Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Foundation Buying Newer Laptops To Help Improve Hardware Support

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

  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by kindu smith View Post
    Since linus tovaldz has designed the pc version of unix --- GNU / linux for us, why should we use unix ----- FreeBSD implemented on the mainframe? ?
    1) I don't like getting a bloody kitchensink along with a neighbour's kitchen behind the wall, when all I wanted was a simple tap of my own. Tons of included packages and dependencies have become a norm.

    2) With each version of each distribution I generally have to re-learn bunch of things, not to mention ton of small idiosyncracies. It's WAY worse when you switch distro. BSD syntax, commands, utilities and basic working principles do not change out of blue. Decade old documentation and forum posts stay relevant. Learn it once and keep up with small changes.

    3) You can sneer at BSD license and it's copyleft nature but BSD's are not buttboys to the whims of large companies. Some single business entity (khm, RH) could not change BSD's (systemd and tons of other stuff) according to their wishes without hard forking. With Linux it's like sugar daddies paying their playtoy for cosmetic surgeries to please their wishes.

    4)BSD are easier to use and conf in absolute scope - you are not limited to the options offered by GUIs. Even better, you don't have to work around invasive GUI's , no need to go through bunch of GUI-driven framework layers piled over confs in some distros.

    5)Or multi-binary system daemon getting suddenly invasive/trying to override your settings after some update because it's scope was again enlargened and it took over some functionality again.

    6)Package managers don't drive me nuts on BSD. Dependency hells are a bitch.

    7) potential security holes called "custom repos" don't generally exist on BSD's.

    8) mentality of 'features over bugfixes' is abhorrent, for me.

    9) Do you enjoy troubleshooting issue you need to read C source for? Or trying to fix something that broke after an update, that doesn't have a good documentation yet and is not covered in forums while you are extremely limited in time? More often happens with penguin.

    Etc ad infinitum. When I need some server up, my first go is at FreeBSD, then DragonFly, only then I may entertain idea of Alpine or Void Linuces.

    Leave a comment:


  • andreyponomarenko
    replied
    Guys, add your FreeBSD laptops here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Laptops

    Leave a comment:


  • kindu smith
    replied
    Since linus tovaldz has designed the pc version of unix --- GNU / linux for us, why should we use unix ----- FreeBSD implemented on the mainframe? ?

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    Well, that's kind of different from the impression you tried to leave. So, the particular pieces did reach into public at least in some amount.
    After 4 years of paper launches, and 2 years beyond schedule, when the project was already dead.

    Now, show me who has or offers hardware based on that Loongsoohn xxx4000 cpu
    This is not the same situation in any way, shape or form. I already told you it is not a paper launch and repeating your initial question only makes me want to write Slowlaris some more times to dissuade you.

    Slowlaris Slowlaris Slowlaris.

    Leave a comment:


  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Probably a Lemaker Cello, that's the only board with that that ever shipped at all if I recall correctly. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-LeMaker-Cello

    They "launched" the hardware after like 4 years of pure paper launches, and 2 years late on the schedule. And afaik only a handful of boards were ever built and shipped years late.

    Afaik Linux also supports this thing, but the project was already dead when the boards started shipping.
    Well, that's kind of different from the impression you tried to leave. So, the particular pieces did reach into public at least in some amount. Now, show me who has or offers hardware based on that Loongsoohn xxx4000 cpu

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    Dude, you don't often enough bother checking even your own past posts I was quoting and just bash out random out of context reply.
    You could have shown you are better than me but no you don't. Fine by me.

    Nah,
    You can disagree, but I'm still right.

    So, what do we have here? No support in Linux and mythical AMD ARM working on NetBSD? Somehow they got their hands on one. Or what?
    Probably a Lemaker Cello, that's the only board with that that ever shipped at all if I recall correctly. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...-LeMaker-Cello

    They "launched" the hardware after like 4 years of pure paper launches, and 2 years late on the schedule. And afaik only a handful of boards were ever built and shipped years late.

    Afaik Linux also supports this thing, but the project was already dead when the boards started shipping.

    grow up?
    Slowlaris

    Leave a comment:


  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Is it too hard to check the posts of the guy I was quoting? Just saying.
    Dude, you don't often enough bother checking even your own past posts I was quoting and just bash out random out of context reply.
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Only slides and no actual progress. Hardware support is progress and it implies money is already invested. AMD's ARM processors are an example, only slides, no actual support, no actual hardware.
    Nah, when some piece of equipment was limited with a prototype batch, it means hardware isn't around to be had for general public regardless of it's support in kernel. Because it simply does not exist beyond handful of examples. It can very well happen that after sending patches upstream came down decision to cancel production. So support of some 2019 hardware could equal with some obscure equipment 30y a go nobody no longer is using. But you would not come and use that latter thing for bragging..

    About AMD ARM processors, you cannot be even sure if AMD did not produce some actual prototypes, put support in their in-house fork, later locked it all up and threw away the keys - because they could see from prototype's performance that things won't have a future.
    EDIT: https://www.netbsd.org/releases/form...etBSD-9.0.html
    Note:
    SBSA/SBBR (server-class) hardware using ACPI. Successfully test on, for example: Amazon Graviton (including bare metal instances), AMD Opteron A1100, Ampere eMAG 8180, Cavium ThunderX, Marvell ARMADA 8040, QEMU w/ Tianocore EDK2
    Looks like you were blasting away from hip claiming "AMD's ARM processors are an example, only slides, no actual support, no actual hardware"
    So, what do we have here? No support in Linux and mythical AMD ARM working on NetBSD? Somehow they got their hands on one. Or what?
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Slowlaris
    grow up?
    Last edited by aht0; 12-03-2019, 07:18 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    from where that Loongsoohn's example even started? Who brought it up first in previous posts?
    Is it too hard to check the posts of the guy I was quoting? Just saying.

    If general unavailability is no indication, then so what is indication of a "paper launch".
    Only slides and no actual progress. Hardware support is progress and it implies money is already invested. AMD's ARM processors are an example, only slides, no actual support, no actual hardware.

    If you don't like my "nitpicking" then first stop yours, I might reciprocate.
    Slowlaris

    Leave a comment:


  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    I'm not the one that pulled that Longsoon to use as example to disprove my point, so yeah, the more you break his statement the more you are helping me telling him he is a moron and that I was actually factually right.

    That said I personally find questionable your nitpicking, there are no indications that this is a paper launch.
    Well, can you find that model up for sale anywhere? Can you see it even on Loongsoohn's Chinese site (Google Chrome can handle and auto-translate). For that matter, from where that Loongsoohn's example even started? Who brought it up first in previous posts? Not me. I simply went and checked if I could find that thing up for grabs from somewhere. If general unavailability is no indication, then so what is indication of a "paper launch". Not that I give two fucks about some obscure Chinese mips cpu.

    If you don't like my "nitpicking" then first stop yours, I might reciprocate.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    When you have no way of getting this piece of hardware, then all the hardware support existence or not-existence remains effectively theoretical
    I'm not the one that pulled that Longsoon to use as example to disprove my point, so yeah, the more you break his statement the more you are helping me telling him he is a moron and that I was actually factually right.

    That said I personally find questionable your nitpicking, there are no indications that this is a paper launch.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X