BSD Installation: An Outdated Mess That Nobody Wants to Fix

Maybe if there were two installers instead of one [ a zfs-based, or a ufs2-based, forced initial choice... ] bugfixes and UI improvements could be developed quicker for each use case...
 
TUI > GUI

TUI
- no need to worry about graphic drivers or RAM size

GUI
- only suitable for LiveCD/USB full desktop experience methods - you try/test it first in full GUI and then install from there.

If you want ease of use out of the box OSS, use Linux Mint.
Or GhostBSD.

If you want options (low RAM, virtualization, headless servers) stick with TUI.
bsdinstall is well done TUI.

Dual booting is not for noobs, especially with Windows, which have a tendency messing up boot partitions with updates. Default Ubuntu dual booting method will not prevent this.
 
There is one analogy here for beginners: driving schools seldom train on Ferrari or Lamborghini with manual shift. Think about why. For the experienced driver, however...

@OP good luck, we all started at 0 one day.
And then there is the everyday commute with FSD Tesla for aspiring mechanics, race drivers or office fodder alike.
The Apple tablet on wheels with two gpus steering the wheel.
 
I apologize to everyone, but I was very angry when the system crashed.
That's quite understandable.
It takes a great character to reflect and to apologize.
Only the fewest are great enough of doing this.
So, kudos for apologizing.
Apology accepted.
Removed you from my ignore list.

I don't think I did anything wrong; I'm just an enthusiastic, inexperienced newbie who, when things go wrong, complains and asks for help like this.
Well, obviously something went wrong - what and for which reasons, we will see step by step.

You need to work on your way how to complain and ask questions. You already saw that yourself and started working on it. Good. 👍
Since here we are no Linux forums. See Sysadminotaur #151 for details. 😁

So, now, let's get your feet on FreeBSD.
You will agree, it's worth it.
Maybe in a few weeks you will help newbies to get into it. :cool:

As you already realized, FreeBSD ain't no tinkertoy.
You are dealing with something on a professional level.
Even if many here using FreeBSD not for professional purposes, while a lot many others do, the system itself requires some professional ways of looking at and dealing with things.
Still in general terms this means two things:

1. Eyecandy can be added optional, if wanted. But by default the barest minimum for UI is delivered just to be capable to do the job needed to be done as comfortable as possible. It is comfortable.
You shall not confuse things of what you are used to with comfy. Personal tip by me: Don't compare too much. Start freshly new all over. You save yourself lots of, 'Why ain't the shit not more like...' Well, it's not. Just use it as it is. It's highly probable you will find out: You simply was not just not used to it yet. But once you are, you will say, 'That's better. WAY better!' :cool: You'll learn in many ways FreeBSD is way less complex and more reliable than many Linux, maybe even better. It depends on, what you want and expect. At least many FreeBSD newcomers had this experience, like myself, when I switched completely from Windows to FreeBSD app. 6 years ago.
Looking nice is of no importance. Silly example: If you need to know what 3 * 4 is, you just need to know it's 12. how the 12 is presented, doesn't matter. If it is some simple UTF-8 characters in a shell output or some GUI toy looking like some 1990's LCD desktop calculator gives you neither more nor less information about what you actually all you want to ḱnow, namely it's 12.

2. Learning is mandatory. FreeBSD ain't not autoinstalling turn-key OS. Such is only suitable for single user desktop machines with a prepicked and preconfigured desktop environment. You will comprehend that this wasn't a good idea for a multipurpose OS like FreeBSD, which means it can also be used for embedded systems or headless servers. So you are free to pick X, Wayland or none GUI at all, and if which DE or WM you wanna use.
For that, learning is required. At least the learning what choices there are, what you want to pick, and how to install and configure it. FreeBSD is meant for tailoring individual systems. Perhaps think of it like 'creating your very own personal "distro".'
And because of GUI is only one single point about the whole show, doesn't make the things more trivial. But once you grasped the idea how to add moduls in general, which ain't rocket sciences, you can add any modul.
For that FreeBSD comes with an exemplary handbook, which covers everything at least a common user needs to get a personal desktop computer up and running. What's missing there is covered here in this forums And other sources, like man pages, books, how-tos, personal websites etc. Tip: Not only the man pages under FreeBSD cover all what's needed - it's worth to search them also for general topics, but file:///usr/local/share/doc/ on your system is a goldmine. 🤓 (copy paste it into your browser's address bar, since I cannot create a link here to a directory on your computer 😁.)

Coming new to Unix first means to learn what documentation there is, where to get it, and which to use when for what. (Another point why Linux ain't no true Unix, because they often refuse to do documentation. 😁:cool:)
And of course, read it.

My recommendation was you start by at least skim the FAQs (actually worth a peek). Cost you ten minutes at most, and gives you a lot ideas about the whole show.
Then start reading at least the beginnnig (abstract, introduction, chapter 1,...) of The Handbook until at least how to install FreeBSD with a GUI.
You want to install FreeBSD as second or third OS on a disk. That's already quite a challenge for the start. So search the forums. You are not the only one booting more than one OS from one drive.

I'll bet you will have FreeBSD up and running with a DE and some Apps installed in a few hours.

I wrote some posts for newbies to FreeBSD (so did others, of course. You will find when you search the forums. Tip: use duckduckgo.com for searches like, 'FreeBSD dualboot'. Most of the times you get better hits there than using the forum's internal search.)
You can find and browse the stuff I wrote on this forums, when you click on my avatar, go to my personal site under "About". But you don't have to read all that junk, of course.

And if you learned how to ask right - and it seems that's now the case :cool: - you will get your answers here.

Enjoy FreeBSD, and again, Kudos for apologizing! :beer::cool:👍
 
I apologize to everyone, but I was very angry when the system crashed.

What actually happened was that I was trying to install FreeBSD alongside Windows and Linux. While partitioning the disk manually by entering commands in the terminal, something went wrong and the entire system crashed. As a result, I had to reinstall the whole system from scratch.

I was extremely frustrated at the time, and out of anger, I wrote a harsh criticism of FreeBSD and its developers, hoping that it might somehow contribute to improving the situation or lead to changes in the future.

Looking back, I realize that I was reacting emotionally. I apologize if my words were unnecessarily harsh or disrespectful.
Microsoft always sabotaged the partitioning of multiboot setups with non-Windows systems. It's just a bad idea.
 
Congratulations on moving forward with FreeBSD - and, again, Welcome !

Before you install FreeBSD you should decide whether you want install ZFS or UFS for your root file system. Because your computer systems are disk partition based you might want to consider using UFS for your FreeBSD install. (And as already pointed out - gparted doesn't support UFS).

When (I do) install FreeBSD using ZFS -- I give the entire disk I am (installing to) to my ZFS pool. There is (NO CONCEPT) of disk partitions when using ZFS.

There is nothing wrong with using UFS - I install UFS to many of my FreeBSD systems as both a "root" file system and for backup media.

Strangely UFS (as a file system) was once supported on many Linux systems -- and then the Linux programmers decided to NO LONGER support UFS as a file system on Linux. This is likely why you do not see UFS support in gparted. That said -- there is NO REASON AT ALL why UFS is not fully supported on Linux, Windows, Mac/OS or anything else.. this is really a "choice".

Also consider purchasing a few books to read about FreeBSD. A few on my shelf are:
  1. Absolute FreeBSD - Amazon
  2. FreeBSD 15.0 Master Class - Author: Ouyang Zhentiam - Amazon
  3. various FreeBSD books authored by Michael W Lucas - I would get more "specific on that" by there are a lot of different book topics and you need to decide what interests you - Amazon
Starting with installing FreeBSD to a Virtual Machine ... sounds great !
 
TUI > GUI

TUI
- no need to worry about graphic drivers or RAM size

GUI
- only suitable for LiveCD/USB full desktop experience methods - you try/test it first in full GUI and then install from there.

If you want ease of use out of the box OSS, use Linux Mint.
Or GhostBSD.

If you want options (low RAM, virtualization, headless servers) stick with TUI.
bsdinstall is well done TUI.

Dual booting is not for noobs, especially with Windows, which have a tendency messing up boot partitions with updates. Default Ubuntu dual booting method will not prevent this.
And a GUI installer is unsuitable for many servers that have no graphics hardware. So if the OS has only one installer, it has to be text mode, or the OS has to give up on being installed on servers and embedded machines.

To the OP: You did read the handbook before starting the install, right? There are sections explaining disk partitioning, and other sections warning you that an install with multiple OSes on a single disk are tricky.

More important than the ease of installation is that the system doesn't need to be reinstalled all the time, and that upgrades are frictionless and reliable. My main server at home has been running FreeBSD continuously since about 2012 (or 2010 or 2014, I forget). During that time, it has been installed three times: the original install, on complete reinstall recently (a few years ago) when I was forced to move from 32-bit i386 mode to 64-bit amd64 mode, and one unnecessary reinstall caused by me being sloppy about upgrades. In the meantime, I also installed two more times, once on a remote (cloud-based) server that has been running for 9 years on a one-time install. And once on a Raspberry Pi, which was abandoned after a while, and the OS replaced with a Debian Linux derivative.
 
TUI > GUI

TUI
- no need to worry about graphic drivers or RAM size

GUI
- only suitable for LiveCD/USB full desktop experience methods - you try/test it first in full GUI and then install from there.

If you want ease of use out of the box OSS, use Linux Mint.
Or GhostBSD.

If you want options (low RAM, virtualization, headless servers) stick with TUI.
bsdinstall is well done TUI.

Dual booting is not for noobs, especially with Windows, which have a tendency messing up boot partitions with updates. Default Ubuntu dual booting method will not prevent this.
I thought the 2 main reasons why we use a TUI for installation is not having to worry about drivers so much and the ability to use a serial console for the install like you might well want to do with a server.
 
Installing over VT100 on headless is leet.

You do need to dress up the installer loader to do the console install.
One of my personal todo list items someday is to just setup a dumb terminal to do most of my computing from. I'm already like 90% of the way there, I just need to set up some convenient way of connecting to the computers during the initial bit if I need to access the uefi.
 
Microsoft always sabotaged the partitioning of multiboot setups with non-Windows systems. It's just a bad idea.
Microsoft are good at sabotaging.

In the early days of having to install DOS and Windows spererately, they put some code into Windows to see if it was running under MS-DOS or DR-DOS which was becoming a quite popular alternative.

I can't remember what action Windows took, whether it just wouldn't load or if it spewed out some erroneous error message.

Must ask GROK.....
 
Microsoft are good at sabotaging.

In the early days of having to install DOS and Windows spererately, they put some code into Windows to see if it was running under MS-DOS or DR-DOS which was becoming a quite popular alternative.

I can't remember what action Windows took, whether it just wouldn't load or if it spewed out some erroneous error message.

Must ask GROK.....
For what I've seen, Windows 95 to 10 simply treat the target install device as a full MBR drive ignoring any possible division of disk areas for different operating systems. They just hate other options on a PC and do everything to eliminate them.
Windows 11 deletes the bootsector of a connected USB memstick during the login screen if it's not MS, without even having anything to do with the data on it...
 
For what I've seen, Windows 95 to 10 simply treat the target install device as a full MBR drive ignoring any possible division of disk areas for different operating systems. They just hate other options on a PC and do everything to eliminate them.
Windows 11 deletes the bootsector of a connected USB memstick during the login screen if it's not MS, without even having anything to do with the data on it...
Over the years, I regularly had issues with Windows screwing up the MBR during updates or installations because it just assumed that it would be the only OS on the disk and nobody in management at MS was demanding that it would play nicer. It's part of why I had a universal bootloader for a while that would look at the various partitions on the disk and direct me to whichever I selected independent of the OS.
 
Actually if you have ever tried to install Debian for a variety computers with various screen specifications,you will probably appreciate the TUI installation option similar to the one provided by FreeBSD and NetBSD installers.Unlike GUI,TUI doesn't have weird scaling issues.Also TUI doesn't have much demand of your hardware performance.
 
Back
Top