Originally posted by dacha
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
FuryBSD Is A New Attempt At A Desktop Focused BSD
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by kylew77 View PostTo those complaining about applications not working in FreeBSD, its Wine support is stellar. It doesn't support Crossover for those hard cases directly but vanilla wine works just fine for running say MS office. Only thing keeping me from using OpenBSD as my daily driver is that it doesn't support virtual box and doesn't support Wine. FreeBSD is my second favorite operating system. It has some quirks but is a solid system. I run vanilla FreeBSD with XFCE as the desktop and I wonder what this FurryBSD would get me that I can't get already in vanilla FreeBSD?
Wine works fairly well, but it could still do a better job on FreeBSD. Quite a few unit tests fail. 16 bit applications don't seem to work for me, will probably have to dig into the kernel for that. And at some stage I must patch Wine's dlls/ntdll/directory.c to support case-insensitive ZFS filesystems better, so it avoids the slow readdir() of every file that is other necessary.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jacob View Post
IMHO XFCE is a better fit for the BSD approach and philosophy. Besides I believe KDE is moving in the direction of integrating with systemd, like GNOME, which will make it not an option for BSD.
I use Vanilla with Gnome as my daily workstation.. I find it simple and easy to modify to suit my needs as it's usually done in a very straight forward manner.. FreeBSD also has a very big selection of packages/ports you can use. I often can't find all the software I like to use on every Linux distro without resorting to random github repos sometimes I need 4 or more from different sources.. I tend to use Gentoo but OpenSuSE and Ubuntu have the same problem.. in FreeBSD everything I like to use is in ports.Last edited by k1e0x; 06 November 2019, 01:56 PM.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by willbprog177 View Post
....
I hope GhostBSD, FuryBSD and others gain some users and developers become interested in FreeBSD so we can have nice BSD things.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by plast0000 View Postyall talking about why not plasma instead of XFCE. well why not LXQT instead if they are talking lightweight?
Also, last time I checked (about a year ago), XFCE and Plasma both used 500-600mb of ram after boot and sitting idle for a minute. AFAICT, XFCE's transition to GTK3 made it lose a bit of it's lightweightness and put it on par with Plasma's ram usage (based on Manjaro's default XFCE and Plasma setups which are pretty bare-bones...Gnome, at the time, was in the 800mb range...only tried Manjaro's official isos).
While a bit anecdotal and non-scientific, due to my personal results and numerous other Phoronix users posting similar numbers regarding XFCE and Plasma from different distributions and setups, depending on how one wants to interpret the results that can be taken as either "XFCE simply doesn't have the lightweight edge anymore" or "both XFCE and Plasma can be considered lightweight desktops". I go with the former and not the latter there (XFCE ain't lightweight anymore).
Leave a comment:
-
I don't get it. They take TrueOS and head that in the direction of Project Trident which appears to be petering out and I never figured out what it was supposed to be. Lumina Desktop (Qt based DM with Openbox as the desktop) which is a 1st class citizen on BSD and now they're switching to FuryBSD with XFCE? I....I'm kinda of at a loss for words. iXSytems isn't big enough to support all that. Is this just 1 or 2 devs starting, more or less, personal projects and then petering out after a few years?
I love FreeBSD. All my servers run it, but it's never going to be a desktop OS unless Linux just takes off as a desktop OS too. I wish iXsystems would focus on their hardware stack and make FreeNAS and TrueNAS a rock stable platform. Work on stuff like blinking light support in JBODs and ZFS daemons, etc.... that's where BSD shines.
I ran FreeBSD for years as my primary work desktop and just got sick of fighting it. I run Arch now and no longer need 2 machines (Arch gaming box and FreeBSD desktop) and stopped using it at work too as a desktop.Last edited by rhavenn; 06 November 2019, 11:49 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
yall talking about why not plasma instead of XFCE. well why not LXQT instead if they are talking lightweight?
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Getting a non-broken desktop environment working is important. Even little things like missing icons in the default install makes it look pretty amateur. I would even go so far as to say a polished desktop doesn't really exist in FOSS; even that provided by enterprise distributions of Linux have breakages here and there.
So I like the idea of this project but I can't help but feel this would be best implemented as a patch-set or really simple self-extractor in its own /usr/fury prefix for FreeBSD rather than a separate install.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: