FreeBSD 13.0-RC3 Released With The WireGuard Driver Removed

[dreich]

... getting up and running with a desktop and a web browser like firefox takes maybe 30 min ...

Yeah, maybe ha ha!
Anyway, it still doesn't beat something like Ubuntu where all you have to do is install it and log in. Why do you think freebsd users use macs and windows? It's 'cause it's easier!

[angrypie]

getting up and running with a desktop and a web browser like firefox takes maybe 30 min. It is like starting from the Ubuntu LTS server install media and installing a desktop with APT.

Are binary packages still old? If so I'd prefer ports, and those take way longer to install.

[cen1]

Yeah.. after thinking about it, not a big fan ob publicly shaming code quality of another developer. Disclose vulnerabilities on security mailing list, send in the patches and that is it, there is no need for a publicity stunt on top of that, at least not in that tone. Unless you are Linus, he gets a free pass.

[k1e0x]

With built-in ZFS v2, FreeBSD is the only OS anyone should consider for NFS/CIFS bulk storage duty. Bhyve has come a long way too, and I'm evaluating whether to replace some CentOS hypervisors with FreeBSD. The combination of bhyve and zfs is pretty tempting, with instantaneous snapshot/rollback capability, and super easy backups with zfs send/receive feature. Running VM's on ZFS is technically superior to anything on the market, at any price.

zvols are nice for VM's for sure. KVM on Ubuntu can do this too and there is some support for zfs (also bhyve oddly enough) in libvirt. However the trick to using it is the pool has to be laid out a certain way. It seems like these libvirt modules don't get a lot of attention.

However yes, BSD itself does make a pretty good virtual platform with jails, bhyve, zfs and pf/vnet. If you can do this in your infrastructure it's not a bad way to be. Another one you might want to look at is OmniOS.

[k1e0x]

I disagree, getting a FreeBSD desktop up and running is about as difficult as doing it on Arch Linux. You don't have to compile a custom kernel and set use flags like Gentoo. The base system is already installed you just need to pkg add your desktop of choice and setup your startx file to start that desktop. Getting auto mounting of external media is another thing entirely but getting up and running with a desktop and a web browser like firefox takes maybe 30 min. It is like starting from the Ubuntu LTS server install media and installing a desktop with APT.

That might be true, one thing is FreeBSD will use the minimum package dependencies to get software running and it won't suggest extra things you may want for a better experience. Almost everything is in there and works for Gnome or KDE but finding the bits you need to install takes time. There is a instant workstation script out there that tries to track down all the extra little bits you might need. (for instance MTP support in Nautilus etc.)

Also you mentioned using geli with ZFS before, you no longer have to do that if you don't want to as ZFSv2 has native encryption and can encrypt it's own pools/datasets. Doing it this way makes them portable because it works with all of the other ZFS features like ZFS send. (or be imported on Linux/MacOS)

Did you know: Gentoo was inspired from FreeBSD and ports can do the same compile with or w/out various flags. It's lacking some polish Gentoo has tho and is more difficult to use so packages are recommended. You can use source packages though if you want and that flexibility is nice to have. Few linux distros can do source or binary packages.

[dacha]

Getting auto mounting of external media is another thing entirely

Not any more. When you install devel/gvfs, it automatically pulls in sysutils/bsdisks, which emulates the UDisks2 D-Bus interface and mounts drives from both GIO-based file managers (Nemo, Thunar, PCmanFM) and KDE's Solid-based ones (presumably Konqueror).

Version 0.24 crashed and would hang sometimes, but I contributed many bug fixes and version 0.25 is very reliable. If you find bugs please report (https://foss.heptapod.net/bsdutils/bsdisks), and I'll take a look even if the maintainer doesn't. It's a small project I've gotten to know well, and fixing bugs is easy now.

Fully automated mounting, as in file manager window opens when a drive is plugged in, won't work on XFCE yet as thunar-volman needs udev. Currently, you have to click on the removable drive icon in your file manager to mount it. But I am hoping to eventually implement a devd->udev conversion too.

[aht0]

For desktop usage it's awful, unless you do nothing else but endless tinkering with your computer. It's fun as a one-off exercise, but it becomes a chore if you have to do it often.

For servers I'd assume it doesn't matter much. CLI is the same for the most part.

I have exact same opinion about Linux. Often something breaks after random package updates and then you HAVE TO fiddle with it. With FreeBSD desktop, dunno what's there to tinker with, not that many "moving parts" (especially compared to Linux) and all the tinkering (in my case at least) is limited to infrequent OS's "base" upgrade from source (handful of console commands) and occassional portsnap auto && synth upgrade-system. That's pretty much IT.

[angrypie]

I have exact same opinion about Linux. Often something breaks after random package updates and then you HAVE TO fiddle with it.

Rolling release distros like Arch strongly recommend reading the release notes before any big upgrade (or recommended, haven't used Arch in a while). Something like Debian stable or OpenSUSE Leap would hardly break if at all, and I can only imagine breaking Ubuntu if you're using a lot of sloppy PPAs. Either you're arguing in bad faith or are revoltingly clueless about how FOSS is developed.

[aht0]

Rolling release distros like Arch strongly recommend reading the release notes before any big upgrade (or recommended, haven't used Arch in a while). Something like Debian stable or OpenSUSE Leap would hardly break if at all, and I can only imagine breaking Ubuntu if you're using a lot of sloppy PPAs. Either you're arguing in bad faith or are revoltingly clueless about how FOSS is developed.

Either you're arguing in bad faith or are revoltingly clueless about how FOSS is developed.

- and you know what, I had same thought about you. You are whining about having to tinker with FreeBSD where it's simple untruth unless you manage to intentionally screw things up (like diving into custom /etc/make.conf and then mixing the custom-built packages with official ones).

My issues have been namely with OpenSUSE and Mint. No custom PPA's (I consider them stupid security risk). Generally some systemd issue or package manager finding itself with corruption. Or btrfs on some drive dying/corrupting itself out of blue. Or GPU (Radeon) losing it's 3D accel. Whatever. Not always after updates but often enough "something funky" would happen and piss me off. Fixable? yes. But with all the "moving parts" inside most distros these days - I want it to "just work", be manageable through GUIs and not force me to read up on Bible-like manuals about how to fix things. Can I get it? No. So I just go with FreeBSD, thank you. Less than dozen conf files to "tinker with" to fix rare hiccup and handful of commands to keep it reasonably updated.

Debian stable versions? Yikes..why? I am already getting its stability and much newer packages with BSD's.

[angrypie]

Seems like I hit a nerve, and, well, you are clueless.

Did you switch to tried-and-true filesystems like Ext4 or Xfs? Did you even consider your remaining issues were caused by corrupted files? Could those be hardware/firmware issues?

I don't think you should be operating anything more complex than a microwave, let alone an undead Unix distribution whose survival is by trickle-down software ported from Linux.