Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MidnightBSD 3.0 Coming Soon For FreeBSD-Derived Desktop OS

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

  • MidnightBSD 3.0 Coming Soon For FreeBSD-Derived Desktop OS

    Phoronix: MidnightBSD 3.0 Coming Soon For FreeBSD-Derived Desktop OS

    For those that may have tried the recent macOS-inspired helloSystem 0.8 release for that desktop-focused FreeBSD-based operating system, if that didn't satisfy your desktop BSD desires, MidnightBSD 3.0 is working its way to release as another alternative...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Is MidnightBSD synced directly with the FreeBSD repos or is there also a delay on synchronization with the FreeBSD repos like GhostBSD?

    I think it is important to immediately have the latest versions of browsers. But also for the '32-bit Wine' to work well on FreeBSD it is important to immediately have the latest software versions.​

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Classical View Post
      Is MidnightBSD synced directly with the FreeBSD repos or is there also a delay on synchronization with the FreeBSD repos like GhostBSD?

      I think it is important to immediately have the latest versions of browsers. But also for the '32-bit Wine' to work well on FreeBSD it is important to immediately have the latest software versions.​
      I think it's the former, and as for web browsers, considering that the ones on the BSDs repos/ports are unofficial builds that lack the security features of the supported platforms, welp, that's not saying much.
      GhostBSD's Firefox is usually up to date afaik.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Nozo View Post
        I think it's the former, and as for web browsers, considering that the ones on the BSDs repos/ports are unofficial builds that lack the security features of the supported platforms, welp, that's not saying much.
        In the case of OpenBSD, I would take the pledge(2), unveil(2) patches any day over upstream generic support.

        Besides, browsers in Linux repos i.e Debian or Ubuntu repos are also unofficial source builds, with bespoke distro integration patches (sometimes security!), just like BSD.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

          In the case of OpenBSD, I would take the pledge(2), unveil(2) patches any day over upstream generic support.

          Besides, browsers in Linux repos i.e Debian or Ubuntu repos are also unofficial source builds, with bespoke distro integration patches (sometimes security!), just like BSD.
          The difference is that these packages are based on the official versions that are distributed for Linux, like the repackaged versions of Google Chrome, that is impossible on BSDs because they don't exist.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Nozo View Post
            The difference is that these packages are based on the official versions that are distributed for Linux.
            This isn't really the case. Since Chrome is closed-source, I assume you mean Chromium and unofficial forks such as ungoogled-chromium and Iridium. There is very little difference here other than Google don't accept upstream patches for BSD. Debian also maintains their own patches for the Chromium in their repo.

            As for Firefox, they are receptive in patches and the process is similar to any Linux distro. A firefox from Debian repos or FreeBSD ports are still quite different from the all in one static linked bundles provided from the Mozilla website however.

            Comment


            • #7
              Last I heard the kernel of Midnight BSD was different enough that the FreeBSD Nvidia driver wouldn't work on it, is that still the case?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

                In the case of OpenBSD, I would take the pledge(2), unveil(2) patches any day over upstream generic support.

                Besides, browsers in Linux repos i.e Debian or Ubuntu repos are also unofficial source builds, with bespoke distro integration patches (sometimes security!), just like BSD.
                It is truly a shame that upstream has problems taking patches from the OpenBSD project and they have to carry a large patch burden of their own! But in my opinion they do a dang good job of it for such a small project!

                Comment

                Working...
                X