Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

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

  • #76
    Guys ... guys ... seriously. Stuff like this happening over in the penguin petting zoo can only help us all out. After all, if any of you have been as busy as I've been lately cleaning up the penguin cages with the likes of python33, udev, systemd and a raft of other penguinisms, the more they're encouraged to stay clear of BSD's, the better off we ALL are!
    When we develop third party apps, We must make sure that they cannot port them to their crappy little ports tree. A good start would be making udev and systemd a dependency for all applications.

    udev is actually unportable to BSD cause 90% of the functions it uses can only be provided by the Linux Kernel and even FreeBSD's shitty Linux Emulation Layer can't support that.

    If the BSD users and developers don't like that, they should commit mass suicide. It'll be entertaining for everyone.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Amzo View Post
      Really..?

      Because from that video Gentoo took 19 seconds, and I can rival those speeds with ArchBSD

      ArchBSD
      keep fucking yourself.

      With bsd kernel the boot time can never be less then 60s cos they load up drivers serially and they even load drivers when there is no supporting devices. oh wait when you meant rival their boot time you mean it's only 5 to 6 times slower then linux inside of 100 times slower

      Seriously, just kill yourself right now. The world will be a happier place.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by BSD SUCKS DICKS View Post
        When we develop third party apps, We must make sure that they cannot port them to their crappy little ports tree. A good start would be making udev and systemd a dependency for all applications.

        udev is actually unportable to BSD cause 90% of the functions it uses can only be provided by the Linux Kernel and even FreeBSD's shitty Linux Emulation Layer can't support that.

        If the BSD users and developers don't like that, they should commit mass suicide. It'll be entertaining for everyone.
        wow, great idea. "Lets kill everything that isn't a linux distro that uses a few select pieces of software! F*** freedom and choice! Lets be just like Apple!"

        I have yet to come across something in my usage that the linux compatibility layer couldn't handle. And i run a good amount of linux systems without udev, and more without systemd. Making some software unable to run on *BSD is called crappy coding. If it can't be ported, you need to learn how to fix what you badly screwed up on, or give up UNIX and code for osx or windows.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by tvall View Post
          I have yet to come across something in my usage that the linux compatibility layer couldn't handle
          Of course it is for you, cause if you admit that linux compatibility layer desn't work (which is true), you be committing thought crime against BSD and your gods M$ and Apple.

          And i run a good amount of linux systems without udev, and more without systemd. Making some software unable to run on *BSD is called crappy coding. If it can't be ported, you need to learn how to fix what you badly screwed up on,
          Of course to BSD whores, any software that cannot run on BSD is shit, homo bullshit etc.... and somehow Linux's fault even though the program maybe windows only.

          programs that concentrate on running one OS are of higher quality then those that try to run on multiple OS cause more time is gone into bug fixing, they are also are smaller cause they dont need to have code for other irrelevant OS. They are also less broken cause porting screws up code.

          since linux is a free and open-source and the best, it should be the target for writing applications. Not Windowz, not OSX and especially not BSDildos.

          or give up UNIX and code for osx or windows.
          Linux is not UNIX. so go fuck urself right now.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by tvall View Post
            Making some software unable to run on *BSD is called crappy coding. If it can't be ported, you need to learn how to fix what you badly screwed up on, or give up UNIX and code for osx or windows.
            In the case of systemd, it's (from what I've read) coded very specifically for the Linux kernel. You could probably fork and re-work it for a different kernel, but I doubt it'd be an easy task. However, I'm sure someone who's inteligent enough could look at the code, read the goals of systemd, see what it's doing, and make something similar for a BSD OS/kernel.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Nobu View Post
              In the case of systemd, it's (from what I've read) coded very specifically for the Linux kernel. You could probably fork and re-work it for a different kernel, but I doubt it'd be an easy task. However, I'm sure someone who's inteligent enough could look at the code, read the goals of systemd, see what it's doing, and make something similar for a BSD OS/kernel.
              BSDs wont allow it, they are under the religion that systemd is shit cause it was designed by linux.

              The only road for BSD is to die

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by BSD SUCKS DICKS View Post
                Of course it is for you, cause if you admit that linux compatibility layer desn't work (which is true), you be committing thought crime against BSD and your gods M$ and Apple.
                just stating experience from real world use

                Of course to BSD whores, any software that cannot run on BSD is shit, homo bullshit etc.... and somehow Linux's fault even though the program maybe windows only.

                programs that concentrate on running one OS are of higher quality then those that try to run on multiple OS cause more time is gone into bug fixing, they are also are smaller cause they dont need to have code for other irrelevant OS. They are also less broken cause porting screws up code.
                if it was coded to standards (POSIX?), it would be nearly effortless to port most programs to other operating systems that also comply to those standards. isnt that the point of standards? and i am specifically talking about linux stuff here. windows is not unix-like, so of course porting isnt easy.

                since linux is a free and open-source and the best, it should be the target for writing applications. Not Windowz, not OSX and especially not BSDildos.
                most of these "linux" programs run well on similar systems (like BSD).


                Linux is not UNIX. so go fuck urself right now.
                linux is unix-like. And i won't go fuck myself. unlike you, I have a girlfriend for that

                Comment


                • #83
                  anti-BSD is back...

                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  I don't have to trust him... I figured this myself. BSD stopped to be relevant years ago and it's true it's holding back many free software projects. Btw. how such people can be taken seriously:

                  http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=36941



                  I tried hard, but I failed to figure out how staying in stone age can help them out?
                  Damn... do I have to read your f*cking trolling again? You didn't have to come back, you know; I'm pretty sure nobody missed you.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    UNIX should have been open source from the start. That way, we wouldn't have BSD and Linux, we'd just have different variants of UNIX. Linux would be called "Linus unix".

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      That is a port. It isn't a part of FreeBSD.


                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      http://static.usenix.org/event/bsdco...tml/node5.html



                      This legacy OS was also using M:N threading implementation just to switch to 1:1 like Linux does.
                      If I recall, Solaris pioneered the concept of threading before it became available in Linux. Linux's first attempt at threads was fairly cumbersome and it did not receive a threading implementation competitive with Solaris until Linux 2.6. If you want to compare copycats to the original, you should compare Linux to Solaris.

                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      Yay, Gentoo developer have spoken. I wonder why freebsd with GCC was way faster than with llvm? I also wonder why the hell you care, so much about compiler and optimization flags? Damn hippo.
                      The current speed differences are insignificant in the grander scheme of things. First, even if the binaries were twice as fast, the difference is insignificant if your workload doesn't bottleneck on it. Second, LLVM/Clang has a cleanly implemented architecture in which it is easier to implement optimization passes and do tuning. The value of that cannot be stated enough. There are plenty of ways to leverage that to obtain performance benefits, but quite honestly, no one cares how much faster programs can run if their running time was not noticeable in the first place.

                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      Hammer was developed for years for DragonflyBSD especially and it's far more mature than zfs on freebsd.
                      Can you quantify that by saying something other than "it must be more mature because I use it"?

                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      If you have no clue, just shut up.
                      Would you care to follow your own advice?

                      http://www.trollaxor.com/2012/05/mis...dragonfly.html

                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      It's way better and modern.
                      Anyone could probably convince you that their OS is "way better and modern" by providing you with some hand picked benchmarks. That does not make it true.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by dee. View Post
                        UNIX should have been open source from the start. That way, we wouldn't have BSD and Linux, we'd just have different variants of UNIX. Linux would be called "Linus unix".

                        Actually there was, (sort-of-getting-there), it was called "OpenSolaris", that is, until Oracle stepped in, and "Closed" ALL the doors. !

                        What we really need now is: "OpenHardware" -did you hear that Nvidia, ... ???!!!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                          I don't have to trust him... I figured this myself. BSD stopped to be relevant years ago and it's true it's holding back many free software projects. Btw. how such people can be taken seriously:

                          http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=36941



                          I tried hard, but I failed to figure out how staying in stone age can help them out?
                          I'm sorry, but U didn't figure anything out, in as much as Lennart actually created systemd, -'cause Redfart didn't, he/they just "stole" -err I mean "ported" it from (Open)Solaris,...
                          That's right kimosobie, Solaris already had created/wrote it from way back when, and, it was caled : "SMF"
                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service...ement_Facility

                          Everyone else seems to have figured that out? It can't be that hard, stealing from a dead man, but then giving yourself ALL the acolades? -hahaha.
                          So, next time, do the freekin' research first before opening up the Linux cheese-hole,...
                          Last edited by scjet; 01-26-2013, 06:20 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by scjet View Post
                            Actually there was, (sort-of-getting-there), it was called "OpenSolaris", that is, until Oracle stepped in, and "Closed" ALL the doors. !

                            What we really need now is: "OpenHardware" -did you hear that Nvidia, ... ???!!!
                            No I mean the original UNIX. Like if it had been GPL-licensed from the start (and if GPL had been invented back then).

                            Also, open hardware is already a Thing, and it's going to be an even bigger Thing in the coming years. Just wait when the first crowdfunded open-source ARMv8 SoC:s are produced, we're going to have fun with them. This I predict by looking into my crystal balls.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by scjet View Post
                              I'm sorry, but U didn't figure anything out, as much as Lennart actually created systemd, -'cause Redfart didn't, he/they just "stole" -err I mean "ported" it from (Open)Solaris,...
                              That's right kimosobie, Solaris already had that from way back when, and, it was caled : "SMF"
                              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service...ement_Facility

                              Everyone else seems to have figured that out?
                              So, next time, do the freekin' research first before opening up the Linux cheese-hole,...
                              systemd is not a port of SMF. However, the ideas in both are fairly similar in their goals. Lennart Pottering would have had trouble convincing people at RedHat to adopt systemd had they already ported SMF.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by dee. View Post
                                No I mean the original UNIX. Like if it had been GPL-licensed from the start (and if GPL had been invented back then).

                                Also, open hardware is already a Thing, and it's going to be an even bigger Thing in the coming years. Just wait when the first crowdfunded open-source ARMv8 SoC:s are produced, we're going to have fun with them. This I predict by looking into my crystal balls.
                                Solaris is based on the original UNIX.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X