Void Linux users don't need any kind of "Russian doll" around their distribution.
You're right. Trident wouldn't replace the default Void installation. It would sit downstream of Void.
Not many users on this forum have complained about boot time that I recall.
I think the comparison is relative to Trident's current boot process, which is very "legacy," to put it mildly.
... but even if you can install Void Linux on Root with ZFS with nice script there is still the same problem that exists with Ubuntu 19.10 Beta - lack of ZFS Boot Environments support and lack of encryption.
If You install FreeBSD you have full root on ZFS with GELI encryption without any additional bullshit (separate ZFS boot pools or
/boot filesystems).
EVERYTHING is on the encrypted root partition on ZFS.
View attachment 6992
Ubuntu 19.10 has three filesystems.
EXT4
/boot.
ZFS v28
bpool (boot pool).
ZFS v5000
rpool (root pool).
... and as of current state does not support ANY kind of Boot Environments tool - you can not even set
bootfs property for the
rpool pool.
View: https://twitter.com/vermaden/status/1182727603272257537
View: https://twitter.com/vermaden/status/1182739310732337154
While Ubuntu just got root on ZFS it still lacks encrypted ZFS and ZFS Boot Environments.
Void Linux - properly configured - will have ZFS Boot Environments but not encryption.
While encryption has been recently added to ZFS on Linux I doubt that Linux will be able to boot from this way encrypted root partition - not to mention without separate
/boot or ZFS boot pool ...
I do believe Trident have said they're abandoning ZFS root.
One day a *BSD genius will come up and offer point and click environment, using bhyve and FreeBSD jails
So FreeNAS?
Oh, apparently they want to switch to musl as well. These people are truly clueless. (All commercial / closed source Linux software is compiled against glibc. Like mentioned Nvidia drivers, for example.)
I thought using obscure solutions regardless of support because they are - in your estimation - technically superior was a standard BSDism
While this certainly is a contradiction - aiming for ease of use while using nonstandard solutions - I don't necessarily think it's any worse than what I've observed in many other distros. They're already choosing a niche base as is, I doubt this is gonna make too much of a difference.
focused on improving Lumina and the graphics stack with the FreeBSD graphics team.
Per the dev, many of their attempted contributions to the FreeBSD effort have gone ignored/unaddressed. I confess I haven't been able to verify this myself.
when it was still at beta v. 0.73 running some version of FreeBSD 5 with KDE 3 as a default desktop
To be fair, that was before Plasma, which transformed KDE into its current excellent state.
It shows a complete lack of loyalty to their userbase IMO
I'm a Trident user. While I'll be migrating to GhostBSD instead of following them to Void, I understand the motivations for the move. However, it does seem that by choosing musl they are, again, painting themselves into a corner in terms of being a solution that's so niche no one supports it.
I haven't minded the driver issues because I run Trident on a
previous gen PC with relatively simple hardware, and it's not my daily driver. But if I were using it on newer hardware, especially with newer Wi-Fi adapters, and as my daily driver, I'd have been frustrated too.
Lumina was the only part of TrueOS I actually cared about.
I think it's pretty good for being essentially a one man project. It's better at X11 forwarding than GNOME, for example.
PC-BSD / TrueOS and everything it spawns was always going to turn into this kind of mess, because the "business model" if you could even call it that, is "let's make it all easy and accessible and attract more users to $OS".
There hasn't been any implied business model since Trident forked from TrueOS.
$OS = something we're going to revise at our discretion, in our supreme arrogance and disregard for the user base we've built up.
I don't think you'd be making this comment if you'd been part of the community. Having interacted with these folks I can assure that's not how they think.
Ubuntu spawned Linux Mint, which was the 1st distro I managed to run without ultimately borking. Never underestimate the effect of an easy onramp.
It's the fallacy of popularity based on the notion that for an OS to "succeed" it needs to grow it's user base.
I mean, if no one uses your solution no one will develop for it, either. If you scroll through the thread you'll see people dogging Trident for choosing musl over glibc and MidnightBSD for having only one user. User base isn't absolutely everything, but it's not something a solution can be truly relevant without. It's phenomenally difficult to achieve very necessary 3rd party support without it.
they conveniently forgot about them
I run Ubuntu 19.04 and don't feel "forgotten" by Canonical. As a matter of fact, I like what they've done to vastly improve the OS' usability over the years.
I wonder where I would be without OSes such as Mandrake and Ubuntu. They might have no focus, stupidly follow the last trend etc ... but somehow, I owe a lot to Ubuntu and Mandrake.
Back in the day, coming from Win95/98/XP, I would not have been able to install Debian or teach myself enough for this purpose.
Ubuntu was easy enough to install (non-free driver, GUI, etc ...) that it allowed me to gain enough confidence to explore Linux. I learned by using it daily instead of reading manuals and then being frustrated by my lack of understanding.
Later, I used PC-BSD to get a working FreeBSD + desktop as I was exploring BSD land.
The accessibilty and the ease of use for new comers are still a plus in my book for such projects.
Agreed. Trident taught me BSD, and I actually appreciate FreeBSD so much thanks to Trident that I'm deciding to stick with the former instead of following the latter to Linux.
