Love the analogy of visiting Canada as an American to explain how BSD is different from Linux.
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
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.
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
Also there is podmon (testing version), https://wiki.freebsd.org/bhyve & https://bastillebsd.org/
NetBSD prefers qemu as far as I know.
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.
But bhyve is a hypervisor ( VMs ) and Bastille is jails. Neither of those is a solution for running OCI containers.
Agreed and FreeBSD keeps getting better at each upgrade.
Next step: macOS.
Lowendbox doing it is what really interests me
Hey! This is a Linux community
That’s why I shared here. Because BSD community already running BSD :)
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.
But BSDs and Linux are very similar in design philosophy and are dependent on each other.
Interesting. Would you mind elaborating on the bold parts? Thank you in advance :D !
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.
I think when it comes to tooling, some Linux tools are actually BSD software that works because of POSIX compliance. An example is OpenSSH.
Thank you, i’ve never used a BSD variant myself but am a long time Linux user. Very curious to the next posts!
Now, where did I put that Katana?🤔
Have you guys tried secCBSD?
Do you mean SecBSD?
No. Not sexy enough.
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:
https://github.com/CaffeineMC/sodium-fabric/issues/2400
https://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:
https://lwn.net/Articles/937369/ (canonical requires a CLA, though this + the subsequent re-license might have happened anyway)
https://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)
https://networkbuilders.intel.com/docs/networkbuilders/accelerate-snort-performance-with-hyperscan-and-intel-xeon-processors-on-public-clouds-1680176363.pdf (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.
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: https://www.phoronix.com/review/bsd-linux-threadripper-7980x
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.
