Reid 
BSD people: can someone please explain what the meaningful differences between FreeBSD and OpenBSD are?
ok since this post seems to be gaining a lot of traction I also want to throw this in: what do BSD people think of Void? I've heard people describe it as "BSD with gnu userland and a Linux kernel" before but how true is that" I remember it was first made by an OpenBSD guy but I don't really know much else about it, does seem like a good enough option when my hardware is supportedn't by most BSDs
vintage screwlisp account@Reiddragon my magic 8 ball says it heard not to use void.
chris@screwtape @Reiddragon As of May, I'll
have been using Void as my "daily driver" for 9 years. That's the longest
I've stuck with any Linux distro. My previous record was Slackware, at
almost 7 years.
Yeah there was some BSD influence in Void, but I don't think it is much
like a BSD.
If you're looking for Linux with a BSD userland,
maybe have a look at Chimera: https://chimera-linux.org/, which is
Linux, musl, utilities from FreeBSD, and the LLVM toolchain, with dinit as the
init system / service manager. I really like dinit
(https://github.com/davmac314/dinit) FWIW.
have been using Void as my "daily driver" for 9 years. That's the longest
I've stuck with any Linux distro. My previous record was Slackware, at
almost 7 years.
Yeah there was some BSD influence in Void, but I don't think it is much
like a BSD.
If you're looking for Linux with a BSD userland,
maybe have a look at Chimera: https://chimera-linux.org/, which is
Linux, musl, utilities from FreeBSD, and the LLVM toolchain, with dinit as the
init system / service manager. I really like dinit
(https://github.com/davmac314/dinit) FWIW.
@chris @screwtape my issue isn't with GNU, and clang is an absolute piece of shit that alone makes me not want to touch anything like chimera
my issues on Linux are with all of gnome's horseshit that gets more and more widespread
my issues on Linux are with all of gnome's horseshit that gets more and more widespread
@Reiddragon
The BSDs use clang mostly, though gcc is ported. Also make is BSD make. gnumake is gmake
@chris
I will update my 8-ball.
The BSDs use clang mostly, though gcc is ported. Also make is BSD make. gnumake is gmake
@chris
I will update my 8-ball.
@screwtape @chris welp, best argument to stick to a gnu system, the only C compiler that was more annoying than clang was msvc but that's a really low bar
@Reiddragon @screwtape I don't have an issue
with GNU either. I mean, I'm sending this from emacs. I don't know enough
about clang/LLVM to have much of an opinion either way, other than to note
that the rise of optimizing compiler crazyness seems to have started there.
As for desktop environments, I don't use one. I run GUI software under
stumpwm.
Void might be a really good choice for you, given what you've said here.
with GNU either. I mean, I'm sending this from emacs. I don't know enough
about clang/LLVM to have much of an opinion either way, other than to note
that the rise of optimizing compiler crazyness seems to have started there.
As for desktop environments, I don't use one. I run GUI software under
stumpwm.
Void might be a really good choice for you, given what you've said here.
Digital Mark λ ☕️ 🚀 🌗@Reiddragon
OpenBSD: Relentlessly security & correctness focused. Theo is an asshole who's usually/always right.
FreeBSD: Comes with most of the nice amenities of a user-friendly UNIX. Fantastic documentation. Friendly community. Dragonfly, etc. have even more desktop stuff configured.
NetBSD: Works on your toaster & a computer from 1995 which sold 1000 units.
#bsd #freebsd #openbsd #netbsd
@mdhughes @Reiddragon
netbsd is being undersold here. Tbh it basically has a positive and relaxed spirit (yeah, based on get things working and then chill out). It's a modern and great operating system. However if we think about security, it doesn't have openbsd's mania (IT IS SECURE AND IT IS EASY TO USE) or FreeBSD's being the obvious choice for schmancy businesses.
netbsd is being undersold here. Tbh it basically has a positive and relaxed spirit (yeah, based on get things working and then chill out). It's a modern and great operating system. However if we think about security, it doesn't have openbsd's mania (IT IS SECURE AND IT IS EASY TO USE) or FreeBSD's being the obvious choice for schmancy businesses.
mhd@mhd @screwtape @mdhughes I never understood who thought that's a good idea
but then again, at one point I shitposted about trying to force Guile inside Hurd and then building a full GNU system on top of that so maybe it was someone with the same brainrot as I but who was skilled and influential enough to convince people
but then again, at one point I shitposted about trying to force Guile inside Hurd and then building a full GNU system on top of that so maybe it was someone with the same brainrot as I but who was skilled and influential enough to convince people
@Reiddragon @mdhughes @screwtape Personally I like that we have at least one BSD that isn't all about "good ideas" and shoots for the moon sometimes.
@mhd @mdhughes @screwtape Lua in the kernel tho? I feel like that's one experiment that shouldn't have gone trough
@mhd
@prahou I feel there's so much potential in the above toot, even though I'm worried about feeling a bit mean
@Reiddragon @mdhughes
@prahou I feel there's so much potential in the above toot, even though I'm worried about feeling a bit mean
@Reiddragon @mdhughes
@qrstuv.bsky.socialShoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll at least shoot yourself in the head.
A Grantler@mdhughes @Reiddragon Don't mix FreeBSD with Dragonfly. They've nothing in common apart from Matthew Dillon who has being part of FreeBSD development in the past before he forked it from FreeBSD 4.8
バルテク@mdhughes @Reiddragon this is oversimplifying by A LOT. For instance: some desktop things work better on #OpenBSD than #FreeBSD. #NetBSD was the first #BSD to implement #KASLR - before OpenBSD. It's not black and white and hasn't been for years now yet everybody copies the same fake mantras about these 3 BSDs.
@bkrawczyk @mdhughes @Reiddragon
the non-secret about openbsd is that we use it because it's easy to use and because of the release songs
the non-secret about openbsd is that we use it because it's easy to use and because of the release songs
@Reiddragon
The visible similarity I guess is basically the ports system. OpenBSD feels quite ingenius, in a way only a relatively small operating system community can. What's normal on openbsd feels like good ways to do things. Unfortunately if there isn't a current dev for something, the person who has to step up is you.
FreeBSD worked hard to nurture its positive (if worryingly professional) community. It's unfair to freebsd maybe, but I would say there's a bit of a debian or gentoo vibe.
@screwtape I don't mind gentoo stuff, but if it's "ubuntu vibes" in the ways I understand it then that's a hard no from me, Ubuntu is absolute horseshit to say the least
@Reiddragon I withdraw that bile. Actually, I'll edit it out. But Gentoo, definitely. I was trying to say super-main-stream and hardware-company-friendly or something.
@screwtape that makes a bit more sense, but as "friendly" as it supposedly is, most of my hardware is marked incompatible on FreeBSD's hardware tracker sooooo 
@Reiddragon mhd's toot was portentious
Darkstar@Reiddragon FreeBSD has ZFS and jails, and bhyve is easier with non-BSD guests.
OpenBSD has all configuration in one place, FreeBSD more scattered.
Sound usually works right out of the box on OpenBSD, on FreeBSD you have to tinker to get it working.
@darkstar I actually don't really care about any zfs stuff; jails are containers iirc? and what even is bhyve?
I don't mind configuration being a little scattered as long as it's not to an unreasonable degree like how on Linux you can set the cursor just fine from your display server's settings but then gtk magically needs its own setting for the cursors because fuck you
as for sound, let's just say I looked up my hardware on FreeBSD's compatibility list thingy and the results were... less than great
I don't mind configuration being a little scattered as long as it's not to an unreasonable degree like how on Linux you can set the cursor just fine from your display server's settings but then gtk magically needs its own setting for the cursors because fuck you
as for sound, let's just say I looked up my hardware on FreeBSD's compatibility list thingy and the results were... less than great
@Reiddragon jails are containers, mature technology.
Bhyve is the FreeBSD hypervisor, like KVM on Linux.
ZFS is wonderful, it provides snapshots, clones, and ZFS send and receive. Once you have worked with those, you don’t want it any other way :)
Tomáš@Reiddragon openbsd is a fully featured operating system.
freebsd is glue-together-your-ideal-system.
@prahou so kinda like Arch or Gentoo?
@Reiddragon No idea, sorry.
Point is, you can get by with an openbsd installation without ever touching a third party package.
tant@Reiddragon @prahou Gentoo was inspired by FreeBSDs port system.
Arch is very similar to FreeBSD with prebuild packages.
One difference is that FreeBSD and OpenBSD have a core set of userland programs which are build buy the same people who build the kernel.
Think like Linus Torvalds and al were feed up with GNU and builds it just for themself, like git.
Arch is very similar to FreeBSD with prebuild packages.
One difference is that FreeBSD and OpenBSD have a core set of userland programs which are build buy the same people who build the kernel.
Think like Linus Torvalds and al were feed up with GNU and builds it just for themself, like git.
@Reiddragon @prahou oh GNU plus a ports infrastructure and packaging system.
@Reiddragon the differences between these two are developer priorities.
OpenBSD values security over performance.
FreeBSD performance over security.
So if a dev makes an argument that a new feature makes the system more secure but it costs performance then OpenBSD is more likely to implement it.
Sometimes FreeBSD then copies the feature a few years later, if they think it has value.