Look if you go to Windows community which is not similar to Linux/Unix like system it’s bad on you. But BSDs and Linux are very similar in design philosophy and are dependent on each other. While windows is different thing of its own.
Sorry for my wording. What I meant was While BSD and Linux are not dependent on each other, they do share a common Unix heritage and have influenced each other over the years.
just_another_person@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 02:48
nextcollapse
BSD will always be faster. That’s a given. It is not flexible, however. It has a very specific purpose. This is why Apple chose this as the origin for OS X, which has now been bastardized to an unrecognizable variation, but if you check the main kernel, will still read as DragonFlyBSD.
BSD might be faster but companies choose BSD because the BSD License is much more flexible than the Linux General Public License. Apple was even able to create their own license, the APSL. They would not be able to do that using Linux.
wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
on 17 Jun 04:57
collapse
While that is true, the question is whether that’s a good thing, or not, and for whom.
While corporations might literally have maintainers sign away their rights so they can take the work from their own community:
lwn.net/Articles/937369/ (canonical requires a CLA, though this + the subsequent re-license might have happened anyway)
lwn.net/Articles/935592/ (RPM spec files are MIT licensed at the Fedora level. There are likely chnages to RPM files contributed by the community that are now source-restricted in RHEL)
FreeBSD doesn’t have desktop environment built in. So maybe running from command line or installation is a lot faster.
rostselmasch@lemmygrad.ml
on 17 Jun 10:03
collapse
Desktop environments are optional if using a Linux distribution. Also as long as a desktop environment doesnt take all resources, there shoudlnt be much difference in benchmarks.
just_another_person@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 12:26
nextcollapse
Smaller footprint in general, compiled as one (not multimodal kernel+extensions), simpler security models, and simpler init system. All of these will make it snappier out of the box than Linux, just not in the ways you’d want, say, a desktop to be faster.
I’m not sure how much I’d buy into phoronix benchmarks in this case. CentOS Strea, 9 was performing as good, if not better than, the recently released Ubuntu 24.04 and 2 week old FreeBSD 14.1 despite having a 3 year old kernel and being compiled with an equally old version of GCC. Linux is currently suffering from a pstate bug with AMD, too.
There’s a reason the BSDs are hardly used in HPC.
just_another_person@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 00:58
collapse
JFC. The end all be all of Linux benchmarks, and you’re standing up to discredit their results? Phoronix practically wrote the modern book on Linux benchmarks, but please tell us how they are wrong or mistaken.
3 other commentors have deleted theirs already for their inane fanboyisms. You want want to make 4, or do you have some new energy to bring to the conversation?
Why are you being inflammatory for no reason? I’m just saying I don’t think it’d be correct for an OS 3 years in the past to be neck and neck with modern stuff. Log off the computer and go outside lmao
just_another_person@lemmy.world
on 19 Jun 02:53
collapse
Pacmanlives@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 04:32
nextcollapse
Very excited to see the rest of this series. I still run some BSD box’s. I really really enjoy it. I really wish they would support Docker at this point but it’s complex and I get it with the developers they have. Jails still work so so well. I am on a box I think I installed end of FreeBSD 9 or 10 on and just keep upgrading. That’s probably get to the 10 year mark at this point. I will have to go and check. It’s such a smooth system to run really a dream. Wish more people tried it especially
I feel like the FreeBSD Community ist really underestimating how important OCI containers are in the Linux world. And how much easier they are to setup than vms and jails.
BlueEther@no.lastname.nz
on 17 Jun 06:43
nextcollapse
I have 3 *BSD vms on proxmox, OpnSense and TrueNAS as well as a GhostBSD desktop for ‘play’. The TrueNAS started as a bare metal install and is now in it’d 3rd 4th server
I also have 2 Macs in the house…
So I guess *BSD is well represented here, looking forward to the read
NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world
on 17 Jun 18:05
nextcollapse
Have you guys tried secCBSD?
polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml
on 17 Jun 21:00
nextcollapse
All of politics information technology is sexual pathology.
Edit: bruh wtf its a real thing what, als o i cant read im leaving this as proof of me being a debil
i’ve had to use netapp ontap’s freebsd and solaris 9 & 10 professionally and going to canada is exactly how it felt; one is vancouver (compared to california) and the other was new foundland.
sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
on 19 Jun 03:09
collapse
I tried FreeBSD for several months about 15-20 years ago. I really liked how clean the filesystem and environment felt, and have suggested it for many people over the years. In the end I couldn’t get around their license vs GPL.
threaded - newest
Hey! This is a Linux community
Sometimes we need to talk about grandpappy.
That’s why I shared here. Because BSD community already running BSD :)
Thank you, i’ve never used a BSD variant myself but am a long time Linux user. Very curious to the next posts!
Excuse me while I light my pitchfork
The audacity. Do YOU see US going into windows communities to shill linux?
Oh. Yeah. Carry on then.
Look if you go to Windows community which is not similar to Linux/Unix like system it’s bad on you. But BSDs and Linux are very similar in design philosophy and are dependent on each other. While windows is different thing of its own.
Interesting. Would you mind elaborating on the bold parts? Thank you in advance :D !
I think when it comes to tooling, some Linux tools are actually BSD software that works because of POSIX compliance. An example is OpenSSH.
Sorry for my wording. What I meant was While BSD and Linux are not dependent on each other, they do share a common Unix heritage and have influenced each other over the years.
That makes a lot more sense. Thank you for clarifying!
Frequently software developed for one is commonly used on the other, such as openssh, iirc.
Now, where did I put that Katana?🤔
BSD will always be faster. That’s a given. It is not flexible, however. It has a very specific purpose. This is why Apple chose this as the origin for OS X, which has now been bastardized to an unrecognizable variation, but if you check the main kernel, will still read as DragonFlyBSD.
BSD might be faster but companies choose BSD because the BSD License is much more flexible than the Linux General Public License. Apple was even able to create their own license, the APSL. They would not be able to do that using Linux.
While that is true, the question is whether that’s a good thing, or not, and for whom.
It’s a good thing for the owners of the codebase, but often, a bad thing for the community (even if the community contributes to said codebase).
For example, FOSS maintainers sometimes will (want to) relicense to protect their income stream:
github.com/CaffeineMC/sodium-fabric/issues/2400
github.com/LizardByte/Sunshine/pull/150
While corporations might literally have maintainers sign away their rights so they can take the work from their own community:
lwn.net/Articles/937369/ (canonical requires a CLA, though this + the subsequent re-license might have happened anyway)
lwn.net/Articles/935592/ (RPM spec files are MIT licensed at the Fedora level. There are likely chnages to RPM files contributed by the community that are now source-restricted in RHEL)
…intel.com/…/accelerate-snort-performance-with-hy… (See section 2.2. Previously, this work was BSD)
Mixed bag, really.
Faster in what sense? Would you kindly point me to the benchmarks used? It’s easy to find the opposite results so I’m curious.
FreeBSD doesn’t have desktop environment built in. So maybe running from command line or installation is a lot faster.
Desktop environments are optional if using a Linux distribution. Also as long as a desktop environment doesnt take all resources, there shoudlnt be much difference in benchmarks.
Smaller footprint in general, compiled as one (not multimodal kernel+extensions), simpler security models, and simpler init system. All of these will make it snappier out of the box than Linux, just not in the ways you’d want, say, a desktop to be faster.
This just dropped as well. You can see where the differences are: www.phoronix.com/…/bsd-linux-threadripper-7980x
That makes some sense I suppose. What was it about DragonFlyBSD and macOS kernel?
I’m not sure how much I’d buy into phoronix benchmarks in this case. CentOS Strea, 9 was performing as good, if not better than, the recently released Ubuntu 24.04 and 2 week old FreeBSD 14.1 despite having a 3 year old kernel and being compiled with an equally old version of GCC. Linux is currently suffering from a pstate bug with AMD, too.
There’s a reason the BSDs are hardly used in HPC.
JFC. The end all be all of Linux benchmarks, and you’re standing up to discredit their results? Phoronix practically wrote the modern book on Linux benchmarks, but please tell us how they are wrong or mistaken.
3 other commentors have deleted theirs already for their inane fanboyisms. You want want to make 4, or do you have some new energy to bring to the conversation?
Why are you being inflammatory for no reason? I’m just saying I don’t think it’d be correct for an OS 3 years in the past to be neck and neck with modern stuff. Log off the computer and go outside lmao
Why are you? Touch grass.
www.phoronix.com/review/…/4
This just dropped as well: www.phoronix.com/…/bsd-linux-threadripper-7980x
Very excited to see the rest of this series. I still run some BSD box’s. I really really enjoy it. I really wish they would support Docker at this point but it’s complex and I get it with the developers they have. Jails still work so so well. I am on a box I think I installed end of FreeBSD 9 or 10 on and just keep upgrading. That’s probably get to the 10 year mark at this point. I will have to go and check. It’s such a smooth system to run really a dream. Wish more people tried it especially
Agreed and FreeBSD keeps getting better at each upgrade.
Also there is podmon (testing version), wiki.freebsd.org/bhyve & bastillebsd.org
NetBSD prefers qemu as far as I know.
But bhyve is a hypervisor ( VMs ) and Bastille is jails. Neither of those is a solution for running OCI containers.
I feel like the FreeBSD Community ist really underestimating how important OCI containers are in the Linux world. And how much easier they are to setup than vms and jails.
I have 3 *BSD vms on proxmox, OpnSense and TrueNAS as well as a GhostBSD desktop for ‘play’. The TrueNAS started as a bare metal install and is now in it’d
3rd4th serverI also have 2 Macs in the house…
So I guess *BSD is well represented here, looking forward to the read
Have you guys tried secCBSD?
All of
politicsinformation technology is sexual pathology.Edit: bruh wtf its a real thing what, als o i cant read im leaving this as proof of me being a debil
Do you mean SecBSD?
No. Not sexy enough.
Next step: macOS.
Lowendbox doing it is what really interests me
Love the analogy of visiting Canada as an American to explain how BSD is different from Linux.
i’ve had to use netapp ontap’s freebsd and solaris 9 & 10 professionally and going to canada is exactly how it felt; one is vancouver (compared to california) and the other was new foundland.
I tried FreeBSD for several months about 15-20 years ago. I really liked how clean the filesystem and environment felt, and have suggested it for many people over the years. In the end I couldn’t get around their license vs GPL.