FreeBSD Foundation Flounders on 15 with Rust, pkgbase, and KDE

cy@ said:
I don't see the difference between freebsd-update and pkgbase. They're both binary updates. To the end user it's all the same.

If you're a developer or keen user, you can always do buldworld/buildkernel/installworld/installkernel. You can even build your own packages, which I've been meaning to do here. If you want legacy style system management you should be building from source. Again, it's all the same.
Click to expand...
If there is no difference between them, then it is unnecessary to change them and this is a case of fixing something not broken.
And no I don't want to compile everything from source every time I want to update a system.
 
baaz said:
If there is no difference between them, then it is unnecessary to change them and this is a case of fixing something not broken.
And no I don't want to compile everything from source every time I want to update a system.
Click to expand...
Then it shouldn't matter if binary updates come by freebsd-update or pkg upgrade. And it doesn't matter either.
 
cy@ said:
Then it shouldn't matter if binary updates come by freebsd-update or pkg upgrade. And it doesn't matter either.
Click to expand...
Even if we take it as true, it would matter because that would mean a stable working system has been replaced through many hours of work and another new one that doesn't make a difference and is less battle tested has taken it's place.
 
baaz said:
If there is no difference between them, then it is unnecessary to change them and this is a case of fixing something not broken.
And no I don't want to compile everything from source every time I want to update a system.
Click to expand...
Compiling from source with META_MODE enabled may be faster than fetching packages...
 
cracauer@ said:
The -current mailing list will serve this purpose. You reach the right people and it is open to anyone.

There are no secret/non-public lists where technical discussions like this are supposed to happen.
Click to expand...
I think much of the KDE stuff has come from the Laptop and Working group meetings. Much of these really were positive but many parts I went through was spent shoehorning KDE where it shouldn't be. On one of the videos I watched early on, there was a sentiment from one user/developer that the FreeBSD terminal should be de-prioritized and only used to bootstrap a GUI desktop which was just a bit bizarre.

Interstingly I feel desktop systems (quick updates, easy to use, user-friendly) are fairly mutually exclusive to well engineered systems and where PkgBase might be good for one user-group; it isn't for the other (just like Linux isn't). So it seems wrong to just have two sides in a community constantly clashing on mailing lists. Not quite sure of a solution. Perhaps the home desktop guys will realize one day that FreeBSD will never be what they want it to be? ;)
 
RetroComputingCollector said:
FreeBSD is being Linuxized […]
Click to expand...
What does that even mean? Off the cuff, in my experience the following characterizes Linux:​
  • Linux is just a kernel. On its own it is useless.​
  • Code, documentation, and support quality varies a lot, abysmal poor to fairly good.​
  • It seems everything was marked “unstable”/“experimental”. Sometimes features appear and vanish before you can say Jack Robinson.​
  • The Linux world is a mess. Remember ISO/IEC 23360‑* Linux Standard Base?​
  • Our lord and savior Linus Torvalds, His will be done, ⟨ insert byble quote here ⟩.​
So in what respects is FreeBSD being “Linuxized” right now?​
RetroComputingCollector said:
[…] Also, why choose KDE of all things‽ I get it's easy to use, but why not also provide an option for CDE or twm?
Click to expand...
For crying out loud, propose integration of YourFavoriteDesktopEnvironment™ into the installer, go ahead.

I mildly oppose supporting any DE – an optional feature not crucial for an operating system – because, well, are all bugs fixed? On the other hand, the definition of operating system changes over time. Maybe, as of today, OS necessarily includes supporting some graphical desktop.​
JohnK said:
> pkgbase

Wasn't this supposed to be tested in 11? pkgbase must be over 10 years old by now. Why all of a sudden are people complaining/worrying?
Click to expand...
Yeah, ten years: Wiki page earliest revision of 2016 links FreeBSD pkgbase mailing list.​
 
cracauer@ said:
Perl was in FreeBSD base but has been kicked out around the end of the bronze age.
Click to expand...
true, my old brain played a trick on me and was rolling dice between FreeBSD and OpenBSD. How embarrassing, but also a little funny.

baaz said:
Jails and ZFS have me hooked or else I would have made this jump long ago.
Click to expand...
add a more adequate hypervisor for me, faster adoption of security fixes for packages and a much friendlier community... but I am not here to troll OpenBSD.

Kai Burghardt said:
What does that even mean? Off the cuff, in my experience the following characterizes Linux:​
  • ...​
Click to expand...
add systemd. But then, some funny guy here opened a Thread how having systemd in FreeBSD would be a great idea.
 
mer said:
But if that base install offered X11 and WM AS AN OPTION, not mandatory, one does not install the 1700 packages.

This is what puzzles me: it sounds like FreeBSD 15 is offering KDE as an option, not Mandatory, so why the fuss?
If 15 is "Always install KDE regardless of what the user wants" then you have an argument. But offered as an option at install time, default to "do not install"? Why the fuss?
Click to expand...

re 1700 packages...understand that it's been a while since I've done it, but IIRC, the basic X11 and a lite window manager was only 200ish packages out of that 1700. I'd like to say that most "distros" in linux are bloated, but it goes beyond the distro element and into the ridiculous dependency hell to do anything in linux. The basic kernel and coreutils philosophy of freeBSD needs to be protected at all costs! Anything else should be an add-on or port. When you start allowing a suite of applications into the core system you start to steer the ecosystem toward specific functionalities, and abandon the niche creative uses that UNIX has always thrived on.
 
Well, I'm using FreeBSD on top a desk at a home, It is (was?) all I want it to be for a desktop.
  • Display servers run.
  • Window managers run.
  • File managers work.
  • Office utilities run.
  • And I have a browser window open.
That's 99% of desktop usage.

And it is easy to use and manage for me, I am a more technical user, yes - but I bet most of the people that are using or going to use that other weird OS with the cute red demon mascot that isn't even Linux are to an extent.
My take would be that: Linux-like desktop systems are mutually exclusive to well engineered systems.
A well engineered desktop system is possible, but the Linux desktop ecosystem is certainly not that.

I think instead of doing weird changes to the installer and fixing already working things (if there is actually any intent on making life on laptop easier) there should be work done on suspend to disk.
 
Kai Burghardt said:
What does that even mean? Off the cuff, in my experience the following characterizes Linux:​
  • Linux is just a kernel. On its own it is useless.​
  • Code, documentation, and support quality varies a lot, abysmal poor to fairly good.​
  • It seems everything was marked “unstable”/“experimental”. Sometimes features appear and vanish before you can say Jack Robinson.​
  • The Linux world is a mess. Remember ISO/IEC 23360‑* Linux Standard Base?​
  • Our lord and savior Linus Torvalds, His will be done, ⟨ insert byble quote here ⟩.​
So in what respects is FreeBSD being “Linuxized” right now?
For crying out loud, propose integration of YourFavoriteDesktopEnvironment™ into the installer, go ahead.​
Click to expand...
By "Linuxized", I mean implementing thr design structure that most Linux distros implement.
 
kpedersen said:
Indeed. I do understand the worry. Its not worth fighting though; there is a lot of noise coming from Linux-centric people these days.
Click to expand...
Yes. This isn't Linux-ism. It's populism. Degrading oneself to a lower common denominator to gain and appease users.

That may be too harsh but I do sense a movement toward gaining everyday users but at what technical debt?

I am concerned but not sure if I need to be. I just don't know if pkg-base bothers me but the KDE thing does.
 
drhowarddrfine said:
Yes. This isn't Linux-ism. It's populism. Degrading oneself to a lower common denominator to gain and appease users.

That may be too harsh but I do sense a movement toward gaining everyday users but at what technical debt?

I am concerned but not sure if I need to be. I just don't know if pkg-base bothers me but the KDE thing does.
Click to expand...
Would gnome or xfce upset you?
J

Post in thread 'FreeBSD Foundation Flounders on 15 with Rust, pkgbase, and KDE'

> X window mgr

There is no default. I could be totally wrong but since words typically have meanings, I try to follow the links first.

1. https://github.com/FreeBSDFoundatio...dates/2025-06.md#kde-desktop-installer-option
2. https://github.com/FreeBSDFoundation/proj-laptop/issues/25

Which leads you to:
"alfonsosiciliano has some work already started here: [3.] https://gitlab.com/alfix/desktopconfig"

From which you can view some Proof-of-concept code which has a few entries like: KDE, Gnome, and XFCE (seems like a nice start).
4...
  • Thanks
 
You guys are crazy. Freebsd-update is "new" to me and was a welcome change from editing stable-supfile. Pkgbase sounds like better customization and I welcome it after being baked for quite some time.
 
drhowarddrfine said:
What my complaint is that there is too much emphasis or desire to appease the amateurs.
Click to expand...
Oh, I love a good RTFM response! Let's bring those back because now I might even have a [slight] chance to be on the other end of those. ...So, the issue with those have always been a "the ability to understand what I don't know" catch-22.

But I'm a bit confused. To what level (I know that sounds like a dumb question--and I'll follow it up with a really bad example which I hope you do not read as me being snide--but to what point/line/place/etc do you consider an amateur?). Should we remove the handbook and let them just read the man pages? ...I started using BSD in 2000, and I still read the handbook and man pages constantly (I feel like I'm still an amateur).
 
JohnK said:
Oh, I love a good RTFM response! Let's bring those back because now I might even have a [slight] chance to be on the other end of those. ...So, the issue with those have always been a "the ability to understand what I don't know" catch-22.

But I'm a bit confused. To what level (I know that sounds like a dumb question--and I'll follow it up with a really bad example which I hope you do not read as me being snide--but to what point/line/place/etc do you consider an amateur?). Should we remove the handbook and let them just read the man pages? ...I started using BSD in 2000, and I still read the handbook and man pages constantly (I feel like I'm still an amateur).
Click to expand...
If i had FreeBSD handbook in physical format like paper - i would have to buy another one by now.
 
linimon@ said:
Sigh.

The next time someone asks me why I am not active on the forums, I am going to point them to this thread.
Click to expand...
Everyone was an amateur at some point, and the best UNIX users are the ones who learn the system and how it works and not "learning" a GUI that coddles the user. Most of us learned the system by reading manuals and asking for help, not ignoring everything and clicking with your mouse.
 
drhowarddrfine said:
They all would upset me. If one wants to run a desktop, do a pkg install. If that's too complicated, then, perhaps, FreeBSD is not for you. And that's OK.
Click to expand...
Well ... option like DE/WM is not that bad , but it has to be an OPTION and not forced one.
I think from newbie point and for newcomers - it would be better so they could explore right away without trying to do extra step, but again i want to repeat myself - it should be OPTION only.
maybe people like to be different and use less popular option and gets upset when something more mainstream is offered for next update/upgrade but by end of the day its good for everyone - more hardware options, more testing ... obviously less good news to moderators in the forum with crazy topics on how to install VIM/EMACS lol ... but by end of the day if FreeBSD attracts more users we should benefit from it.
I think CUDA is in works/talks ? which is good news and if FreeBSD would be somewhat small and only for 10 people - these rumors/options would not even exist.
 
Why does it have to turn argumentative? Why can't we just comment or criticize the proposals instead? it hurts the project.

This was really 3 on topic subjects: KDE installer, pkgbase, and zig/rust in base. Then, a 4th topic of Linuxization. Most of these, except the KDE installer aren't Linuxizations.

Pkgbase can be done in a limited and correct way. Rust in base can be compared to Rust in Linux's base, but it's about an example of something that has done it, and discussion about FreeBSD. No Rust in base, bc it's simply not in the C family. Zig, maybe.

Anyone, especially amateurs, can install an OS by using an ncurses type interface. Most people on these forums are already apt at that. The issue, is that using a KDE installer is a waste of resources, when already, so many bring up how there's not enough committers, developers and other software contributors. It's better as an option than a requirement, because I don't want to be forced to use a KDE installer.
 
linimon@ said:
Sigh.

The next time someone asks me why I am not active on the forums, I am going to point them to this thread.
Click to expand...
It's the many preconceived ideas not based on anything but thin air. Reminds me of some Teams chats I've witnessed. As a co-worker of mine says, it's a grab the popcorn moment. Sit back and enjoy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top