Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 111

Thread: Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

  1. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    For me switch to Clang/LLVM was positive.
    And Ubuntu not switching to systemd is of course unpolitical.
    Also Git replaced BitKeeper, because of political reasons.
    Both cases you mentioned are nothing, but stupidity. Switch to llvm was stupid and Ubuntu not switching to systemd is stupid as well. Git is probably the best tool, so it was a practical decision.

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

    The Arch BSD operating system is moving forward, an attempt at a BSD platform that's inspired by the Arch Linux distribution and using its package-set...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI4MTk
    Obvously Phoronix got it wrong this time, since ArchBSD is "pure" FreeBSD + Userland + pacman _ OpenRC, + ...
    But, BSD dev's gotta start looking into some Linux help too, in the "free-spirit" of things. -it goes both ways soon.

    "Clang,..."? fine, that's good for BSD, strip gpl* code, who cares, but as Picard once said: "...just make it work Number 1...!" -It's all good for us.
    pacman, OpenRC can be built/ported for this, but it still leaves me with the obvious questions of FreeBSD 10 and beyond, where are the "DRIVERS'" ???
    This is a continual ongoing issue, whether we're in Linux-emulation or not, at present. Linux-emulation is outdated and non-senseicle anway, in BSD -other than see, we can be you but you can't be us, right now?
    On the other hand, this Linux tool-assisted "visibilty" can only help BSD in more ways than less. At the very hopeful best, it's a chance for OpenHardware, finally to exist, as well. (I mean it's still hardware, DUH, and we still gotta pay for it).

    Also, BSD-community/dev's should welcomely-embrace endevours such as ArchBSD, Gentoo/FreeBSD, (not so much kFreeBSD), but anyway, these are big Linux players' who recognize BSD for what it's worth. If torvalds can be curiously-respectful of Microsoft lately (ya, I thought that too, mmmm???!!!) then he can darn well start being a little respectful of *BSD/Unix, it has 'bin around before even any of us, or him. I mean, "...it's just a kernel" right ? -LoL.

    So whats it gonna be Beaver(s)?, we all work together, in the "free-spirit" of unix sharing ?, or, divided do we continually fall to the obvious M$/MacO$'s out there -and 'fer nuthin' ?

    BSD ain't goin' away, and it ain't dead -by a long shot.
    Yes it does need HELP though -but who doesn't, for f* sakes. ?
    Last edited by scjet; 01-25-2013 at 12:36 PM. Reason: 'cause of certain unreasonable BSD-haters' here.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Both cases you mentioned are nothing, but stupidity. Switch to llvm was stupid and Ubuntu not switching to systemd is stupid as well. Git is probably the best tool, so it was a practical decision.
    Switch to llvm was good for llvm and it's good to have more good compilers. Git was started because of political reasons.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Both cases you mentioned are nothing, but stupidity. Switch to llvm was stupid and Ubuntu not switching to systemd is stupid as well. Git is probably the best tool, so it was a practical decision.
    http://bsd.slashdot.org/story/11/07/...levant-anymore
    Let me guess, you actually believe this marketing-teddybear-puppet from IBM, regarding systemd, along with pulseaudio ? ya ya I know, it's mounted in the bathroom right >?
    it's ok, toilet is a good place for to do a a lot of things, or is it "thongs" ?
    Last edited by scjet; 01-25-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  5. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scjet View Post
    http://bsd.slashdot.org/story/11/07/...levant-anymore
    Let me guess, you actually believe this marketing-teddybear-puppet from IBM, regarding systemd, along with pulseaudio ? ya ya I know, it's mounted in the bathroom right >?
    it's ok, toilet is a good place for to do a a lot of things, or is it "thongs" ?
    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

    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!
    I tried hard, but I failed to figure out how staying in stone age can help them out?

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    36

    Default

    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.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote 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.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote 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.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote 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.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    364

    Default

    Quote 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.

Posting Permissions

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