FreeBSD Foundation tutorial does not work.

[mikethe1wheelnut]

Hi posting this here not knowing if it's where it goes. I expect somebody will tell me to contact the foundation.

This is their tutorial: FreeBSD Foundation tutorial.

I found this thread that claims the same problem. It has plenty of responses, plenty of proposals. The problem, as I see it, is that it's necessary at all. A fresh shiny looking tutorial like that one should not have such problems. This is me, tired and irritated. I opted for that tutorial -precisely- because it made the whole thing look easy and simple. As previously, I'm -trying- to switch to bsd. If it's too hard, I -will- give up. At the very least, the date at which I finally adopt it will keep on getting pushed back. Till when? who knows.

Synopsis: I can't install gnom3 or vim-console. they aren't in the repositories. my repositories have been updated. I'm on a DELL latitude e7440 laptop, in a virtual machine installed in lubuntu (..20.04 I think..) ...not that any of that is relevant if the problem is the programs aren't in the repositories...

 

[sko]

A fresh shiny looking tutorial like that one should not have such problems.

That tutorial is 3 years old - far from "new and shiny", especially if it covers a fast-moving target like gnome.

If you take a look at the ports:
x11/gnome3 moved to x11/gnome because gnome3 is dead and gone since early 2022 and they switched to the same stupid versioning like e.g. firefox uses, i.e. omitting the dot after the major release - hence version numbers are now 40, 41, 42 etc...
editors/vim-console has been removed because editors/vim *is* console-only and can be built with various flavours (e.g. vim-tiny)

Instead of following old tutorials, use the only valid source: The FreeBSD Handbook

 

[astyle]

Use the Handbook, not Foundation tutorial... Foundation info tends to be out of date.

Also - it really sounds like you're skipping steps and not following them exactly - that's a recipe for failure even in the Linux world. Heck, you linked to step 2 of the Foundation tutorial...

Also - It looks like you're using a VM on a pretty old laptop - a usable desktop needs more metal than that. ?

 

[mer]

a usable desktop needs more metal than that.

Define "usable"
But that's why I prefer Window Managers over "Desktop Environments"; on average a Window Manager uses less resources than a DE.

As for packages and repos, the biggest hint I have for the OP is:

pkg search

(man pkg-search)

 

[astyle]

Define "usable"
But that's why I prefer Window Managers over "Desktop Environments"; on average a Window Manager uses less resources than a DE.

As for packages and repos, the biggest hint I have for the OP is:

pkg search

(man pkg-search)

GNOME (which seems to be what OP wants to install) is a full-blown DE, and kinda needs room to breathe... "usable" as in, apps launch reasonably quickly, don't freeze in the middle of responding to a random click... A VM is not the best place to try a full-blown DE, unless you have enough metal underneath all that. ?

 

[taiwan740]

Also - It looks like you're using a VM on a pretty old laptop - a usable desktop needs more metal than that. ?

Nonsense - "run what you brung" - I've got more than happy desktops on "worse" hardware than the lowest spec of that model.

Anyway, mikethe1wheelnut, as others have suggested, you can find packages using partial names using the pkg search command

So:-

pkg search gnome

will return a list of packages with gnome in the name. Generally with big environments like GNOME, there will be one named just that (it may have a version number suffixed but you don't need to specify that in the installation command

To install what you want:

pkg install gnome vim firefox

You'll then get a prompt saying it needs to download and install other packages as dependencies for what you're installing. As you're installing GNOME, there will be a lot. Type 'y' to approve this, and it should install as desired.

You might need to install a login manager (aka a login screen) if gnome doesn't install gdm by default.

pkg install gdm

and then use your new vim install to enable gdm in /etc/rc.conf

 

[mer]

"usable" as in, apps launch reasonably quickly, don't freeze in the middle of responding to a random click..

Ahh so running "latest version of Windows on the minimum recommended hardware" is "not usable"

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

Use the Handbook, not Foundation tutorial... Foundation info tends to be out of date.

Also - it really sounds like you're skipping steps and not following them exactly - that's a recipe for failure even in the Linux world. Heck, you linked to step 2 of the Foundation tutorial...

Also - It looks like you're using a VM on a pretty old laptop - a usable desktop needs more metal than that. ?

That tutorial is 3 years old - far from "new and shiny", especially if it covers a fast-moving target like gnome.

If you take a look at the ports:
x11/gnome3 moved to x11/gnome because gnome3 is dead and gone since early 2022 and they switched to the same stupid versioning like e.g. firefox uses, i.e. omitting the dot after the major release - hence version numbers are now 40, 41, 42 etc...
editors/vim-console has been removed because editors/vim *is* console-only and can be built with various flavours (e.g. vim-tiny)

Instead of following old tutorials, use the only valid source: The FreeBSD Handbook

Please tell me somebody is spanking them for false advertising. If they're getting funding for their projects, (there is certainly plenty of mention of cash on their site), at the very least they should keep their tutorial up-to-date. sigh.

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

Use the Handbook, not Foundation tutorial... Foundation info tends to be out of date.

Also - it really sounds like you're skipping steps and not following them exactly - that's a recipe for failure even in the Linux world. Heck, you linked to step 2 of the Foundation tutorial...

Also - It looks like you're using a VM on a pretty old laptop - a usable desktop needs more metal than that. ?

Yup! that's me! in love with old laptops! ;-)

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

GNOME (which seems to be what OP wants to install) is a full-blown DE, and kinda needs room to breathe... "usable" as in, apps launch reasonably quickly, don't freeze in the middle of responding to a random click... A VM is not the best place to try a full-blown DE, unless you have enough metal underneath all that. ?

Define "usable"
But that's why I prefer Window Managers over "Desktop Environments"; on average a Window Manager uses less resources than a DE.

As for packages and repos, the biggest hint I have for the OP is:

pkg search

(man pkg-search)

Like I said: "tired and irritated". posting was my way of communicating to the foundation, and anybody else to whom it might be relevant, that there was a problem -with the tutorial-.

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

GNOME (which seems to be what OP wants to install) is a full-blown DE, and kinda needs room to breathe... "usable" as in, apps launch reasonably quickly, don't freeze in the middle of responding to a random click... A VM is not the best place to try a full-blown DE, unless you have enough metal underneath all that. ?

You might be right. We won't know any time soon since it didn't take long for more problems with that tutorial to come to light. The conclusion is, it's going to take more time and effort than I have to spare just now to get bsd installed. It'll have to wait until I have a solid several weeks to calmly wade through the handbook. The only reason I considered a virtual machine is that I (seemed to) have a brief concise tutorial explaining exactly how to do it that way. The alternative involved switching over my partition table from mbr to gpt. Which seemed like a major change and made me very nervous. Like I said, limited time to do it all carefully and cautiously as it must be done. Ultimately, installing bsd is -not-, in my opinion, something that can be done on a lark.

 

[smithi]

It'll have to wait until I have a solid several weeks to calmly wade through the handbook.

Unless you're a terribly slow learner, installing FreeBSD by the book is a lazy afternoon at worst.

The only reason I considered a virtual machine is that I (seemed to) have a brief concise tutorial explaining exactly how to do it that way. The alternative involved switching over my partition table from mbr to gpt. Which seemed like a major change and made me very nervous.

Which alternative? While GPT is given prominence, there's no problem installing FreeBSD to an MBR / BIOS partitioned disk.

Like I said, limited time to do it all carefully and cautiously as it must be done. Ultimately, installing bsd is -not-, in my opinion, something that can be done on a lark.

Assuming you have good backups, what's to lose trying?

 

[Zare]

Unless you're multibooting legacy OSs there is no need to hold BIOS MBR.
It's an ancient standard plagued by ancient problems.

GPT is just a list of partitions the right way. Without data type/size issues, and "logical partition" hacks.

I suggest you take a look at another alternative which is a cheapest SSD found in your local shop. Spend 50 bucks or euros for a drive you can use to install and try out OSes seamlessly.

You might be right. We won't know any time soon since it didn't take long for more problems with that tutorial to come to light. The conclusion is, it's going to take more time and effort than I have to spare just now to get bsd installed. It'll have to wait until I have a solid several weeks to calmly wade through the handbook. The only reason I considered a virtual machine is that I (seemed to) have a brief concise tutorial explaining exactly how to do it that way. The alternative involved switching over my partition table from mbr to gpt. Which seemed like a major change and made me very nervous. Like I said, limited time to do it all carefully and cautiously as it must be done. Ultimately, installing bsd is -not-, in my opinion, something that can be done on a lark.

Although this is your personal experience, I have to say I don't agree with this.

If you use a blank installation target, such as a VM or real hardware with only blank drive(s) present, wired internet connection, the FreeBSD installation comes down to next-next-finish approach. The defaults in installer are defaults for a reason. This is what you'll be getting through;

Chapter 2. Installing FreeBSD

Guide about how to install FreeBSD, the minimum hardware requirements and supported architectures, how to create the installation media, etc

docs.freebsd.org

Give 10 minutes to take a look at those screenshots, then come back here if you have any questions about it. But you probably won't since install is easy, handbook covers everything FreeBSD while installation at practice is a subchapter of a chapter. Calmly wading through handbook for weeks and you'll learn far far beyond what's needed for a base install.

You won't have anywhere to practice while reading the handbook if you don't have an installation.

Eye through the bsdinstall chapter; pop up the install image into a VM, use installer defaults. You'll be left with a fully functional FreeBSD base connected to the network. Pick up handbook and practice from there.

 

[smithi]

Unless you're multibooting legacy OSs there is no need to hold BIOS MBR.
It's an ancient standard plagued by ancient problems.

I don't know about the OP, but I am indeed multibooting with an existing Win10, shrunk to make space for a common FAT32 slice and the rest for FreeBSD.

Mostly so I can leave my projects for my PC and Mac- using family when I shuffle off.

MBR is not 'plagued by ancient problems' when used as always intended. I'm not arguing against GPT for most modern uses, but much deprecation of MBR is largely mythological.

GPT is just a list of partitions the right way. Without data type/size issues, and "logical partition" hacks.

I don't use logical partitions, 4 slices is plenty here, boot0cfg is a fine boot manager.

What data type/size issues on laptop-sized disks do you mean?

I agree with the rest of your post, assuming the OP is in a position to swap disks easily.

 

[astyle]

You might be right. We won't know any time soon since it didn't take long for more problems with that tutorial to come to light. The conclusion is, it's going to take more time and effort than I have to spare just now to get bsd installed. It'll have to wait until I have a solid several weeks to calmly wade through the handbook. The only reason I considered a virtual machine is that I (seemed to) have a brief concise tutorial explaining exactly how to do it that way. The alternative involved switching over my partition table from mbr to gpt. Which seemed like a major change and made me very nervous. Like I said, limited time to do it all carefully and cautiously as it must be done. Ultimately, installing bsd is -not-, in my opinion, something that can be done on a lark.

It took me 4 or 5 attempts to install FreeBSD successfully for the first time. I was getting frustrated with Linux and the distros' propensity to swap around components and features at the drop of a hat. But I started having success with FreeBSD once I learned to use the Handbook. Yeah, it takes some self-discipline to not skip steps. What I like about the Handbook is that it's THE official, up-to-date documentation that clearly states what versions of FreeBSD it applies to.

The worst part was frankly the UFS partitioning - it was just like Linux (even though Linux has different filesystems, the partitioning theory (and free space calculation) is exactly the same). After I had a bootable system (after those 4-5 attempts), I still wanted to make adjustments to the partitions, and that necessarily meant reinstalling the whole system a few times. I chalked it up to a learning experience. ZFS changed that in a flash, back in 2017, and I never looked back! ?

Unless you're a terribly slow learner, installing FreeBSD by the book is a lazy afternoon at worst.

I have tried to install Linux on a lark (Gentoo and then Arch). It was a 1-week effort each time to get them going in a VM (I was trying to pull off double-nested virtualization, which I did - at the expense of performance). Made me realize just how out of practice with Linux I was. And, it reaffirmed my decision to stick with FreeBSD.

Please tell me somebody is spanking them for false advertising. If they're getting funding for their projects, (there is certainly plenty of mention of cash on their site), at the very least they should keep their tutorial up-to-date. sigh.

I wouldn't say it's false advertising - the tutorial was written awhile ago, back in 2017 (If you go by what you can see in the Windows screenshot in Step 1). FreeBSD Foundation is not the same thing as the dev team for FreeBSD project. Foundation is largely volunteer-based. Sometimes they come out with their own tutorials for how to use/configure the FreeBSD OS. They also provide some direction for development. Just maintaining FreeBSD's visibility on the Internet - that's what the Foundation is really doing. It takes renting servers and bandwidth, staying in touch with donors, making sure financial info is up to date, coordinating different projects - just try doing that with a small group of volunteers who do very limited development (if at all).

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

Unless you're a terribly slow learner, installing FreeBSD by the book is a lazy afternoon at worst.



Which alternative? While GPT is given prominence, there's no problem installing FreeBSD to an MBR / BIOS partitioned disk.



Assuming you have good backups, what's to lose trying?

"Unless you're a terribly slow learner, installing FreeBSD by the book is a lazy afternoon at worst."

I probably shouldn't respond to this, but please re-read what you wrote and realize how potentially insulting it is. I've been through the handbook once before, "successfully" installed freebsd, had a ton of problems with it, and ended up jumping ship back to ubuntu. At the time I was experimenting with multiple different linux distros as well, arch linux being one of them. So, maybe my memory is wrongly lumping freebsd into the whole painfull mess that included the arch installation attempt, researching everything that it seemed I needed to research, before I just went and installed ubuntu without any partitioning and it was so simple I felt I could breath again. Before you claim it's a lazy afternoon at most, ask yourself why bsd isn't considered a more dominant operating system. apparently linux has taken off more dramatically because of how the lisencing works, but both are still dominated by windows. if bsd was trully superior, and it was super easy to install, it wouldn't be a fringe operating system in terms of numbers of users. Yes, I'm aware that bsd is considered primarily for servers, and not for desktops, but that only reinforces the message: people don't like using it as a desktop. why? If it was so great, and was super easy to install, surely this would not be the case. And macs don't count here, even if their os is derived from bsd. I'm talking about users motivated to go through the -freebsd- installation process. I'm also aware that any research done online has to be considered suspect, so all my conclusions may be wrong.

Be thankful there are people out there like me who are sufficiently determined to escape from windows (..and linux..? I never thought I'd see the day when I'd be trying to escape from linux..) that we'll put this much effort into exploring other operating systems. I don't -need- freebsd. ubuntu has been working for me just fine, technically. I've just read enough about it, I like the sound of it, I'd like to try it out. I have plenty of other challenging technical projects taking up my mental space and energy, all much more important, so I'd be hard pressed to justify time spent on this. So, given that you probably -didn't- intend it to be insulting, this is me giving you a gentle reminder that this is an instance where what you said was not received the way you intended. I will assume that what I said above is indeed true, (it's something that at least one other person here has also said) that bsd is a walk in the park compared with arch, so that I've wrongly labeled bsd as difficult to install. In the meantime, I'll be sticking to ghost for initial testing.

 

[smithi]

"Unless you're a terribly slow learner, installing FreeBSD by the book is a lazy afternoon at worst."

I probably shouldn't respond to this, but please re-read what you wrote and realize how potentially insulting it is.

It certainly wasn't my intention to insult you, but I did want to challenge your contention of needing weeks of preparation, given your obvious intelligence.

Sorry if you took that badly, and I concede it's something I've done enough times to find easy.

That said, I've just reviewed the Handbook installation section and find it better than ever.

I've been through the handbook once before, "successfully" installed freebsd, had a ton of problems with it, and ended up jumping ship back to ubuntu. At the time I was experimenting with multiple different linux distros as well, arch linux being one of them. So, maybe my memory is wrongly lumping freebsd into the whole painfull mess that included the arch installation attempt, researching everything that it seemed I needed to research, before I just went and installed ubuntu without any partitioning and it was so simple I felt I could breath again.

Of the Linux distros, ubuntu sounds one of the better ones. I maintained a Debian system for a few years with few complaints.

Before you claim it's a lazy afternoon at most, ask yourself why bsd isn't considered a more dominant operating system.

Few BSD users seem terribly interested in dominance. There are always some of course, but it's not a strong meme usually.

apparently linux has taken off more dramatically because of how the lisencing works, but both are still dominated by windows. if bsd was trully superior, and it was super easy to install, it wouldn't be a fringe operating system in terms of numbers of users.

FreeBSD certainly isn't for everyone, nor does it claim to be. Popularity is a two-edged sword; the more naive users, the more support people and resources are needed. 'Naive' isn't an insult, just a recognition of lack of necessary knowledge.

Of course there are minimal levels of users and especially developers needed to keep up with technological development and we do lag behind in some areas; it's a trade off.

Yes, I'm aware that bsd is considered primarily for servers, and not for desktops, but that only reinforces the message: people don't like using it as a desktop.

Quite a few people have merrily used FreeBSD on desktops and laptops for 20 years, but yes, these tend to be technically minded people who will dig deep for solutions and chose the right kit for the job, not the more casual punters.

why? If it was so great, and was super easy to install, surely this would not be the case. And macs don't count here, even if their os is derived from bsd. I'm talking about users motivated to go through the -freebsd- installation process.

Yes, motivation is the key here.

I'm also aware that any research done online has to be considered suspect, so all my conclusions may be wrong.

I'm still often pleasantly surprised by the depth and quality found by searching these forums on many topics, after years of only using mailing lists.

Be thankful there are people out there like me who are sufficiently determined to escape from windows (..and linux..? I never thought I'd see the day when I'd be trying to escape from linux..) that we'll put this much effort into exploring other operating systems.

Thanks

I don't -need- freebsd. ubuntu has been working for me just fine, technically. I've just read enough about it, I like the sound of it, I'd like to try it out. I have plenty of other challenging technical projects taking up my mental space and energy, all much more important, so I'd be hard pressed to justify time spent on this. So, given that you probably -didn't- intend it to be insulting, this is me giving you a gentle reminder that this is an instance where what you said was not received the way you intended. I will assume that what I said above is indeed true, (it's something that at least one other person here has also said) that bsd is a walk in the park compared with arch, so that I've wrongly labeled bsd as difficult to install. In the meantime, I'll be sticking to ghost for initial testing.

No worries. Walk in the park? Only if you're wide awake and well armed with good tools!

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

It certainly wasn't my intention to insult you, but I did want to challenge your contention of needing weeks of preparation, given your obvious intelligence.

Sorry if you took that badly, and I concede it's something I've done enough times to find easy.

That said, I've just reviewed the Handbook installation section and find it better than ever.



Of the Linux distros, ubuntu sounds one of the better ones. I maintained a Debian system for a few years with few complaints.



Few BSD users seem terribly interested in dominance. There are always some of course, but it's not a strong meme usually.



FreeBSD certainly isn't for everyone, nor does it claim to be. Popularity is a two-edged sword; the more naive users, the more support people and resources are needed. 'Naive' isn't an insult, just a recognition of lack of necessary knowledge.

Of course there are minimal levels of users and especially developers needed to keep up with technological development and we do lag behind in some areas; it's a trade off.



Quite a few people have merrily used FreeBSD on desktops and laptops for 20 years, but yes, these tend to be technically minded people who will dig deep for solutions and chose the right kit for the job, not the more casual punters.



Yes, motivation is the key here.



I'm still often pleasantly surprised by the depth and quality found by searching these forums on many topics, after years of only using mailing lists.



Thanks



No worries. Walk in the park? Only if you're wide awake and well armed with good tools!

Thank-you! This is a relief. I've stayed away, not being sure what the response would be.

..I'm very gradually becoming aware of this concept of not actually wanting "market dominance". Everything you say makes perfect sense.. ..It's interesting, from an intellectual point of view, the challenges that will be faced by a "movement", more like a "sub-culture" (since it isn't exactly new) like this, when so many of the people who come into contact with it will do so with the pre-conceived (and in-accurate) notion that it's like a startup company desperately desiring and needing new clients; frustrated and angry that .. well.. that other operating systems seem so much more popular.

So, it's clear that more reading of the handbook is in my future, even if it still won't happen quickly.. ..the ptsd is still there.. ?

 

[mikethe1wheelnut]

..the irony is that I've concluded (..ya ya, somebody will tell me I'm wrong..) that it's not actually possible just now to dual-boot ubuntu and ghostbsd, which leaves very few options if I'm to explore bsd -_-

 

[astyle]

..the irony is that I've concluded (..ya ya, somebody will tell me I'm wrong..) that it's not actually possible just now to dual-boot ubuntu and ghostbsd, which leaves very few options if I'm to explore bsd -_-

oh, it's perfectly possible to dual-boot 'em both, but it does take having a handle on how to partition the disk so that the installer can see ( and boot ) the correct partition.