my impression is that OpenBSD is the secure one, FreeBSD is the fast one (for servers). What's DragonFly good at?

Perhaps a bit too scandalous (I don't know), but my understanding is that there was also a falling out of sorts between the DragonFly lead and BSD people, largely caused by allegedly abusive behaviour form the DragonFly lead while they were still working on BSD main. As I understand it, DragonFly came after this. Maybe doesn't answer your question, but it contextualises (however accurately!) part of how it came to be…

Benno Rice -> "The Tragedy of systemd" OR "The Trouble with FreeBSD"

I am a bit torn apart about him, he's half right half wrong, anyway it's good to have discussions like that.

Post reply on HN