Introduce yourself, tell us who you are and why you chose FreeBSD

robroy · 2024-10-29T17:41:44+0000

I went to install VLC on a 14.0-RELEASE host this week (I know... but I'm waiting for 14.2-RELEASE) and the package system went predictably berserk, with no easy way to get back to where I'd started.

'activated a prior boot environment, and was back up and running in seconds. Thank you, working base system.

kpedersen · 2024-10-29T17:42:23+0000

cracauer@ said:
Even if it did you could recover thanks to the base system tar-able

A bit off topic from this thread but isn't PkgBase trying to break that feature though?

Especially since pkg-static(8) can only actually install pkg, not everything else that will get splintered off into lots of daft modular monolith packages.

cracauer@ · 2024-10-29T17:44:33+0000

kpedersen said:
Isn't PkgBase trying to break that feature though?

That is a concern that I have.

But even then, dependency hell in pkg/ports still does not break base.

astyle · 2024-10-29T17:48:29+0000

kpedersen said:
A bit off topic from this thread but isn't PkgBase trying to break that feature though?

Nope, PkgBase actually builds on the ability to just roll base into a tarball!

It's an idea from the Linux camp, adapted for FreeBSD - to offer the base as a gzipped tarball that FreeBSD's pkg can handle.

astyle · 2024-10-29T17:51:55+0000

cracauer@ said:
But even then, dependency hell in pkg/ports still does not break base.

Very true, and I like FreeBSD for that - I like the predictability that Linux was sorely lacking - breaking with no good way to go back unless you're willing to do a LOT of research and reading random wikis/blogs of people who did somehow manage to power through THAT.

kpedersen · 2024-10-29T17:54:57+0000

astyle said:
It's an idea from the Linux camp

Thats exactly the worry.

astyle said:
Nope, PkgBase actually builds on the ability to just roll base into a tarball!
[...]
adapted for FreeBSD - to offer the base as a gzipped tarball that FreeBSD's pkg can handle.

Not convinced. Turning base into lots of little packages that all update separately will open up the potential for breakage to libcrypt and libc mentioned by cracauer@ and Crivens a couple of posts ago.

cracauer@ said:
But even then, dependency hell in pkg/ports still does not break base.

I'm not so sure. RHEL's cesspit that they call "base" is exactly this setup (base packages, 3rd party packages) and it does tend to break. At the very least pkg-delete -a will need to be made smarter / more complex.

Either way (and so I don't derail this thread further), I am happy to see how it turns out. I actually keep one leg in OpenBSD specifically because I am skeptical of PkgBase. So if the concept of PkgBase does get fixed between now and when it is deployed, then thats great. Otherwise, not too much of a problem either. I just don't really like broken / riced operating systems; they have their place for i.e web appliances; just not for sane workstations.

astyle · 2024-10-29T18:03:33+0000

kpedersen said:
Not convinced. Turning base into lots of little packages that all update separately will open up breakage to libcrypt and libc mentioned by cracauer@ and Crivens a couple of posts ago.

How do you think freebsd-update even works? FreeBSD has all the pieces to make it work, it's just a matter of organizing them in a different way. Even Poudriere is nothing more than scripts that automate stuff like creating a jail and managing the package repos... PkgBase is done in the same manner as Poudriere.

kpedersen · 2024-10-29T18:05:52+0000

astyle said:
How do you think freebsd-update even works?

It works simply and separated from the pkg system (compare against pkg-update(8)). Something that Linux distros all seem to be weak on and something that PkgBase will also compromise.

astyle said:
FreeBSD has all the pieces to make it work, it's just a matter of organizing them in a different way.

Different is not a problem. However based on experience of the different approaches taken by Linux and UNIX over the years, I feel what is currently being proposed by PkgBase is an objectively "worse" way to what we have now. The concept of base tends to do better when it is completely separated from the 3rd party packages. In terms of location *and* tooling. One of my favorite things about Solaris (10) was that it had ~3 different package managers. All completely separate systems so you were very unlikely to run into conflicting versions.

softweyr · 2024-10-29T18:12:58+0000

Hello, my name is Wes, and I'm a FreeBSD Addict.
Oh, wait, this isn't FreeBSD Anonymous?

I started using FreeBSD pretty much as it was created, but officially with 1.0. Remembering keeping your calculator on hand to calculate disk cylinder sizes to do partitioning?

I was able to use FreeBSD professionally from about 1998, when I became a committer, to 2008, and then my career branched in ways that have been challenging but often unrewarding. I even somehow managed to end up on the Core Team from 2002 to 2008, though due to personal reasons (home destroyed by a wildfire) late 2007 on was mostly MIA.

Since then, I've been largely working in the embedded Linux space, with a short bewildering trip though (moderately) big data and web services. I'll elide the rants on the things misguided developers do to Linux to "harden" it for embedding, and just say that as soon as I have breathing room for catching up on stuff I want to do, I'll be back to FreeBSD. I've kept it running on at least one small system all through the years, in various states of upgrade and/or disrepair.

bakul · 2024-10-29T18:21:55+0000

Presumably you can still do make buildworld kernel etc. With the right setup it typically takes a few minutes (unless something changed in the llvm world, which then adds at least an hour).

I stopped using freebsd-update a long time ago as I don't like it downloading gazillion files but I never got around to thinking through the best way to do it (including port updates).