Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD 12.2 Beta Available For Testing

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

  • FreeBSD 12.2 Beta Available For Testing

    Phoronix: FreeBSD 12.2 Beta Available For Testing

    While FreeBSD 13 is aiming for release around March of 2021, FreeBSD 12.2 is on the way for releasing next month as the next stable installment...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-Beta-Released

  • #2
    Per the article I will link below, the OpenZFS 2.0 release that has both the Linux and FreeBSD codebases merged should happen around the end of the year. If FreeBSD 13 is looking at an around March 2021 release, does anyone know if the default ZFS for that will be the new merged codebase?

    I was actually trading some emails earlier in the year with iXsystems about the code merge, and this all seems to be falling into place sooner than expected. I am looking forward to it, even if I am not exactly doing anything with ZFS yet, other than playing with it.

    https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/...reebsd_merger/

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ehansin View Post
      Per the article I will link below, the OpenZFS 2.0 release that has both the Linux and FreeBSD codebases merged should happen around the end of the year. If FreeBSD 13 is looking at an around March 2021 release, does anyone know if the default ZFS for that will be the new merged codebase?

      I was actually trading some emails earlier in the year with iXsystems about the code merge, and this all seems to be falling into place sooner than expected. I am looking forward to it, even if I am not exactly doing anything with ZFS yet, other than playing with it.

      https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/...reebsd_merger/
      Yes, it will be that new merged codebase. Aug 25 saw OpenZFS pulled into -HEAD, so barring any horrific regressions, FreeBSD 13 should use OpenZFS 2.0

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by KesZerda View Post

        Yes, it will be that new merged codebase. Aug 25 saw OpenZFS pulled into -HEAD, so barring any horrific regressions, FreeBSD 13 should use OpenZFS 2.0
        Thanks! I am starting to understand the various FreeBSD a little bit better, but by no means an expert. I appreciate the heads up and clarification. Seems exiting!

        Comment


        • #5
          If I am to try FreeBSD 12.2, what would be some benefits versus running a modern Linux distro, such as Clear Linux or Ubuntu 20.04 (keeping in mind that Ubuntu can run zfs)?

          Please, only technical benefits (as opposed to ideological ).

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by vladpetric View Post
            If I am to try FreeBSD 12.2, what would be some benefits versus running a modern Linux distro, such as Clear Linux or Ubuntu 20.04 (keeping in mind that Ubuntu can run zfs)?

            Please, only technical benefits (as opposed to ideological ).
            There are several posts on Reddit in r/freebsd that answer this question but I will answer your question here. Stability is one, if you think Debian is stable FreeBSD is much more stable. You can update a FreeBSD 12.1 to 12.2 with a couple simple commands and it will more than likely be problem free. My experience upgrading Ubuntu 14.04 to 16.04 had way more problems as did Debian 7 to 8. The base system is separate from user space. This means that your desktop environment such as XFCE4 or KDE5 are kept separate from the base system. SInce about FreeBSD 5 or 6 (I can't remember) Xorg is even separate from base. Base gets you a great minimal system using about 36MB of RAM that you can then turn into a web server, a light weight desktop, or a heavy weight workstation. ZFS integration leaves nothing to be desired. You can configure ZFS raid and full disk encryption from the installer. It really puts the Ubuntu ZFS installer to shame. The base system ships with a full C/C++ development environment if you count vi as an IDE. LLVM is included in the base as a compiler for you. The default shell choices are TCSH, CSH, and SH not Bash so Bash bugs are avoided. As shown here on Phoronix performance is sometimes a little higher than Linux and some times a little lower depending on the use case in question. Some of that can be attributed to using LLVM versus GCC and some is kernel and/or userland differences. All in all a FreeBSD workstation just feels good to use. Like it is a rock solid system. There are a few shortcomings ext4, xfs, btrfs, ntfs, exfat and other file systems all have limited access and auto mounting is about where LInux was a decade ago. Some software just isn't available period, but the same could be said about Linux. Steam gaming is not really well supported despite a Linux compatibility layer. Wine works though. The free drivers such as those for Intel and AMD lag behind Linux since they track the upstream Linux code so sometimes the latest and greatest Intel or AMD gpu won't work. Nvidia drivers are supported by a stealer well integrated 3rd party driver just like in Linux. So if you want a base system as hard as diamond or iridium that is that rock solid stable give FreeBSD a try it might meet your needs or you might find a piece of software you need missing. You never know until you give it a try. As for me I'm never going back to Linux after switching.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by kylew77 View Post

              There are several posts on Reddit in r/freebsd that answer this question but I will answer your question here. Stability is one, if you think Debian is stable FreeBSD is much more stable. You can update a FreeBSD 12.1 to 12.2 with a couple simple commands and it will more than likely be problem free. My experience upgrading Ubuntu 14.04 to 16.04 had way more problems as did Debian 7 to 8. The base system is separate from user space. This means that your desktop environment such as XFCE4 or KDE5 are kept separate from the base system. SInce about FreeBSD 5 or 6 (I can't remember) Xorg is even separate from base. Base gets you a great minimal system using about 36MB of RAM that you can then turn into a web server, a light weight desktop, or a heavy weight workstation. ZFS integration leaves nothing to be desired. You can configure ZFS raid and full disk encryption from the installer. It really puts the Ubuntu ZFS installer to shame. The base system ships with a full C/C++ development environment if you count vi as an IDE. LLVM is included in the base as a compiler for you. The default shell choices are TCSH, CSH, and SH not Bash so Bash bugs are avoided. As shown here on Phoronix performance is sometimes a little higher than Linux and some times a little lower depending on the use case in question. Some of that can be attributed to using LLVM versus GCC and some is kernel and/or userland differences. All in all a FreeBSD workstation just feels good to use. Like it is a rock solid system. There are a few shortcomings ext4, xfs, btrfs, ntfs, exfat and other file systems all have limited access and auto mounting is about where LInux was a decade ago. Some software just isn't available period, but the same could be said about Linux. Steam gaming is not really well supported despite a Linux compatibility layer. Wine works though. The free drivers such as those for Intel and AMD lag behind Linux since they track the upstream Linux code so sometimes the latest and greatest Intel or AMD gpu won't work. Nvidia drivers are supported by a stealer well integrated 3rd party driver just like in Linux. So if you want a base system as hard as diamond or iridium that is that rock solid stable give FreeBSD a try it might meet your needs or you might find a piece of software you need missing. You never know until you give it a try. As for me I'm never going back to Linux after switching.
              I appreciate your answer!

              I should say that there are some nuances where I disagree with you, but it's definitely good to understand your perspective.

              Fine to start running it under qemu/KVM, right? (my current desktop is Windows running under qemu/KVM with gpu passthrough ).

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by vladpetric View Post

                I appreciate your answer!

                I should say that there are some nuances where I disagree with you, but it's definitely good to understand your perspective.

                Fine to start running it under qemu/KVM, right? (my current desktop is Windows running under qemu/KVM with gpu passthrough ).
                I quick google search shows that as a qemu guest things should be supported. Virtualbox and VMware workstation both work perfect for me too.

                Comment

                Working...
                X