Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Improving Boot Times, Adds Hole-Punching, Better Linux Binary Compatibility

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by kylew77 View Post
    I don't understand why FreeBSD lags so far behind when all they do is port the Linux driver
    not enough manpower

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Vorpal View Post
      my laptop with Ubuntu boots far slower
      there are linuxes which start in milliseconds

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by aht0 View Post
        Slightly altering drive geometry won't drop you into emergency shell either, it's so fucking stupid when removal of a drive which had nothing to do with Linux blocks your boot and demands sorting out.
        Andv it would shut down properly unlike penguin where system often just couldn't shut itself down without multiple +30s timeouts..
        so to love freebsd you have to suck at linux and/or use some broken distro

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by pal666 View Post
          so to love freebsd you have to suck at linux and/or use some broken distro
          Oh you poor trollboi, I used freebsd far before jumping ship from linux. Just systemd gave me the final push. And those "broken distros" are fairly mainstream.

          But you know what. In my childhood in USSR, when somebody bought brand new car from factory, they first needed to dissassemble the entire fucking car, in order to find every little problem and fix it. Because there was always something wrong with it. It usually took master mechanic or knowing of one. Car is a tool. Linux is a tool. USSR died 30 years a go, maybe its time for linux to drag itself out from the similar mentality and focus on quality and simplicity, instead of piling layers of patchy frameworks and code on top of each other. When I need to use Linux I would expect "user-friendly" distro not to bug with mysterious errors or assume I am well-versed in it's internals. It's okay for DIY distros but not for "kitchen sink"-ones. So, nowadays when I use Linux I do it through WSL2 or FreeBSD jails, much more convenient than diving into guts of some distro and finding out all it's peculiarities compared to some other distro.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by vladpetric View Post
            I don't know, after TrueNAS migrating to Linux, I think FreeBSDs relevance is lower by the day.
            The next release of TrueNAS CORE is in active dev and based on FreeBSD 13. CORE will continue to be FreeBSD based.
            TrueNAS SCALE is a separate packaging of TrueNAS and debian-based. iXsystems indicates both will continue.
            And with FreeBSD 13 being free of the GPL, *BSD is more relevant than ever.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by pmbauer View Post

              The next release of TrueNAS CORE is in active dev and based on FreeBSD 13. CORE will continue to be FreeBSD based.
              TrueNAS SCALE is a separate packaging of TrueNAS and debian-based. iXsystems indicates both will continue.
              And with FreeBSD 13 being free of the GPL, *BSD is more relevant than ever.
              I doubt that their intent is to maintain two parallel and idempotent releases, forever, as it takes a lot of the resources to do so with little gain. I see this as an experiment that may or may not pan out (but if it does pan out, Linux will replace FreeBSD). But we shall see.

              For most people running servers (users of TrueNAS), the license difference is completely irrelevant. Yeah, if you are Apple or similar proprietary software
              company who needs to distribute binaries built from opensource code, BSD is infinitely preferable to GPL because it is nearly impossible to be successfully sued if the original code was released as BSD (unless you do something totally egregious, like strip copyright notices, which they won't do). Not so with GPL.
              Last edited by vladpetric; 27 November 2021, 01:49 PM.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by vladpetric View Post
                I doubt that their intent is to maintain two parallel and idempotent releases [...]
                You of course have a right to your opinion. iXsystems have a long history as a *BSD shop and have explicitly stated their vision for a multi-OS future. We shall see.
                As to the rest, I made and make no claims on whether or not BSD/GPL factor into individual user decisions in most cases.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by pmbauer View Post

                  You of course have a right to your opinion. iXsystems have a long history as a *BSD shop and have explicitly stated their vision for a multi-OS future. We shall see.
                  As to the rest, I made and make no claims on whether or not BSD/GPL factor into individual user decisions in most cases.
                  Actually would you mind sharing a link re: their explicitly stated vision?

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    vladpetric
                    https://www.ixsystems.com/blog/truenas-multi-os/
                    They appear to be holding to their stated direction from over a year back.
                    Maybe this changes in future, but BSD-based TrueNAS CORE development progresses.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X