Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Can Now Be Built From Linux/macOS Hosts, Transition To Git Continues

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by KesZerda View Post

    I provided an example of a company that uses FreeBSD, and has written extensively as to why they do so. I could also mention that the differences in development philosophy which mean that out of tree development, like OpenZFS, is encouraged, in contrast to the Linux kernel team's well known FUD attacks.
    I provided the same multiplied by three.. The *BSD have nothing to worry about when comes to OpenZFS. On the Linux side it's far different, but I thought the situation should be obvious here?

    I could also mention a number of other design features under FreeBSD that are fantastic to work with. Jails, for example, are fantastic for isolating portions of the system for general ease of maintenance, and especially useful for things like development, where being able to create and destroy instances on a whim is a godsend.
    I'm not denying it. I could do the same: cgroups, lxc and so on. It wasn't the point.

    Ps. I bet we can both agree Open Source systems have superior networking stack, file systems and other features in comparison to proprietary trash.
    Last edited by Volta; 22 October 2020, 07:34 AM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Goddamn. And here I was thinking this was good news.

      I also get a kick out of the GPL comments in threads like these. It's like they don't realize how much MIT and BSD licensed code is in the kernel; which has always made me wonder what the legalities of tweaking Linux kernel code that is more permissive than GPL. Do companies technically have to release those changes too?

      Comment


      • #13
        Next big thing for FreeBSD (and derivates) : FreeBSD from scratch

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by KaoDome View Post
          Wow... where does the hate come from?
          There's no hate. I'm sorry if I confused you.

          They try to switch GPL code with BSD one. They replaced GCC with LLVM.

          Now they switch to Git, a GPL project that started as a need for Linux kernel development.

          Originally posted by KaoDome View Post
          They're moving forward.. and it pains you?
          It's good they are moving forward, it was due.

          Don't get me wrong: I used all BSD flavors many years ago. I got bored of lagging behind Linux in comparison.

          I would like a real alternative, instead being used in a few specialized niches (PlayStation and other proprietary software+hardware users) and a good performer at networking.

          I want real competition against Linux instead focusing so much on Linux emulation! And their own drivers.

          Originally posted by KaoDome View Post
          I'm glad to see things like these, switching from Subversion to Git (or any other distributed VCS) alone is a big improvement; same with being able to build from different systems, I'm sure it adds convenience for some devs.

          All in all, good for them
          It's nice! But I'm sure they could do it even a lot better!

          Where's the superiority of BSD software against GPL? It's that kind of fanaticism that I don't like.

          Why not merge BSD and GPL? Why so much separation?

          Comment


          • #15
            A good amount of "Git technology" is just SSH. This is very much developed and improved from the BSD camp.

            Also there are different Git clients (not-GPL). Such as Got or Git9

            Originally posted by timofonic View Post

            Why not merge BSD and GPL? Why so much separation?
            GPL license is incompatible with many other licenses by definition. This isn't a bad thing. GPL projects can also take from BSD/MIT and they cannot do the same. This can be seen in the OpenOffice vs LibreOffice projects. What I find strange is how competitive all other operating systems still are compared to Linux even with this in place. Perhaps the slight unorganisation of Linux is to blame for its relatively slow development.
            Yes, BSD might be slow in development too but for the fraction of the developers, it really is much faster per contributor.
            Last edited by kpedersen; 22 October 2020, 08:51 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
              What I find strange is how competitive all other operating systems still are compared to Linux even with this in place. Perhaps the slight unorganisation of Linux is to blame for its relatively slow development. Yes, BSD might be slow in development too but for the fraction of the developers, it really is much faster per contributor.
              It depends what do you mean by competitive? On desktops they're lagging behind badly. The same goes for HPC, mainframes, networking market share. In the end it will be easy to verify after their transition to git.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by timofonic View Post
                There's no hate. I'm sorry if I confused you.
                Oh! I see! I had misunderstood your earlier comment, I understand what you want to convey now.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                  But is FreeBSD better at anything? Does it have any advantages?
                  yes, you can sell proprietary versions of it

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by KesZerda View Post
                    Networking. There are reasons why companies like Netflix invest heavily in FreeBSD.
                    linux networking is better, look at all other internet companies, who didn't happen to have freebsd person making decisions. and btw netflix invests heavily in amazon linux ec2 instances
                    Originally posted by KesZerda View Post
                    The FreeBSD network stack is still much more stable, and more performant than the Linux network stack.
                    it's a freebsd fairytale. freebsd has no drivers and no stack compared to linux

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by KesZerda View Post
                      I could also mention that the differences in development philosophy which mean that out of tree development, like OpenZFS, is encouraged, in contrast to the Linux kernel team's well known FUD attacks.
                      you should stop your fud attack and look at hard reality where orders of magnitude more developers are contributing to linux, exactly because it has better development philosophy
                      Originally posted by KesZerda View Post
                      I could also mention a number of other design features under FreeBSD that are fantastic to work with. Jails, for example, are fantastic for isolating portions of the system for general ease of maintenance, and especially useful for things like development, where being able to create and destroy instances on a whim is a godsend.
                      again linux containers are superior and whole world is built on them while you are posting your ads

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X