ArchBSD

Well, since I setup my website yesterday I got a bit of publicity about my project.. However I thought I would take the time to clear up some things.

What is ArchBSD:
ArchBSD is a project I started to use the Arch Linux package manager and tools for a rolling release FreeBSD distro; Too keep it update as the port tree and in some cases even more up to date than what is available in the port tree.

What makes ArchBSD different:
ArchBSD uses the pacman package manager, which builds packages using the FreeBSD port tree ( Ease of use :p)

It also uses a new init system which is openrc (BSDL license) which aims to keep GPL stuff out of the base to keep enthusiast happy. Packages are optimised for x86_64 and i686 respectively to give the best speed possible for binary packages on those architectures. All packages (As well as base GPL coded stuff) are prefixed to /usr/local to avoid tainting base. Base will be GPL free as of release of FreeBSD 10. PKGBUILDS use FreeBSD ports in a jail which can override system variables and make it easy to packages and configure software for ArchBSD.

Progress of ArchBSD:

While things got out before I could finish the project, the website is far from completion and a very limited package set as of now. Though, if you're interested in the project, you can join in the discussion at:

irc.archbsd.net

#archbsd

Conclusion:
Some people may not agree with my project, but rather, this was a personal project which I started to respond to issues I currently had with FreeBSD. It kinda got out though, so, if you like the Arch philosophy and the rolling release distros; You may enjoy ArchBSD.
 
In case we get questions regarding ArchBSD:

[thread=7290]Topics about PC-BSD | FreeNAS | NAS4Free | m0N0WALL | pfSense | kFreeBSD | ArchBSD[/thread]
 
There was some confusion regarding it, it isn't based on GNU userland, and the base is a perfect FreeBSD system untouched.

Minus the OpenRc in base which is BSDL ever other GPL product is prefixed to /usr/local/ as not to taint base.
 
Doesn't matter much, support questions should be asked on your forums, not ours ;)
 
SirDice said:
Doesn't matter much, support questions should be asked on your forums, not ours ;)

I agree, I was just pointing out a few issues that was mismatched in Dutch Daemons posts, that's all. :p
 
I'll see if I can change the text. Do you have any other links we could mention?
 
SirDice said:
I'll see if I can change the text. Do you have any other links we could mention?

unfortunately no, things got out before I could finish things, but this can't be helped.. Just rumors are saying it's GNU userland which isn't true; It is infact a pure FreeBSD base.
 
Amzo said:
unfortunately no, things got out before I could finish things, but this can't be helped.. Just rumors are saying it's GNU userland which isn't true; It is infact a pure FreeBSD base.

Maybe that's a good thing... some people might try BSD and find to like it without realizing it. :)
 
I am assuming, Amzo, that you guys will take care of proper developer and community support for this?
 
Carpetsmoker said:
Does this include an installer? The ArchLinux concept of an installer seems to be a brief README file.

I use the same method, which is pacstrap, but in time, I hope to get around to porting their old installer and updating it.

It's a command line install, on UFS, zfs partitions, setup manually from the liveCD.
 
I'll give you credit for being persistent.

You could always try making a liveCD iso that has an optional installer.
 
Frankenstein was the doctor/creator not the monster/creature.
Right now, there is no standard/definitive Linux kernel + userland. This is both an advantage and a disadvantage.
A package manager is just that, it manages packages. I'd rather that a ports/Makefile system be a standard option for all systems but that's me.
 
Back
Top