What do you think about a "SteamBSD" machine ?

[Beastie7]

There is something unhealthy about failing to realize that man pages aren't the only resources out there. The web offers plenty of useful documentation on how things work—material that processes and presents information in a different way. That ought to be enough to calm expectations down. But it isn't. It seems, then, that what matters isn't simply that I learn (in my way), but that I should learn in *your* way. That shifts the conversation onto a different track. A broken track.

Let me know when I can run Battlefield 6 at 8k 120fps with 4x Ray Tracing and AI hypergoon Deep Realism.

 

[ZioMario]

man pages are created by the people who know best
the developer who wrote the software

you cant be sure that other resources are either up to date
or correct unless you compare them to the man page

its not my way it the unix way

if you want people to collaborate they are going to expect you to read man pages
and understand technical jargon

not reading the man pages before asking someone a question
can be seen as a sign of disrespect that you dont value their time
and expect to be spoon feed

thats how a lot of people will take it

saying you dont understand technical jargon
isnt going to fill people with much confidence on such a complex project if you want them to use it

I know, but it’s better for me to grasp *something* than to understand nothing at all and just give up completely. You shouldn't base your reasoning on what *you* can do—or what you think you can do— or what you should do (because everyone does the same) because my way of thinking is different from yours. The same goes for me: I can't expect you to understand concepts the way I do; you’ll understand them in your own way. The method I suggest might suit you perfectly, or it might not. In my case, the way the developers chose to explain their concepts doesn't align with how I process information, so I have to find my own ways to understand them. There’s nothing that can be done about that. You could go on forever about the importance of reading / understanding man pages, but it would be a waste of time—not because I don't *want* to, but because I'm not able. Fortunately, though, I’ve found my own methods for understanding what I read: finding sources that use less technical jargon, comparing them, and asking questions to AI.

NB : Check the picture attached to realize that I'm not using IA just because you think that IA put "—" in the sentences. This show how you are in bad faith. It's not the IA that puts "—",but the google translator.

 

[ZioMario]

Zio watch this video, in full, don't skip even a single word

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

Sorry,I'm not sure if have been able to get your point.

 

[AlfredoLlaquet]

How is the project coming along, though?

Come procede il progetto—però?

 

[monwarez]

I know, but it’s better for me to grasp *something* than to understand nothing at all and just give up completely. You shouldn't base your reasoning on what *you* can do—or what you think you can do— or what you should do (because everyone does the same) because my way of thinking is different from yours. The same goes for me: I can't expect you to understand concepts the way I do; you’ll understand them in your own way. The method I suggest might suit you perfectly, or it might not. In my case, the way the developers chose to explain their concepts doesn't align with how I process information, so I have to find my own ways to understand them. There’s nothing that can be done about that. You could go on forever about the importance of reading / understanding man pages, but it would be a waste of time—not because I don't *want* to, but because I'm not able. Fortunately, though, I’ve found my own methods for understanding what I read: finding sources that use less technical jargon, comparing them, and asking questions to AI.

NB : Check the picture attached to realize that I'm not using IA just because you think that IA put "—" in the sentences. This show how you are in bad faith. It's not the IA that puts "—",but the google translator.

Given I can only grasp like 1/5 of the words on the original text, it seems to me that google translate is doing some LLM processing on it. There is no ways a regular translator would add spurious —, some markdown based emphasis on words.
Even the phrase structure are completely shifted.
If you want to emphasis on words, maybe use the forums feature to do so ? Because having *emphasis word* only scream LLM generated stuff.

 

[sualbee]

I know, but it’s better for me to grasp *something* than to understand nothing at all and just give up completely. You shouldn't base your reasoning on what *you* can do—or what you think you can do— or what you should do (because everyone does the same) because my way of thinking is different from yours. The same goes for me: I can't expect you to understand concepts the way I do; you’ll understand them in your own way. The method I suggest might suit you perfectly, or it might not. In my case, the way the developers chose to explain their concepts doesn't align with how I process information, so I have to find my own ways to understand them. There’s nothing that can be done about that. You could go on forever about the importance of reading / understanding man pages, but it would be a waste of time—not because I don't *want* to, but because I'm not able. Fortunately, though, I’ve found my own methods for understanding what I read: finding sources that use less technical jargon, comparing them, and asking questions to AI.

Except that documentation shouldn't and almost certainly doesn't use any "technical jargon" to explain things, only concepts actually necessary to understand the subject. If you feel you have problems with some terms, it's expected that you stop there and sort things out until they get clear enough to move on. That's not the question of being able to do so. Everyone is, no doubt. Rather that's indeed a question of effort and putting some real consistent work. Telling otherwise, as well as stating that one has their own unique way to deal with complexity (constantly bombarding commercial LLMs to ELI5, I guess?) just screams about one's ignorance and incompetence, at least. And I'm just talking here about using the system, not about programming, and certainly not about designing stuff. To state that you can do the latter without knowing or being able to properly do the former is completely beyond the bounds of reason.

So no wonder why nobody takes you seriously. If you can't see it, there is absolutely no point in trying to explain or prove it to you over and over again. Perhaps only with time will you begin to realize that people with education and/or experience probably knew something that you simply didn't, and that it was only wise to try to listen to them instead of LLMs.

 

[LibreQuest]

Llm output should include attribution and licence of source data if being used in a licensed work. But that information would likely be fabricated half the time by the llm program.

 

[ZioMario]

Except that documentation shouldn't and almost certainly doesn't use any "technical jargon" to explain things, only concepts actually necessary to understand the subject. If you feel you have problems with some terms, it's expected that you stop there and sort things out until they get clear enough to move on. That's not the question of being able to do so. Everyone is, no doubt. Rather that's indeed a question of effort and putting some real consistent work. Telling otherwise, as well as stating that one has their own unique way to deal with complexity (constantly bombarding commercial LLMs to ELI5, I guess?) just screams about one's ignorance and incompetence, at least. And I'm just talking here about using the system, not about programming, and certainly not about designing stuff. To state that you can do the latter without knowing or being able to properly do the former is completely beyond the bounds of reason.

So no wonder why nobody takes you seriously. If you can't see it, there is absolutely no point in trying to explain or prove it to you over and over again. Perhaps only with time will you begin to realize that people with education and/or experience probably knew something that you simply didn't, and that it was only wise to try to listen to them instead of LLMs.

What the hell are you talking about ? Don't you realize you're trying to dictate how I should do things—which strategies I should adopt and what material I should read to design projects ? You aren't inside my head, after all. You can't do that; just as I don't come along and tell you what or how to study, you shouldn't do it to me. I’ve actually found my own path, and I’m churning out plenty of working projects. Besides, what you’re writing is full of the usual prejudices about AI.

 

[DanielBowman]

Since BSD has driver disadvantage, it would make sense only for specific HW setup.
Which can be a hassle on par with becoming SONY.

Speaking of which, PS4 which are plenty among people, collecting dust, was recently jail broken.
Since it already runs FreeBSD fork(?), why not making the project about installing FreeBSD on PS4 with ported ready to go STEAM ?
People would have use for old PS4 and you wouldn't have to go insane with HW support demands.

Personal side note - my PS4 was donated to kids and not attempted to jail brake and turn in to Android TV or whatever, because it is too NOISY. It can be excused when running loud games but as media center it is useless.

 

[ZioMario]

How is the project coming along, though?

Come procede il progetto—però?

E' nella fase di studio. Ho appena trovato una strategia che, almeno nella teoria,potrebbe aiutare a "ingannare" il sistema anti-cheat,con lo scopo di far girare su Linux prima e su FreeBSD dopo, dei giochi che i produttori non vogliono che ci girino. Loro ci obbligano ad usare Windows,ma a noi Windows non piace. E questo è ingiusto. Perciò io lotto contro queste ed altre ingiustizie tipiche della mentalità capitalistico-corporativa che vuole privilegiare sempre il monopolismo,quindi l'uso di WIndows a discapito della libertà,quindi Linux e ancora di più,FreeBSD.

It is currently in the research phase. I have just come across a strategy that—at least in theory—could help to "fool" the anti-cheat system, with the aim of running games on Linux that the developers do not want running there. They want to force us to use Windows, but we don't like Windows. And that is unfair. That is why I fight against this and other injustices typical of the capitalist-corporate mindset, which always seeks to prioritize monopolies—and thus the use of Windows—at the expense of freedom, and therefore Linux and, even more so, FreeBSD.

 

[ZioMario]

Since BSD has driver disadvantage, it would make sense only for specific HW setup.
Which can be a hassle on par with becoming SONY.

Speaking of which, PS4 which are plenty among people, collecting dust, was recently jail broken.
Since it already runs FreeBSD fork(?), why not making the project about installing FreeBSD on PS4 with ported ready to go STEAM ?
People would have use for old PS4 and you wouldn't have to go insane with HW support demands.

Personal side note - my PS4 was donated to kids and not attempted to jail brake and turn in to Android TV or whatever, because it is too NOISY. It can be excused when running loud games but as media center it is useless.

Yeah,I proposed this idea on Reddit. I was eaten alive :

https://www.reddit.com/r/freebsd/comments/1urke71/i_want_to_install_freebsd_on_the_ps4/

 

[sualbee]

What the hell are you talking about ? Don't you realize you're trying to dictate how I should do things—which strategies I should adopt and what material I should read to design projects ? You aren't inside my head, after all.

That's not what I'm doing. I don't really care what you'll learn and how, and I don't think anyone here does. I actually think you can stay in your own reality as long as it doesn't harm anyone.

What I do say is that you cannot blame others for confronting ignorant and arrogant public statements of yours, as well as for not willing to do the necessary heavy lifting for you in "your" projects.

You can't do that; just as I don't come along and tell you what or how to study, you shouldn't do it to me.

Well, I'm not the one who comes to various FreeBSD forums with countless of my new shiny vibe-not-yet-coded projects I obviously would never be able to complete because I don't want to acquire genuine competence first while also expecting respect and recognition.

Besides, what you’re writing is full of the usual prejudices about AI.

Prejudices? Do you really think you know better of how big commercial LLMs work and what impact they have on both the environment and the society? Maybe you got any book you've read recently about the topic and want to recommend?

 

[ZioMario]

ignorant and arrogant public statements of yours

These are insults. But there is something worse: You dismiss ideas you don't agree with as ignorant and smug, when in fact they are simply ideas you don't share and / or you don't understand yet. That actually makes *you* the smug one. The most effective way to communicate is easy : is to say something like this "I don't agree with your ideas" and explaining why —not to insult me personally, forcing me to report your comment as an abuse.

Well, I'm not the one who comes to various FreeBSD forums with countless of my new shiny vibe-not-yet-coded

These are your own mental projections. The idea that I want to show off by using AI to act like a know-it-all is just your assumption—and assumptions aren't objective truths. Especially since you don't know me at all. My impression is that your reaction is formulaic; you are reacting negatively to a pattern of behavior that you happen to see reflected in what I write.

projects I obviously would never be able to complete

Merlin the Wizard has come.

So no wonder why nobody takes you seriously. If you can't see it, there is absolutely no point in trying to explain or prove it to you over and over again.

That is a statement that deserves a solid response. I believe this happens because many users developed their skills and absorbed behavioral patterns from the early days of computing—patterns that persist, and they simply continue to follow them. They all share a common root: the myth of the "self-made man"—the myth of the programmer capable of writing massive software projects entirely on their own. I suppose that might have been true years ago—though even then, only to a certain extent. But things grew more complex; the market gradually became saturated with simple projects, giving way to complex ones that required teamwork. Consequently, individual programmers were left with little choice but to work on tiny projects—important ones, certainly, but smaller in scope. Yet, despite these changes, the egos of certain individuals remain—and they need feeding. So, there is immense respect for those who build everything solo, but zero interest in those who accept help and try to make do however they can.

Wake up: times have changed. Those who try to create something to the best of their ability shouldn't be criticized, and those who write significant code shouldn't be overrated. It is also crucial to recognize who the *real* programmers are; after all, while many aspire to the title, not everyone deserve it.

Let's suppose somebody says:

“I need a FreeBSD driver for this undocumented device. I used existing Linux drivers, vendor sources, datasheets, other programmers, and AI models. I designed the experiments, tested every revision on hardware, diagnosed failures, rejected wrong suggestions, and gradually got the device working.”

Calling that person “not a programmer” because they didn't personally type every line would be a very peculiar definition of programming.

Those who don't often vent their frustration on anyone they perceive as wanting to become one... without "sweating blood and tears" for it. That is precisely where the error in judgment lies: Someone who accepts help can work just as hard—and sweat just as much—as anyone else.

 

[Zare]

Sorry,I'm not sure if have been able to get your point.

Yes, I see. Let me simplify

Journalist asked Richard Feynman to explain something - like these magnets, or principles of quantum mechanics, I can't track down particular video, there are too many of them.

Feynman replied with - magic. "It works via magic"

Journalist was bit stunned, asked Richard to clarify, and Richard clarified the journalist doesn't have understanding of the fundamentals or the scientific background to grasp any of it. "For you, it's magic".

The point why I sent this to you is that you reflex this approach via LLM. If you cannot read a manpage and comprehend it, what is there to be done?

If you ask LLM to sum up technical topic into words that can be explained by nontechnical people, it has dilluted the topic beyond the practical means. If you can understand magnets only as "magic", how can you engineer magnets?

 

[Zare]

Wake up: times have changed. Those who try to create something to the best of their ability shouldn't be criticized, and those who write significant code shouldn't be overrated. It is also crucial to recognize who the *real* programmers are; after all, while many aspire to the title, not everyone deserve it. And those who don't often vent their frustration on anyone they perceive as wanting to become one... without "sweating blood and tears" for it. That is precisely where the error in judgment lies: Someone who accepts help can work just as hard—and sweat just as much—as anyone else.

This is some sort of 21st century inclusion-delusion.

I was taught how to program by humans when I was below 10 years old. Until 15, I've won several competitions including 6th place on state robotics competition (personal score) and 2nd place (project score). When I enrolled into high school at that age, I was immediately released from programming classes and told I should just go elsewhere with A written down in stone for me. I did not like this approach but I understood even at 15 y.o that teacher won't be able to respond to my questions. Then comes hacking, side gigs, university, first jobs, painful periods. I've never stopped learning.

What is painful for you, reading a manpage is a job task for me.

You want to just fast track through this? Go right ahead.

Deliver something.

Until you do, this is all just a wet dream and some sort of therapy for yourself, pastime or whatever.

You claim you can play a game but you don't come to playground. You can play it only in your head. Prove to yourself first, you can deliver.

 

[ZioMario]

The point why I sent this to you is that you reflex this approach via LLM. If you cannot read a manpage and comprehend it, what is there to be done ?

Mine is simply a different way of understanding things. Rather than figuring out how to connect the various building blocks that make up a language, I try to understand the ultimate goal of putting them together—the underlying meaning and purpose. Perhaps the precise term for this isn't "programming," but "meta-programming." Today, with the advent of LLMs, knowing how to write code is becoming less important, while understanding what the code needs to do, how it should do it, and why a particular approach is best is becoming increasingly vital. Your logic remains anchored to old programming paradigms. I can understand this. But today,roles have changed. I do meta-programming,LLM writes the code. I say to LLM what I want,which particular features should be implemented,why I want it should do in that way. LLM replies to me telling me if what I want and how I want it is the best choice or not. If it does not agree,it can propose a different approach and then I think about it and I ask to it another round of questions,until we reach an agreement. This is how the programming works today (with the help of the LLM ; if you don't want to use it,you can still use the old paradigm).

 

[eternal_noob]

I fed a prompt to a text to image generator:

An Italian conductor who conducts a series of computers. He looks stressed since no one listens.

(Not related to this thread)

 

[AlfredoLlaquet]

Yes, I see. Let me simplify

Journalist asked Richard Feynman to explain something - like these magnets, or principles of quantum mechanics, I can't track down particular video, there are too many of them.

Feynman replied with - magic. "It works via magic"

Journalist was bit stunned, asked Richard to clarify, and Richard clarified the journalist doesn't have understanding of the fundamentals or the scientific background to grasp any of it. "For you, it's magic".

The point why I sent this to you is that you reflex this approach via LLM. If you cannot read a manpage and comprehend it, what is there to be done?

If you ask LLM to sum up technical topic into words that can be explained by nontechnical people, it has dilluted the topic beyond the practical means. If you can understand magnets only as "magic", how can you engineer magnets?

Feynman is famous for explaining very difficult concepts in simple terms. I bet you are misremembering or misunderstanding what he said.

Additionally, the insistence of everyone here against the OP would disturb me if it weren't because he seems to enjoy the attention. You all have a weird hobby.

Personally, I find many man pages badly written and the handbook very incomplete in many key concepts.

I love FreeBSD, but its documentation being great is a myth. So is the archwiki being great documentation. I still have to find a FOSS OS well documented. But it's okay. They are free. They are more than perfect taking that into account. One manages, so everything's fine.

PS: Maybe I won't participate further in this discussion. I'd really like to see how far the OP can go with his project, but I doubt he'll ever even start compiling and testing code. He's had a blast in this thread, though. I tip my hat to him. Well done, mate!

 

[ZioMario]

I doubt he'll ever even start compiling and testing code.

Are you sure ? I'm moving forward with complex projects at a good pace. The thing is, since I create them with the help of AI, nobody pays them enough attention, so they quickly disappear to the bottom of the threads. And people think I’m all talk. That’s not true.

bhyve Thread 'We have Linux virtualized with qemu + bhyve on the Radxa Cubie A7z.'

Sep 10, 2026

Hello.

on the picture you see a Linux VM virtualized on the Radxa Cubie A7z with qemu accelerated with bhyve...it's a shame that last year I bought the 4 GB version and not the 8 GB,so it's not usable. At the moment the 8 GB version is out of stock everywhere,except on AliExpress,but the price is exorbitant...anyway...it works.

• ZioMario
• Replies: 0
• Forum: Emulation and virtualization

bhyve Thread 'Enabled the nVidia GPU passthrough inside a Linux virtual machine via QEMU accelerated with BHYVE.'

Jun 7, 2026

Hello.

here we are again. I continued the developing of the initial project of Abhinav Chavali, VMM Accelerator support for QEMU :

Google Summer of Code

Google Summer of Code is a global program focused on bringing more developers into open source software development.

summerofcode.withgoogle.com

this time I've enabled the passthru of my nVidia GPU to a Linux VM. And finally we got it :

That's cool. Isn't it ? The internal logic of the passthru has been heavily copied from Corvin's code,so it is well written,since Corvin is a very good coder. The remaining code, the one used to adapt BHYVE Corvin's code to the logic used by QEMU, was written from scratch by...

• ZioMario
• Replies: 48
• Forum: Emulation and virtualization

• 
• 

bhyve Thread 'Booted Debian and FreeBSD 15 using qemu accelerated with bhyve/vmm for the first time. This is an epic milestone for the community !'

May 17, 2026

Hello to everyone.

We have booted Debian and FreeBSD with qemu accelerated with bhyve/vmm for the first time. This is an epic milestone.

Further development is needed...a lot of development...but anyway this is a storic moment....we can use another hypervisor. This time in cooperation with the storic and mature qemu. FreeBSD is second to none.

This success has been possible thanks to the competence of @Abhinav Chavali who started this project for the GSOC 2025 ; thanks bro.

If someone wants to help the development,tell me. We have shared the code on github...

• ZioMario
• Replies: 46
• Forum: Emulation and virtualization

• 
• 

 

[sualbee]

These are insults. But there is something worse: You dismiss ideas you don't agree with as ignorant and smug, when in fact they are simply ideas you don't share and / or you don't understand yet. That actually makes *you* the smug one. The most effective way to communicate is easy : is to say something like this "I don't agree with your ideas" and explaining why —not to insult me personally, [...]

How is calling a statement arrogant now considered a personal insult? I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, never expected that. Still, whether I agree or disagree with it doesn't make the statement any more or less arrogant.

forcing me to report your comment as an abuse.

Of course, order comes first.

Merlin the Wizard has come.

But I thought you don't have to be Merlin the Wizard to realize that a non-programmer cannot complete a program? Only some(one|thing) else could do that for them, there is no other way.

Calling that person “not a programmer” because they didn't personally type every line would be a very peculiar definition of programming.

Those who don't often vent their frustration on anyone they perceive as wanting to become one... without "sweating blood and tears" for it. That is precisely where the error in judgment lies: Someone who accepts help can work just as hard—and sweat just as much—as anyone else.

I really thought this is obvious to everyone, but apparently it isn't. Well...
You can't be an artist without being able to create art yourself. Period.
You can be an LLM user, but not an artist.
To become an artist and to gain recognition among other artists, do you know what you have to be able to do? I think you know, you're just refusing to accept it.

Perhaps the precise term for this isn't "programming," but "meta-programming." Today, with the advent of LLMs, knowing how to write code is becoming less important, while understanding what the code needs to do, how it should do it, and why a particular approach is best is becoming increasingly vital. Your logic remains anchored to old programming paradigms. I can understand this. But today,roles have changed. I do meta-programming,LLM writes the code.

That wouldn't work. You cannot understand what the code needs to do and how it should do it without being able to code. That is logic, no roles have changed.

And you don't do any programming that way, "meta-" or not. I think that should be considered an insult - to my profession. But don't worry, I'm not gonna report your comment as an abuse.

 

[AlfredoLlaquet]

If it works it works. People's opposition to AI-generated code is backward superstition: it's code; read it and tell me why it's wrong. But why keep fighting against all the haters? The majority here hates AI or considers your approach impure. You are not gonna change their opinion. You must like the attention, which is perfectly fine.

 

[ZioMario]

This is some sort of 21st century inclusion-delusion.

I was taught how to program by humans when I was below 10 years old. Until 15, I've won several competitions including 6th place on state robotics competition (personal score) and 2nd place (project score). When I enrolled into high school at that age, I was immediately released from programming classes and told I should just go elsewhere with A written down in stone for me. I did not like this approach but I understood even at 15 y.o that teacher won't be able to respond to my questions. Then comes hacking, side gigs, university, first jobs, painful periods. I've never stopped learning.

What is painful for you, reading a manpage is a job task for me.

You want to just fast track through this? Go right ahead.

Deliver something.

Until you do, this is all just a wet dream and some sort of therapy for yourself, pastime or whatever.

You claim you can play a game but you don't come to playground. You can play it only in your head. Prove to yourself first, you can deliver.

You are confusing "knowing how" with "knowing why."

An LLM can increasingly take care of part of the how: writing a data structure, translating an API, producing boilerplate, finding the equivalent of a given primitive, and so on. But someone still has to determine the what, the why, the constraints, and—most importantly—verify whether the result is actually correct.

And this distinction becomes particularly obvious in projects like mine. If I simply tell an LLM, "Port this Linux driver to FreeBSD," it can quite easily produce something that compiles while still being conceptually wrong. I understand, for example, that a Linux function cannot be natively translated into a FreeBSD one and I recognize that what initially looks like a Wi-Fi problem may actually originate at the USB, IRQ, firmware, or protocol-synchronization level.

I do not need to have personally written every single line of that code in order to perform that reasoning. The fact that I understand basic concepts allows me to produce great results.

I am not calling the magnet "magic." I am delegating the construction of some of its parts while continuing to reason about the model, the constraints, and the verification process.

 

[sualbee]

it's code; read it and tell me why it's wrong.

No, thank you. You can do it yourself, if you want. But I don't think you can, otherwise you'd know all the issues about that.

 

[AlfredoLlaquet]

No, thank you. You can do it yourself, if you want. But I don't think you can, otherwise you'd know all the issues about that.

I can do it.

 

[AlfredoLlaquet]

No, thank you. You can do it yourself, if you want. But I don't think you can, otherwise you'd know all the issues about that.

Maybe you cannot and that's what's gotten you so scared and angry.