Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My 10 Minute Experience With PC-BSD 10.0

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

  • My 10 Minute Experience With PC-BSD 10.0

    Phoronix: My 10 Minute Experience With PC-BSD 10.0

    With FreeBSD 10.0 having been released and the final release of the PC-BSD 10.0 coming this week, I decided to try out the PC-BSD 10.0-RC5 ahead of the final release. While I intended to run some benchmarks of FreeBSD/PC-BSD 10.0 against its predecessor and compared to Linux distributions, this initial PC-BSD 10.0 encounter was cut short after about ten minutes...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU4NTc

  • #2
    Haswell isn't currently supported by the Intel KMS code - it's a work-in-progress, but they need to update their DRM code first: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Graphics.

    It should be fine on Ivy Bridge and earlier intel graphics.

    Is there any chance you could be persuaded to give an AMD graphics card a test on PCBSD? It looks like radeonsi isn't supported yet, but r600g benchmarks (or even simple tests) would be interesting.

    Comment


    • #3
      If I install/try this, it will be because of the various incompatible Nvidia installers on Ubuntu, just a pain in the ass.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by mike4 View Post
        If I install/try this, it will be because of the various incompatible Nvidia installers on Ubuntu, just a pain in the ass.
        It's too hard for you to use repositories? What installers are you talking about?

        Comment


        • #5
          Why is PC-BSD still so slow?

          I am still curious about BSD, or even Solaris (OpenIndiana or whatever), but the last time I tried PC-BSD (v.7 I guess) it was sluggish and really not worth the switch from Windows for instance. On the same machine 3y-old machine Ubuntu was working perfectly well, so I never looked back again.

          Comment


          • #6
            In the article Michael mentioned dd'ing the image to an usb stick and then booting off it in efi mode. Michael what was the motherboard you used in the test? I had problems with dd'ing the image, the mobo just won't find the stick in the boot menu. I had to burn it to a DVD but even then I'd get hangs. I was forced to install it through legacy bios. I have an ASRock Fatal1ty killer motherboard. Thanks for your time.

            Comment


            • #7
              PCBSD needs more then 2GB of RAM and 2GHz of CPU to run. And that's the absolute minimum. When they made ZFS the default file system, PCBSD now needs way more that and this is all just to run fluxbox.

              The reason why PCBSD is so slow is because it is literally FreeBSD running KDE and other modern desktop environments. The FreeBSD wasn't designed to take that sort of load and it never will. Also, Systemd and Upstart out performs the BSD init by light years and it's kernel can only search and initiate drivers serially (unlike Linux which initiate all in parallel).

              I recommend not switching to PCBSD because it is so buggy, bloated and it has a lot of services turned on by default which coupled with the lack of ASLR, make it a serious security liability.

              I especially don't recommend switching to PCBSD 10.0 because of the tendency for the X.0 versions to be very very buggy.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by endman View Post
                PCBSD needs more then 2GB of RAM and 2GHz of CPU to run. And that's the absolute minimum. When they made ZFS the default file system, PCBSD now needs way more that and this is all just to run fluxbox.

                The reason why PCBSD is so slow is because it is literally FreeBSD running KDE and other modern desktop environments. The FreeBSD wasn't designed to take that sort of load and it never will. Also, Systemd and Upstart out performs the BSD init by light years and it's kernel can only search and initiate drivers serially (unlike Linux which initiate all in parallel).

                I recommend not switching to PCBSD because it is so buggy, bloated and it has a lot of services turned on by default which coupled with the lack of ASLR, make it a serious security liability.

                I especially don't recommend switching to PCBSD 10.0 because of the tendency for the X.0 versions to be very very buggy.
                1. If memory is a concern you can run FreeBSD with UFS instead of ZFS. I'm running PCBSD with KDE and I have firefox open and putty. All of that consumes 1.7Gb or ram. Here's the screenshot for it
                I checked what other distributions require for their installs and for example openSUSE, which is known for its well integrated KDE environment, recommends 2Gb. Here's the link http://en.opensuse.org/Hardware_requirements

                2. Services are turned on by default so that you have as positive out-of-the-box experience as possible. Users who are not fond of that can use the thorough documentation provided by PCBSD and FreeBSD to disable the services in question. If you do not want services enabled by default you can use ArchBSD. I'm not sure what is the status of the project but tip of the hat to the devs behind the project.

                3. I do not know why FreeBSD developers haven't adopted ASLR or an ASLR-type of security I'm not one of them to explain the reasons why but I'm sure there was much talk about it. ASLR first appeared in OpenBSD so I'm sure it would not constitute as big an effort to implement it as porting from somewhere else, Linux for example.

                To each his own, I chose PCBSD because of many amazing features ZFS, jails, bhyve etc. and the simplicity it offers to quickly install it with a DE of choice. I do not use it a server operating system, I use it as my desktop OS of choice. I have yet to find uses for the multitude of tools it offers but I found myself at home here.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by endman View Post
                  I recommend not switching to PCBSD because it is so buggy, bloated and it has a lot of services turned on by default which coupled with the lack of ASLR, make it a serious security liability.
                  Please don't use Debian, it turns on services by default. Actually, if you as user/admin of the system are not capable of turning of a service you don't need please don't run any OS and stop bothering us with your trolling. Don't you have another "article" to write on your hate spewing troll blog?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BSDude View Post
                    In the article Michael mentioned dd'ing the image to an usb stick and then booting off it in efi mode. Michael what was the motherboard you used in the test? I had problems with dd'ing the image, the mobo just won't find the stick in the boot menu. I had to burn it to a DVD but even then I'd get hangs. I was forced to install it through legacy bios. I have an ASRock Fatal1ty killer motherboard. Thanks for your time.
                    I planned to make some tests next week with BSD, but I have the same motherboard. Now I know what to expect.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by endman View Post
                      PCBSD needs more then 2GB of RAM and 2GHz of CPU to run. And that's the absolute minimum. When they made ZFS the default file system, PCBSD now needs way more that and this is all just to run fluxbox.

                      The reason why PCBSD is so slow is because it is literally FreeBSD running KDE and other modern desktop environments. The FreeBSD wasn't designed to take that sort of load and it never will. Also, Systemd and Upstart out performs the BSD init by light years and it's kernel can only search and initiate drivers serially (unlike Linux which initiate all in parallel).

                      I recommend not switching to PCBSD because it is so buggy, bloated and it has a lot of services turned on by default which coupled with the lack of ASLR, make it a serious security liability.

                      I especially don't recommend switching to PCBSD 10.0 because of the tendency for the X.0 versions to be very very buggy.
                      This isn't correct. You can run FreeBSD with a heavy desktop environment and it's pretty much identical in experience to anything else.

                      It's not going to be as fast on start as SystemD, but not much is nowadays; just about any Linux spin not using Systemd or Upstart is about the same. If a five second boot matters to you then obviously Debian/Gentoo with Openrc/FreeBSD isn't going to cut it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by endman View Post
                        PCBSD needs more then 2GB of RAM and 2GHz of CPU to run. And that's the absolute minimum. When they made ZFS the default file system, PCBSD now needs way more that and this is all just to run fluxbox.

                        The reason why PCBSD is so slow is because it is literally FreeBSD running KDE and other modern desktop environments. The FreeBSD wasn't designed to take that sort of load and it never will. Also, Systemd and Upstart out performs the BSD init by light years and it's kernel can only search and initiate drivers serially (unlike Linux which initiate all in parallel).

                        I recommend not switching to PCBSD because it is so buggy, bloated and it has a lot of services turned on by default which coupled with the lack of ASLR, make it a serious security liability.

                        I especially don't recommend switching to PCBSD 10.0 because of the tendency for the X.0 versions to be very very buggy.
                        The first point is unsourced.

                        The second point is not based in any fact. No operating system was designed with a view to running modern graphics environments; most operating systems of major use today were built, at least originally, before the mid 90s. As regards Systemd and Upstart, Upstart is soon to come to GNU/kFreeBSD at least. Launchd's port to FreeBSD is also getting updated. As for BSD init's slowness, you really are laying it on a bit thick. It is barely slower than systemd or Upstart.

                        Third point is totally subjective. Most desktop operating systems have lots of services turned on by default. If you dislike this then run something that leaves little on by default: FreeBSD vanilla, Arch, Gentoo, and their likes. ASLR is an insignificant feature which is useful for protection against rootkits, but most of those already work around it. That is my opinion. But if you don't like my view, please find Oliver Pinter's ASLR patch for the FreeBSD kernel. As for 'serious security liability', are remote exploits a big issue for desktop users? Not really. Most of them are behind NAT which puts an end to that before it reaches their PC. Server is another matter, but PC-BSD is for desktops.

                        Fourth point has a little truth in it -- X.0 versions of FreeBSD and its derivatives can be buggier. However - and this may not be scientific, but it's a good measure anyway - the general consensus in #FreeBSD on Freenode is that this is a very stable release. In any case, that's no reason to advocate against switching to PC-BSD, and 'very very buggy' is an overstatement, even for buggier point-zero releases from the past.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by BSDude View Post
                          3. I do not know why FreeBSD developers haven't adopted ASLR or an ASLR-type of security I'm not one of them to explain the reasons why but I'm sure there was much talk about it. ASLR first appeared in OpenBSD so I'm sure it would not constitute as big an effort to implement it as porting from somewhere else, Linux for example.
                          To be perfectly correct it was ported to OpenBSD two years after PaX made it for Linux. ASLR is WiP for FreeBSD:

                          http://0xfeedface.org/blog/lattera/2...-aslr-progress

                          It's taking so long, because lack of resources and different priorities than OpenBSD in my opinion.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            first world problems:


                            "I only got haswell laptops to test on"

                            motherfucker I will ship you a couple of old ass t60's and you can give me that haswell

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X