Chimera Linux Pushes Ahead For FreeBSD User-Space Atop Linux, Built Using LLVM

[aht0]

lol, that's how you call lack of basic usability
linux has correct way of designating device drivers, but uneducated freebsd zealots can't understand it
well that's the only way you can tell which is which, other ways like eth0 don't tell you anything at all(and can get reordered on reboot)
lol so you still don't understand what those designations mean. don't worry, in linux you can rename or alias interfaces
it's your system, you should know it. shutdown gracefully shuts down all services. my system shuts down faster than boots up, on your system something takes long time, only you can investigate it

BSD device driver naming schemes are older than Linux. Kinda idiotic of you to make such strong fanatical statements.

"Lack of basic usability"? How come? Oh, I see the pattern now. Lack of order in arguments, pile of spaghetti-code in kernel and sytemd - mental preference, that's what it is, right? That also explains why Linux distros are constantly in half-working state on some part. Secret solved. Thank you!

"Correct way" defined by whom exactly? Poettering and RHEL? Show me standardization first, before trotting out such arguments. Or one may call whatever "correct way", depending on his (or possibly her) subjective view. From MY pov, naming network device by it's freakin' driver and adding incremental digits to it are far more USABLE (your favorite word!). I can just do "man igb" or whatever if I wanted to know what that device is capable for. And if I have machine with multiple nic's I would also have good idea which card is behind some designation. Without thinking about it more than 5s. Usability. Instead of having first to try and figure out whatever is hiding behind the fucking cryptic designation . Time saved, more "usability" (again your favorite word,see!).

is ext4 with casefold supported on freebsd?

Might be, through FUSE. Haven't checked standard kernel module. But it's also irrelevant because on FreeBSD I would have simply made use of case-insensitive dataset in ZFS. I used ext4 only because Linux relative lack of filesystems capable for such adaptation.

Why I used SUSE? I assumed I would be able to point-and-click my setting-up through Yast and be done with the setup within hour. One service needs to run "ported-from-windows"-Linux binary which works properly only with case-insensitive file system.

Instead of, you know.. installing FreeBSD, setting up Linux jail, running binary through that.

i don't use suse, on fedora it works

Fedora is shit because it's unfit to be in long-term install production-use box. That's the first issue with it.
Second problem is, IF I WANTED TO dive under the hood and dig into shell, I would have done it in BSD to begin with. Considered briefly Slackware and Salix but honestly might as well install BSD -roughly same amount of work with the setup.

SUSE GUI's are closest to "good and usable" with its Yast, also Leap's get SLES updates - so it should be reasonably stable. If I wasn't finding slew of little nagging issues (that casefold issue, also seems VNC remote admin yast module doesn't really do it's job).

Buntus, CentOS's etc you can stick where the sun doesn't shine, if I don't get fully usable GUI and have to do part of the job in shell I'd rather do all of it in shell and config files. In minimalistic system.

so maybe your main problem is bad distro choice?

No, it's shoddy coding and patch-work nature of Linux. So far.

[TiberiusDuval]

Isn't that behauviour (order of arguments for commands) rather shell specific than OS specific? I mean one can use whatever shell one wants, be it any Linux distribution or FreeBSD.