Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by tvall View Post
    by your logic, anything that uses a BSD style init system sucks. therefore, 90% of linux sucks, and the rest either sucked in the past, or sucks for some other reason.
    Wrong DICK FACE, 90% of Linux use SysV init and upgrade to the awesome systemd. I hate gentoo and debian cause they are now working on BSD and thus betraying Linux.

    Most Linuxes has always been SysV init cos SysV init outperforms and kill BullShitD init.

    Comment


    • #47

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by kraftman View Post
        Nah, no more than BSD anti-Linux crowd.
        I agree, just take a look at their latest propaganda:

        http://i477.photobucket.com/albums/r...01/FreeBSD.jpg

        This hear is evidence that BSD people hate Linux. And we as Linux users and supporters must stand up against them and beat them back.

        Teach them a lesson and confiscate their source code, remove the BSD license and put GPL on it and give the source code to the Linux foundation.

        Also if the FSF principles make it to law (Which I hope they will) they should make sure that anyone who develops and/or uses BSD or follow their practices of licensing software under the BSD license should be put in jail. (I'm serious)

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Amzo View Post
          Basically, the project was to user a new package manager (pacman) and to use a new initsystem ( OpenRC ) and things have been going well.
          This sounds very similar Alpine Linux. We use OpenRC and uClibc/busybox in userspace instead of GNU. Musl were not that mature when we started the project but we are interested in switching to musl. We considered pacman and pkgbuild but ended up making our own package manager, apk-tools. Also, like OpenBSD, we like hardening up things in kernel and therefore we use the Grsecurity patch.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
            Someone please tell the dev how pkg_add works.
            Or even better, tell them that apk-tools exists.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Amzo View Post
              pkgng wasn't around when I started the project and FreeBSD 9.1 lacks pkgng packages .
              Amzo: You might want have a look at Alpine Linux and apk-tools.

              You are welcome in our #alpine-devel channel on freenode for a chat.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by ncopa View Post
                Or even better, tell them that apk-tools exists.
                How is that related to FreeBSD?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
                  How is that related to FreeBSD?
                  It eliminates the "need" for using FreeBSD. What they are telling Azmo is that rather then wasting time on trying to improve FreeBSD, he should just ditch it and use Alpine Linux.

                  You should also ditch FreeBSD and use Linux for fuck sake.

                  FreeBSD sucks and so does all other BSDs and non-Linux crap

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                    What?
                    As a BSD user you should know about this. I bet freebsd jerks made everything to make their users forgot about their embarrassing past. Just imagine Linux threads were for some time an only option in freebsd.

                    What "Linux principles"?
                    Like database optimizations. Dragonfly is way faster than freebsd, because it follows Linux principles like:

                    "Light Weight Kernel Threads (LWKT) implementation and a virtual kernel similar to User Mode Linux."

                    http://lwn.net/Articles/384200/

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      As a BSD user you should know about this.
                      BSD Users are always in denied. Thats why they manage not to use Linux and instead use BSD even though linux is far more easier and pleasant to use. BitLight in particular is a prime example of this.


                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      I bet freebsd jerks made everything to make their users forgot about their embarrassing past. Just imagine Linux threads were for some time an only option in freebsd.
                      The FreeBSD project governing system is like how the country oceania from orwell's 1984 governs it's people. Free speech is heavily sensored in there and people and historic events become unpersons or unevens (In FreeBSD and OpenBSD).
                      Last edited by BSD SUCKS DICKS; 01-25-2013, 07:07 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by BSD SUCKS DICKS View Post
                        Thats why they manage not to use Linux and instead use BSD even though linux is far more easier and pleasant to use.
                        Use Windows then. You don't even need an X-Server for it. Good luck.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                          As a BSD user you should know about this. I bet freebsd jerks made everything to make their users forgot about their embarrassing past. Just imagine Linux threads were for some time an only option in freebsd.
                          You mean LinuxThreads library? Well that is because Linux now uses NTPL, which uses Linux specific system calls. So they had to do their own, which is probably not slower than LinuxThreads.
                          I'm not freebsd user and never was, I'm occasional OpenBSD user.


                          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                          Like database optimizations. Dragonfly is way faster than freebsd, because it follows Linux principles like:

                          "Light Weight Kernel Threads (LWKT) implementation and a virtual kernel similar to User Mode Linux."

                          http://lwn.net/Articles/384200/
                          So Light Weight Kernel Threads are very similar to Linux kernel threads? I couldn't found any reference.
                          Virtual kernel feature is similar to User Mode Linux, but it's not performance feature:
                          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                          Dragonfly is also much faster, because it's using Linux principles.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            attention everyone, azmo (the only developer of ArchBSD) is a useless fucking prick would just wants to show off to the world how shitty his piece of shit OS is cause it's based on the shittest OS of all (BSD)

                            the world needs less projects like this

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Cthulhux View Post
                              How is that related to FreeBSD?
                              My bad. I thought I posted to the Starch Linux thread. Sorry.

                              PS. is there some way to filter out messages in this thread that uses font size over a given limit?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                                Dragonfly is what BSD system should be. FreeBSD was using Linux threads in the past, but switched to much worse and slower solution. It was using GCC and now it's using slow llvm. I would consider Dtrace and zfs as tech preview, so they're meaningless. Dragonfly has modern file system unlike FreeBSD which has legacy and crappy UFS. Dragonfly is also much faster, because it's using Linux principles.
                                Do you have a reference for your Linux threads comment? If you know how a kernel works, you should know how absurd that statement is.

                                Compilers do not matter very much as far as performance goes. Better aglorithms and code that plays well with cache will always matter more than anything a compiler could do.

                                Dtrace and ZFS could be called a "tech preview" in FreeBSD 7.x and FreeBSD 8.0-8.2. It is fairly mature in FreeBSD 8.3 and later. At this point, ZFS and Dtrace are no more of a "tech preview" than DragonflyBSD is.

                                Lastly, DragonflyBSD has influences from AmigaOS, not Linux.

                                DragonflyBSD has its merits, but it is different, not better.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X