• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

FreeBSD is amazing

-Snake-

Active Member

Thanks: 21
Messages: 125

#1
Hello, I have asked some questions in the forum sometimes so I think some will know me.

I have been a user of gnu/linux since 2011 both desktop and servers, after so many years using linux and try FreeBSD (just a year) I can not be happier with this operating system.

What I like about FreeBSD apart from its stability is the extremely simple it is, very unix-like and this does not exist in almost any linux distribution, for example how to manage the audio I love (not instead as pulseaudio) and Not to mention how to manage the daemons (rc vs systemd) everything is extremely simple and you understand the first simply by configuring it.

In linux in contrast some configurations are strange and although you can solve the problem you can not understand exactly how it works, in FreeBSD everything has a "sense"

On the other hand I love that there is both pkg and ports to install software, it is extremely flexible, gentoo would be the equivalent but I do not like being forced to compile everything but I want and I find it simpler how to configure compilation options in FreeBSD.

FreeBSD is very compared to slackware, and it is true that slackware is the most unix-like system of gnu/linux but it still seems cluttered freebsd without resolving dependencies without the ports in a specific directory, etc ...

Right now the only "advantage" that I see gnu/linux over FreeBSD is the support of hardware and applications (but the truth for that I almost use windows)

Summary: Another linux user who has fallen in love with FreeBSD (although I also want to try other BSD systems like netbsd or openbsd)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Trihexagonal

Aspiring Daemon

Thanks: 423
Messages: 909

#2
...I also want to try other BSD systems like netbsd or openbsd)
I have one box running OpenBSD but prefer FreeBSD. They are very similar to Administer and operate. Some of the commands are different in OpenBSD but not hard to learn or to set it up.

I've never tried NetBSD.
 

-Snake-

Active Member

Thanks: 21
Messages: 125

#3
I have one box running OpenBSD but prefer FreeBSD. They are very similar to Administer and operate. Some of the commands are different in OpenBSD but not hard to learn or to set it up.

I've never tried NetBSD.
I have heard that openbsd is extremely secure and is ideal for firewalls.
 

Trihexagonal

Aspiring Daemon

Thanks: 423
Messages: 909

#4
I have heard that openbsd is extremely secure and is ideal for firewalls.
You heard right, but FreeBSD uses the OpenBSD pf firewall and there is a long list of ISP's that utilize FreeBSD:

https://www.freebsd.org/commercial/isp.html

The implementation is somewhat different but I use the same ruleset I do with FreeBSD on my OpenBSD box, with the exception of 2 rules where the syntax is different. IMO If you know how to secure your FreeBSD box there isn't any reason it cant be just as, if not more, secure than an ISP as you can limit incoming traffic where they allow it to a degree as a server.

When I switched ISP's they only provided a cable modem and I didn't have a cable router at the time. I ran my FreeSBD laptops connected directly to the net without a moments hesitation and did so for months. I only got a router more recently so I could have more than one machina online at once and my laptops are probably more secure than it is.
 

-Snake-

Active Member

Thanks: 21
Messages: 125

#5
You heard right, but FreeBSD uses the OpenBSD pf firewall and there is a long list of ISP's that utilize FreeBSD:

https://www.freebsd.org/commercial/isp.html

The implementation is somewhat different but I use the same ruleset I do with FreeBSD on my OpenBSD box, with the exception of 2 rules where the syntax is different. IMO If you know how to secure your FreeBSD box there isn't any reason it cant be just as, if not more, secure than an ISP as you can limit incoming traffic where they allow it to a degree as a server.

When I switched ISP's they only provided a cable modem and I didn't have a cable router at the time. I ran my FreeSBD laptops connected directly to the net without a moments hesitation and did so for months. I only got a router more recently so I could have more than one machina online at once and my laptops are probably more secure than it is.
Interesting, I really like pf because it is very syntactically clear, at least in comparison of iptables.
Being honest, I've only used it domestically with basic rules in freebsd, something like this:

Code:
tcp_services="{ssh, domain, auth}"
localnet="192.168.1.0/24"
block in all
pass out all
pass proto tcp from $localnet to port $tcp_services
 

debguy

Member

Thanks: 8
Messages: 75

#7
> In linux in contrast some configurations are strange and although you can solve the problem you can not understand exactly how it works, in FreeBSD everything has a "sense"

I've run linux since the early 90's, infact made my own "linux from scratch" lightweight distribution of GNU/Linux (which actually uses pmake for some things!)

I'm new to BSD but am finding I it's easier to do the mundane things than it is in linux (modules, getting X running, getting networks out to the internet, etc). Easier and (same result, running 'nix apps and having an X desktop). However I've never been an android or "linux set top box multimedia" user, so i can't comment there.

I'm very much enjoying freeBSD though. I got a mac-mini for (my multimedia/iphone needs) and that has a BSD userland and is just great as well (i wouldnt run win10 unless for games or because this or that business app was released for win10 only). Really these days you can't just have one box - multiple lightwieght boxes makes life allot easier.
 

ShelLuser

Daemon

Thanks: 1,102
Best answers: 2
Messages: 2,427

#8
Late comment, but oh well...

On the other hand I love that there is both pkg and ports to install software, it is extremely flexible, gentoo would be the equivalent but I do not like being forced to compile everything but I want and I find it simpler how to configure compilation options in FreeBSD.
Just to clear something up here, maybe not needed but... Keep in mind that there really isn't too much difference between them. If you install something using the Ports collection you're effectively compiling the source code in order to create a package, which is then eventually installed using pkg. So it's not really an issue of "Ports or pkg", a better description would be: "ports or binary packages".

And speaking of which: keep in mind that generally speaking you should not mix these two approaches because it can (and often will!) cause problems, especially in the longer run.

I have heard that openbsd is extremely secure and is ideal for firewalls.
Using a certain product doesn't provide extra security, the way you use it does that.

Just mentioning this because way too many people seem to think that if you use "product X" which has a reputation of being secure (not just referring to OpenBSD here mind you) then just using that will be enough to "become safer". Yet that reasoning is seriously flawed.

In other words: security isn't a product or a thing which you can "simply" install, instead it's an ongoing process / methodology to use and follow.
 

-Snake-

Active Member

Thanks: 21
Messages: 125

#10
Just to clear something up here, maybe not needed but... Keep in mind that there really isn't too much difference between them. If you install something using the Ports collection you're effectively compiling the source code in order to create a package, which is then eventually installed using pkg. So it's not really an issue of "Ports or pkg", a better description would be: "ports or binary packages".
Yes, I understand that perfectly, I just wanted to highlight FreeBSD's advantage over gentoo by offering both options.
 
Top