Solved A pretty stupid person is nervous about trying FreeBSD

F

full_of_chocolate

Hello.

I'm pretty stupid about computers and thought it best to ask if FreeBSD is a safe environment for the inexperienced. So why do I think it might not be? And what am I comparing FreeBSD to? Windows and Ubuntu. I trust in them being configured out of the box in a way that is safe for someone pretty stupid about computers to use as a desktop. I feel there's a gap of knowledge between those "user friendly" operating systems and FreeBSD. This isn't a complaint. I'm just wondering if I can trust a FreeBSD installation to "have my back" while learning more. More specifically:

1) Does FreeBSD expect previous knowledge about Unix system administration and networking concepts to be run securely as a desktop system?

2) Do I need to learn to install and configure a software firewall on the PC in addition to a firewall built into my cable modem? Ubuntu for example doesn't come with one because it doesn't open any ports by default.

3) Does a default installation of FreeBSD have open ports/services that are listening for connections, that I'm expected to learn beforehand to disable? Some Linux distributions for example come with SSH daemons because many experienced users find them useful.

I decided to Read The Fine Manual before braving an installation but got stuck where you should define a fully qualified hostname. This is a home computer without a domain. Just a connection to the ISP. Searching the forums and Google I saw suggestions to come up with a fake domain.

4) Why exactly should you define a fake one? What expects to find it? Isn't there an agreed upon standard here, for example my.home.localdomain? Is there a chance of me screwing with someone's domain? Or does my router/firewall limit the fake domain to the local network? I really don't know what I'm talking about here, are you having fun? My treat.

5) And lastly, I came by this book, Unix and Linux Administration (4th Edition) in the local library. Unfortunately FreeBSD coverage seems to have been dropped from the previous edition, but might this be a good book to read anyway? It does seem to have a wealth of topics and pointers for learning.

The target system is a desktop PC with a separate hard drive to spare. Connection to the Internet goes through a cable modem with a built-in router and firewall, the Cisco EPC3825.

Thank you for coming to stare at the wall that I built.
 
The base FreeBSD does not have a GUI, so that might influence how it works for you. PC-BSD is FreeBSD with a choice of GUI on top. It requires a 64-bit machine and probably at least 4G of RAM, but the desktop setup is done for the user.

FreeBSD can be set up the same way, but it can be an intimidating process for some users.

full_of_chocolate said:
1) Does FreeBSD expect previous knowledge about Unix system administration and networking concepts to be run securely as a desktop system?
Click to expand...
For as long as I've been using it, it's hard for me to say. The first third of the Handbook is a "basics" section, though.

full_of_chocolate said:
2) Do I need to learn to install and configure a software firewall on the PC in addition to a firewall built into my cable modem?
Click to expand...
No, in fact FreeBSD is likely to have a lot less running than Ubuntu.

full_of_chocolate said:
3) Does a default installation of FreeBSD have open ports/services that are listening for connections, that I'm expected to learn beforehand to disable?
Click to expand...
No, kind of the opposite. Things like sshd(8) and others must be enabled during the install or afterward. Since it will be behind your cable modem firewall anyway, that is less of a concern.

full_of_chocolate said:
4) Why exactly should you define a fake one?
Click to expand...
A fake FQDN? People get somewhat worked up over that. Honestly, it does not matter much unless the machine will be a mail server or connected to the internet directly instead of behind a firewall. Lots of people use .local as their own domain.

full_of_chocolate said:
5) And lastly, I came by this book, Unix and Linux Administration (4th Edition) in the local library.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I don't know it. FreeBSD really is Unix, and much works without adjustment. Problems usually involve Linuxisms, like assuming sh(1) is bash.
 
full_of_chocolate said:
I decided to Read The Fine Manual before braving an installation but got stuck where you should define a fully qualified hostname. This is a home computer without a domain. Just a connection to the ISP. Searching the forums and Google I saw suggestions to come up with a fake domain.

4) Why exactly should you define a fake one? What expects to find it? Isn't there an agreed upon standard here, for example my.home.localdomain? Is there a chance of me screwing with someone's domain? Or does my router/firewall limit the fake domain to the local network? I really don't know what I'm talking about here, are you having fun? My treat.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what you use as the domain name as long as it doesn't conflict with an existing domain name. Just make up something. DNS is designed in such a way that domains need to be delegated by the official name servers for the top level domain for them to be recognised globally. Without that delegation nobody but you and your systems know about the domain you have set up locally.
 
full_of_chocolate said:
And what am I comparing FreeBSD to? Windows and Ubuntu.
Click to expand...
While learning UNIX and FreeBSD in particular can be one of the most rewarding intellectual experiences my feeling is that it is very unlikely that a casual "computer user" with previous exposure to Windows and Ubuntu will endure anything but frustration.

If you in-spite of my discouragement decide to undertake a voyage to the land of UNIX my advise would be to start by reading The Unix Programming Environment by Brian Kernighan and Rob Pike ($5 on Amazon) as well as reading through FreeBSD handbook and trying to install and configure FreeBSD. Make sure you have a spare computer which you can use to play without fear for any data/content and lots of time on your hands.

On another hand for any computer science, mathematics, physics, astronomy, and serious IT professional UNIX (not Linux) is right of passage.
 
I installed FreeBSD on a separate hard drive. Windows is installed on the other drive, but I'm not going to make it visible by creating an entry in /etc/fstab or mounting manually. I'm reading the Handbook and am going to order The Unix Programming Environment. A local library had a copy, but apparently it's been stolen.

This probably is an intellectual experience thing. I don't expect to be able to use FreeBSD for my "productive tasks" any time soon. But of course it's impossible to not bring in expectations and thus frustration. My expectations probably have to do with being able to work with a sane and stable system. One I can understand as long as I work at it. Linux felt troublesome because the distributions modified things, but didn't seem to document their changes. Trying to understand the general concepts and workings of systemd for example was made more difficult, because file paths on the system differed from those in the documentation. It was frustrating work to piece together exactly where the resulting symbolic links were created after enabling/disabling a service. Even documentation for the "advanced distributions", Fedora and Debian, felt very limited. To put it nicely.

FreeBSD feels, in its own way, more easily approachable. There seems to be plenty of documentation. And it often refers to more general concepts and older sources on Unix. This isn't the first time that The Unix Programming Environment is mentioned. That's something concrete to work with. This is an inviting contrast to something that Linus Torvalds said about the traditional Unix way - or perhaps the init system - not being suitable for the modern age. Something to hold on to. I know I'm under the magicks of the new-'n-tasty at this point. But it sure seems like a pretty nice beach that you've got here.

Oko said:
On another hand for any computer science, science in general mathematics, physics, astronomy, and serious IT professional UNIX (not Linux) is right of passage.
Click to expand...

I'm interested in this thought because usually Linux is spoken of as being Unix-like. Do you know of a summary on the topic? I'm aware of Matt Fuller's "BSD vs Linux" (https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/01).
 
I wanted to like FreeBSD, and in some wicked way I still do. I like FreeBSD for the pain it gives. Getting FreeBSD to do the simplest thing is like climbing a mountain.
As a new user I found support channel on IRC very unfriendly.
As a new user I tried following the FreeBSD handbook, but it contained error so it could not be trusted (if you try to get gnome working, refers to old package, when I tried to use it).

FreeBSD was unstable on my desktop, one day it worked, the next it did not work.
Windows or Debian, just works.
The most basic thing like setting up keyboard.
My Norwegian layout keyboard works in Windows and Debian, as long as I chose Norwegian layout.
In FreeBSD, there are many different places for keyboard layout, and after weeks of research I had not found all of them....

Try to get a : Å Æ Ø sign during setup, just select Norwegian and test it (no need to install with it)

I still remember setting up remote desktop on FreeBSD, worked for some days, and then just did not work anymore. No changes from my side.

So more pain, and less stability and less driver support on FreeBSD.

Still it cool with a different system that is not in the Linux sheep crowd. It is a different beast. I like the idea of a coherent base system. And competition is healthy. I felt proud of myself, in a similar way to the first time I set up Gentoo linux, when I had FreeBSD running for the first time.
This forum is friendly, and well moderated.
So give FreeBSD it a try I'd say on a secondary computer.

I think some FreeBSD developers themselves prefer OSX or Windows, rather then FreeBSD for desktop usage.
 
Maybe the learning curve is a bit steep for someone coming from Windows, but if you like to fiddle with the greatest OS in the world, just go for it. We all started like this.
 
Since you have a little experience with Linux, this article from the FreeBSD documentation explains some of the differences between the two operating systems. You might find it helpful. I had zero experience with UNIX or UNIX-like operating systems before learning to use FreeBSD and while the learning curve can be steep at times, it was both rewarding and empowering once a basic understanding of how the operating system works was achieved. As mentioned, most things are well documented and improvements to the system are usually well implemented without forcing you to throw out a lot of what you have already learned. The community, both developers and users, are generally quite helpful. FreeBSD works quite well as a secure desktop operating system if both the hardware you have is supported and it fits your own needs. This of course is subjective and everyone holds there own opinion. If you enjoy learning you should enjoy both learning and using FreeBSD. :)
 
Your motivation for trying FreeBSD is important here.

My own motivations were based on a dissatisfaction with Windows 95/98 and the fact that I knew very little about it. Problems were addressed by digging into my wallet which I felt to be an excessively frequent occurrence. Not only is it about learning, but there is a sense of satisfaction in putting together a clean, responsive and reliable system. A personal side benefit is that I now utilize many OSS programs in my work and, basically, editors/libreoffice works the same in FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Debian, Fedora, Arch, Slackware . . . . . .

A good question is which one is best to start off with? IMHO, OpenBSD is excellent in that the OpenBSD FAQ is succinct and religiously updated. There is a mostly tolerant user community at DaemonForums. FreeBSD has this forum, a more indepth/lengthy FreeBSD handbook and a longer support cycle.

In the Linux world you essentially learn the Debian way or the Redhat way. One exception is Slackware which for me allowed an easy transition to the BSD's. Slackware Documentation is scattered all over the internet.

Edit: I'll add that Arch Linux has pretty good documentation and you are walked through some pretty basic installation steps - the only disk partitioning tool is manual. Arch then added systemd and it's value as a learning tool was diminished signifiicantly.
 
Last edited:
Psypro said:
I wanted to like FreeBSD, and in some wicked way I still do. I like FreeBSD for the pain it gives.
Click to expand...
I find it hard to understand the problems you have. I've had none of them and the ones I have had were fleeting. For instance, you claim stability problems yet I've run FreeBSD on up to 10 servers at one time plus two desktop workstations and a laptop with no stability problems at all. Any basic problems I've had were solved through the handbook and I've never had a problem finding a driver for any hardware I've come across except for one that had a broadcom network driver (which has since been resolved). Most of my hardware is less than two years old and my workstation, built with all the latest stuff, just turned one last month.

I work remotely on all those servers every day, all day long, and when I'm working on site for a client, I often ssh into my home workstations, again, all day long. So your problems with not being able to do what I do, I don't understand that either.

I've never heard a FreeBSD developer say they use Windows for their desktop though I often hear they use a Mac so I don't know where you heard they use Windows.

So I don't get it.
 
full_of_chocolate said:
Hello.
The target system is a desktop PC with a separate hard drive to spare. Connection to the Internet goes through a cable modem with a built-in router and firewall, the Cisco EPC3825.
Click to expand...

If your main PC is powerful enough, I'd suggest using VirtualBox (it's free) on whatever your current environment is, and install FreeBSD in a virtual machine. This allows you to take snapshots along the way and can help revert changes in case you messed something up, or branch out in clones.
On top of that, it prevents you from breaking the currently installed OS by mistake. (There are very few safeguards in the Unix/BSD world. The general assumption is that you know what you're doing, and if you don't, you will have to fix it.)

In any case, be prepared for a rough ride in the beginning. There'll be a very thin line between massive frustration and great satisfaction, so just keep going to get over that line again and again :)
You will have to read and learn a lot to get anywhere. And you'll ask yourself several times along the way if it's really worth the pain. Not saying this to put you off, but rather to adjust expectations a bit.

Don't listen to the nay sayers! FreeBSD works splendidly on a desktop, if you are prepared to spend considerably more time to get there. At least you have a wealth of choice along the way, and no nonsense installers, which litter your system without giving you much of a clue as to what they have done. You'll learn a lot more when you do it yourself. By the way, I'm writing this from my FreeBSD 10 desktop, which I use exclusively these days. (The only Linux installation I've got left on my desktop is a headless VirtualBox VM, which provides access to Skype via ssh/X-Forwarding to my FreeBSD desktop; unfortunately required for one of my customers, or I'd do away with it altogether, but I'm digressing...)
 
sysconfig said:
(The only Linux installation I've got left on my desktop is a headless VirtualBox VM, which provides access to Skype via ssh/X-Forwarding to my FreeBSD desktop; unfortunately required for one of my customers, or I'd do away with it altogether, but I'm digressing...)
Click to expand...
11-CURRENT can run linux version of Skype after lemul branch was merged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top