Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 111

Thread: Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ghent
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightmarex View Post
    Stachlinux, now that's interesting.
    Yeah I am excited too

    One essential package that needs to work first before I migrate is "schroot". That way I could use a static "core" os and then seamlessly run a dynamic Arch in schroot (including X11 stuff) for big and complex stuff that would be horrible to try to build statically.

    Ps. Oh by the way - if I ever had a say about a mascot I would vote for a Mr. Potato variant of Tux, but perhaps I am the only one that would appreciate such a pun Ds.
    Last edited by staalmannen; 01-24-2013 at 03:30 AM.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    212

    Default

    So, Amzo, what is the benefit of pacman towards pkgng?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    So, Amzo, what is the benefit of pacman towards pkgng?
    pkgng wasn't around when I started the project and FreeBSD 9.1 lacks pkgng packages .

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    212

    Default

    Of course, as it is still a beta.

    That's why I am wondering if there is any benefit of Arch BSD.

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amzo View Post
    I know most people on this Forum are anti-BSD, but this was a personal project for me, to change some of the things I disliked about FreeBSD.
    Nah, no more than BSD anti-Linux crowd. Why didn't you choose much modern DragonflyBSD kernel instead?

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amzo View Post
    Actually, first of all, the project is using BSD userland, there was someone who attempted the same but with a GNU userland which has long died.

    The reason I started this project, which some may not agree with, was the lack of binary packages that were outdated in FreeBSD repos and to change the initsystem to something more modern.

    Basically, the project was to user a new package manager (pacman) and to use a new initsystem ( OpenRC ) and things have been going well.

    A few other important changes are:

    PKGBUILD and makepkg work with FreeBSD ports in a jail, this saves effort of compiling outside the port tree and having to setup a lot of system variables to keep them prefixed in /usr/local to keep to BSD standards

    The benefit to this is ease, and you can also override variables in PKGBUILD such as LDFLAGS, CFLAGS, CONFIGURE etc to set any options you otherwise would when building outside the port tree.

    I know most people on this Forum are anti-BSD, but this was a personal project for me, to change some of the things I disliked about FreeBSD.
    OpenRC is a RC system, not an init system. Unless you have adopted sysvinit, you are likely using the FreeBSD init system with OpenRC on top.

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Nah, no more than BSD anti-Linux crowd. Why didn't you choose much modern DragonflyBSD kernel instead?
    DragonflyBSD takes a different approach to kernel design than FreeBSD, but it is by no means more modern. FreeBSD has both DTrace and ZFS. DragonflyBSD has neither.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amzo View Post
    Actually, first of all, the project is using BSD userland, there was someone who attempted the same but with a GNU userland which has long died.

    The reason I started this project, which some may not agree with, was the lack of binary packages that were outdated in FreeBSD repos and to change the initsystem to something more modern.

    Basically, the project was to user a new package manager (pacman) and to use a new initsystem ( OpenRC ) and things have been going well.

    A few other important changes are:

    PKGBUILD and makepkg work with FreeBSD ports in a jail, this saves effort of compiling outside the port tree and having to setup a lot of system variables to keep them prefixed in /usr/local to keep to BSD standards

    The benefit to this is ease, and you can also override variables in PKGBUILD such as LDFLAGS, CFLAGS, CONFIGURE etc to set any options you otherwise would when building outside the port tree.


    I know most people on this Forum are anti-BSD, but this was a personal project for me, to change some of the things I disliked about FreeBSD.
    Cool, thanks for explanation, this is really GREAT news, and I sincerely wish ArchBSD the best in all of its future endeavours.
    The best of the Linux distro's (namely, at the least, one of the very best) being Arch, which I luv, with the *BSD/Unix, my first luv. (that is, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD -and in that order).

    It's a marriage that may help bear very fruitful results, one of them being, that ALL hardware manufacturers hopefully, and finally, start turning around and working even MORESO with BSD/Linux, at all levels, drivers', firmware,..., -did you HEAR that AMD/ATI Catalyst ?

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ryao View Post
    DragonflyBSD takes a different approach to kernel design than FreeBSD, but it is by no means more modern. FreeBSD has both DTrace and ZFS. DragonflyBSD has neither.
    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.

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scjet View Post
    It's a marriage that may help bear very fruitful results, one of them being, that ALL hardware manufacturers hopefully, and finally, start turning around and working even MORESO with BSD/Linux, at all levels, drivers', firmware,..., -did you HEAR that AMD/ATI Catalyst ?
    Keep dreaming. BSD is meaningless, because it's dead.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    212

    Default

    So much about the questions why the Linux fan trolls had not posted here yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •