Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

John Carmack Goes On Coding Retreat With OpenBSD

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by Leopard View Post

    Not related but is it true that some Autobahns on Germany has no speed limits?
    Some limits are time based like no limit between 20:00-6:00 else 120km/h.
    The first time you go 320km/h (200mph) and overtake a police car it feels a bit strange.
    No matter how fast you go there's always someone going faster.

    Comment


    • #22
      Most software isn't consistent anyway. If you consider the fact that Linux is basically trying to be the every-system. It's got projects like wine, 2ine, darling etc running on it. A third of the "Linux" software is ported from other platforms, another third are rewrites/reverse engineered remakes of software and the third type of apps are native and specific to one of the specialised desktops. Is it really a surprise? Frankly I think KDE/GNOME should just put more emphasis on getting clones of each other's software going if people want a coherent desktop. It's already sort of going that way with Libreoffice being a GTK app and Collabra being the KDE version.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by cb88 View Post
        Also you completedly ignored his main complaint with Linux... it isn't cohesive like at all.
        that complaint is incorrect. bsd isn't cohesive either, he selected one bsd distro. you can select one cohesive linux distro

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by pal666 View Post
          that complaint is incorrect. bsd isn't cohesive either, he selected one bsd distro. you can select one cohesive linux distro
          BSD already has the "Distro" part in the name. Berkeley Software Distribution Distribution sounds tacky.

          Also, you likely know this but OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD are not classed as distros of BSD because they do not depend on a single upstream project (there is no standalone "BSD" project.

          Something like PC-BSD however is a distro of FreeBSD. FreeBSD being the upstream project.

          Does Sony's PS4 OrbisOS count as a FreeBSD "distro"? I guess it does.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by AndyChow View Post
            Well, he could have just installed gcc6 which is available in the packages
            gcc6 is almost 2 years old. openbsd looks like joke os
            Originally posted by AndyChow View Post
            and have C++14
            in the times of c++17
            Last edited by pal666; 05 March 2018, 07:36 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
              BSD already has the "Distro" part in the name. Berkeley Software Distribution Distribution sounds tacky.
              so what? fedora isn't distro because it does not have distro part in the name?
              Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
              Also, you likely know this but OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD are not classed as distros of BSD because they do not depend on a single upstream project (there is no standalone "BSD" project.
              there is no standalone "linux distro" project. kernel is just one package of thousands and 1) many distros modify their kernels 2) all bsds are forks, while some linuxes are not
              Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
              Something like PC-BSD however is a distro of FreeBSD. FreeBSD being the upstream project.
              that is more like fedora's spins

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by AndyChow View Post

                Well, he could have just installed gcc6 which is available in the packages, or gone into /usr/ports/lang/gcc/6 and typed "make install clean", and have C++14 and all that.

                If he would have gone with Gentoo, he would have finished his weekend retreat and almost finished compiling GCC.
                I gathered that his whole point was to experience using OpenBSD. Not to install extras until it looks like a different operating system.

                Whenever I personally have to use FreeBSD for something, I end up installing so many GNU tools that it may as well be Linux. But then I'm not really using FreeBSD as intended, am I?

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Zan Lynx View Post

                  I gathered that his whole point was to experience using OpenBSD. Not to install extras until it looks like a different operating system.

                  Whenever I personally have to use FreeBSD for something, I end up installing so many GNU tools that it may as well be Linux. But then I'm not really using FreeBSD as intended, am I?
                  Maybe. The whole gmake, cmake, pmake, bmake, fmake makes me overly confused. Add to that FreeBSD completely going to clang, while OpenBSD and DragonFly are sticking to GCC. And I don't know where NetBSD is (probably GCC), just makes it all confusing.

                  Every time I try to install some new hardware, or software, it needs 10-150 MB of extra tools, to run a final binary which is maybe 1-10 MB, often 100-500 KB.

                  The fragmentation overall isn't even a problem, it's insanity. The same solutions, solved over and over and over again. Most of it caused by ignorance of what already exists. A few caused by pure creative drive, and a tiny fraction because actually it's a better solution.

                  It's a serious problem, but I don't have a solution. Or even an idea of a solution.

                  How is something supposed to be used? Intended to be used. A rock can be used as a hammer, but we often have hundreds of rocks lying around for different nails, while the perfect hammers lay unused in their cases, because we haven't read the friendly (boring) manual.

                  The GNU tools are a good start, I think. They are solid. We shouldn't feel bad using them, even on BSD.

                  I can't think about this subject too long, it makes me depressed thinking about all the wasted resources.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
                    gcc6 is almost 2 years old. openbsd looks like joke os
                    in the times of c++17
                    Code doesn't rot. GCC8 still has many regressions compared to GCC6 that it hasn't been fixed. Two year old is nothing, lol. OpenBSD is about security, not bleeding edge. Most banks still run Fortran code from the 80's in their mainframes, and the reason is simple: good code doesn't rot, new code contains bugs.

                    Ask yourself what c++17 fixes compared to c++14? Oh, it allows to run code that is ill written and badly defined. Tired of those pesky errors from sloppy? Sure, well ignore the problem.

                    Yeah, I'm being disingenuous, but I see very few improvements in c++17. Nothing compared to the great improvements in c11 vs c99. But I never liked c++ anyway. IMO, everything should be c, maybe some fortran for management, lisp for intellectuals, php for pragmatic people. I don't know, I'm a bit depressed. Sorry.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by AndyChow View Post

                      Code doesn't rot. GCC8 still has many regressions compared to GCC6 that it hasn't been fixed. Two year old is nothing, lol. OpenBSD is about security, not bleeding edge. Most banks still run Fortran code from the 80's in their mainframes, and the reason is simple: good code doesn't rot, new code contains bugs.

                      Ask yourself what c++17 fixes compared to c++14? Oh, it allows to run code that is ill written and badly defined. Tired of those pesky errors from sloppy? Sure, well ignore the problem.

                      Yeah, I'm being disingenuous, but I see very few improvements in c++17. Nothing compared to the great improvements in c11 vs c99. But I never liked c++ anyway. IMO, everything should be c, maybe some fortran for management, lisp for intellectuals, php for pragmatic people. I don't know, I'm a bit depressed. Sorry.
                      Don't forget that many scientists still run Fortran code too! Think NASA and the like.

                      Hope that could cheer you up, at least a little bit.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X