No announcement yet.

FreeBSD Working On Improving Its Audio Stack & Creating Graphical OS Installer

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by flakmirror View Post
    Can someone in the know point me towards information about UnionFS? I mean a spinoff of it appears to be OverlayFS which we all know (and well, the only one of these that I know...) and UnionFS can be used somehow instead of it? Now... OverlayFS is part of the kernel but UnionFS appears not to be... is there a specific reason for it?

    And as UnionFS seems to be getting more FreeBSD adoption, I wonder why this choice.

    Yeah, I'm clueless here.
    FreeBSD doesn't support OverlayFS, only UnionFS which works in a similar manner.


    • #12
      Boooooooyyyyyyaaaaaaa!!! The "Year of FreeBSD" is only about 10 years away now


      • #13
        Checking watch and calendar. Walking away shaking my head.


        • #14
          This is one of the reasons why the creators of PC-BSD and TrueNAS abandoned FreeBSD as a base and went to Debian. At this point the BSDs should just concentrate on making appliance OSs and headless install OSs. If you’re just now getting to audio and graphic installers…well…it’s not a good look.


          • #15
            Originally posted by sophisticles View Post
            FreeBSD should have had a graphical installer decades ago
            Why? It's unlikely that average Joe will ever consider installing FreeBSD on his computer to replace Windows. Others can easily handle current FreeBSD installer which is pretty convenient.


            • #16
              I echo that a TUI installer is good enough, ncurses never killed anyone. Heck OpenBSD does have a CLI installer and somehow they make it good enough even if partitioning is a bit rough if you have a smaller SSD; having to balance space between /home and /usr/local.


              • #17
                Why would they want a graphical installer when they don’t ship any graphical stack in the base system whatsoever? Even the basic DRM drivers are external kernel modules you have to get after installation… except the package manager is also not installed by default. Not to mention how shitty their Wi-Fi drivers are, bsdinstall is ugly user hostile-garbage (why is configuring IP using DHCP not the default setting? Why does it ask all these low-level config questions when I’m just trying to connect to Wi-Fi?) and why the hell is the installation media 4GB when it includes next to nothing?

                Meanwhile OpenBSD includes DRM, Mesa,, a few window managers, working Wi-Fi drivers, and a package manager all by default, all maintained immaculately, with a fraction of the funding and developers FreeBSD has, and all fitting on a CD-sized image. Their installer is clean, simple and user-friendly. FreeBSD really has no excuse to be as poorly-made and user-hostile as it is.
                Last edited by mxan; 03 May 2024, 04:59 PM.


                • #18
                  BSD folks now realizing that:

                  Bling & Fancy Graphics Sells

                  So what could be next? Fancy 'spins' (echoes of Fedora in that one) with desktop environment du jour?

                  Perhaps BSD should work much harder on more current hardware support. That seems to be a big issue with downstream distros that use BSD as the basis of purpose-built systems like firewalls and virtualization environments; it was one of the banes of VMare's ESX product, limited (or carefully selected?) hardware support.


                  • #19
                    There's already GhostBSD for a user friendly FreeBSD "distro".

                    Live media, try before installing then install with a graphical interface just like X (enter your distro of reference).

                    FreeBSD 15 will probably be the general use desktop version that was Linux circa 2012?


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by dragon321 View Post
                      Why? It's unlikely that average Joe will ever consider installing FreeBSD on his computer to replace Windows. Others can easily handle current FreeBSD installer which is pretty convenient.
                      That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy, isn't it?

                      Average Joe won't consider installing FreeBSD because there isn't an easy installer, and because the average guy won't install it FreeBSD doesn't create an easy installer.

                      Circular reasoning that can be used to justify not having 3d acceleration, audio support, printer support or any other feature.

                      If you build it, they will come.