Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD...

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

osp

Guest
Hi,

I still have a dilemma about whether I should move from Linux to FreeBSD. I was always tempted by jails, ZFS and stability which I thought were FreeBSD's virtues. But then I read this about jails:
(mod: url removed)
And yet another rant on FreeBSD release 10 from the same guy here:
(mod: url removed)

And I would appreciate if someone from FreeBSD community could dispute with his arguments here for me.

I would be actually happy on Linux (zfs-on-linux, openvz seems great, hardware support etc.), but recent events (systemd viral destruction of everything unix-like) made me seriously think about migration to more transparent and more unix-like system.

Btw. I tried FreeBSD 10 in VirtualBox and didn't finish configuration due to very odd behaviour in FreeBSD's vim ( pkg install vim), it is somewhat terrible to use, so I stopped for this moment with experimenting. I was determined to follow this guy: https://cooltrainer.org/a-freebsd-desktop-howto/

Many thanks for factual answers ;)
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

osp said:
Hi,
I have still dilemma if I should move from Linux to FreeBSD. I was always tempted by jails, ZFS and stability which I thought were FreeBSD's virtues. But then I read this about jails:
(mod: url removed)
And yet another rant on FreeBSD release 10 from the same guy here:
(mod: url removed)

And I would appreciate if someone from FreeBSD community could dispute with his arguments here for me.
Click to expand...
Site is a known troll. We will not discus it, nor will we allow links back to his page. It's all bullshit (pardon the expression but the subject has been beaten to death numerous times already).
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

SirDice said:
the subject has been beaten to death numerous times already.
Click to expand...

Where? I read all comments (there are not too many of them) on reddit:
(mod: url removed)

and no arguments...just that guy must be bsd-hater - so does he lie in those articles or are those true?
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Well, it seems he is mostly trolling from what I see. I can imagine that bhyve is not working well, because it is experimental, but the other arguments are lies or he has got a very weird kind of hardware. Everyone can construct such a story for a piece of hardware which is not working well (actually yesterday, I could not start the latest Ubuntu installation CD on an Asus laptop and FreeBSD/PC-BSD worked without a problem).

What I want to know about is your problem with vim that I cannot understand. Please be a more exact here what is happening.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

osp said:
Where?
Click to expand...
Here. And most of those threads have eventually been trashed.

This is exactly what the author wants, attention. And by bringing the subject up once again we've fallen into the same trap. Please just ignore the guy. It may take a while but eventually this stuff will be buried deep in the history of the internet.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

nakal said:
the other arguments are lies or he has got a very weird kind of hardware
Click to expand...

I can say that I cannot find piece of evidence for his jail backdoor, which brought down apache.org - and find out this:
(mod: url removed)

So I post question on his article and it is in attachment.

But for a speed: I can compare with Linux Mint (with full blown mate desktop) and just installed FreeBSD 10 in the same VirtualBox on the same machine (i7) and Linux Mint boots to lightdm quicker then freebsd to login prompt.
 

Attachments

  • Výběr_005.png
    Výběr_005.png
    22.6 KB · Views: 1,164
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Some untruths are so blatantly obvious they do not need to be refuted. Repetition does not make them any more true.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

The vim posts have been split into a different topic.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Linux probably does usually boot faster than FreeBSD, but how does everything else work? Linux is now going to systemd, which will make faster boots. However, it seems that some things are getting sacrificed in the name of a faster boot. See, for example, http://boycottsystemd.org

Many Linux distributions are aimed at the desktop user, where speed of booting is more important. FreeBSD's slogan, The power to serve, indicates that it is aimed at being a server O/S. On production machines, you're far more concerned with it booting properly than the speed of booting. (Which is one complaint that many are making about systemd, now that it's found its way into the latest RedHat and CentOS releases, which are more likely to be used by system administrators.)

Speed of booting is not, in this case, an indication of speed of operating system. In the end, I often think that people pull up lots of technical arguments to justify what often seems to be an emotional decision. (Not an original statement on my part--I think the first time I saw similar phrasing was in an old mailing list article about Mutt vs. Pine.) :)

Seriously, try it, see if you like it. It might not be for you, and there's nothing wrong with that either. Obviously, most of us like it or we wouldn't be here, but speed of booting, in my less than humble opinion, is a feature that doesn't necessarily mean quality.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Many years ago, when I first stumbled across that blog, I tried to find out who that anonymous person was. Most people who know what they're talking about don't post a lot of articles without revealing who they are. After a lot of searching and following posts on the mailing lists and some forums, I convinced myself this guy is someone who wanted to be a FreeBSD contributor. He may have actually contributed some code at one time and he wanted to do more. However, what he wanted to contribute was often outrageous to the point where he was ignored. He would rant on the mailing lists about how everyone else was crazy if they didn't do things his way. His ideas were so far out of line that no one would even consider any of his thoughts. This infuriated him.

It was shortly after some incident online (removed his account from the mailing lists?) that this blog appeared.

So my impression became, while he may be technically competent, he directs all that knowledge against the system he feel has wronged him. His rants spew things out that look real but are either false, supposed to work that way, or "who cares?".

So put no effort into reading that thing.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Anyone who complains about the fact that a machine takes too long to boot and shut down (one or two minutes?), most probably has nothing to do in the remaining time.
Click to expand...
Anon
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

The only reason Linux boots quicker than FreeBSD is that they load some parts of the system in parallel, whereas FreeBSD loads sequentially as did Linux originally.

Edit: Does it really hold you back? It is probably less than 1 minute difference.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

I see the same thing about browsers on some forums. People will complain because one browser comes up 10 seconds faster than another so it must be a better browser. That they say it takes 10 seconds (and more) to come up is pretty astounding in itself.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

I personally boot my system only every time I either need to reboot for update or switch to some other OS for gaming purpose. My computer could take 5 to 10 minutes to boot for all I care, once it's done you don't have to do it for a while! In my opinion what's really important is how the system behave after.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

scottro said:
Linux probably does usually boot faster than FreeBSD, but how does everything else work? Linux is now going to systemd, which will make faster boots. However, it seems that some things are getting sacrificed in the name of a faster boot. See, for example, http://boycottsystemd.org

Many Linux distributions are aimed at the desktop user, where speed of booting is more important. FreeBSD's slogan, The power to serve, indicates that it is aimed at being a server O/S. On production machines, you're far more concerned with it booting properly than the speed of booting. (Which is one complaint that many are making about systemd, now that it's found its way into the latest RedHat and CentOS releases, which are more likely to be used by system administrators.)

Speed of booting is not, in this case, an indication of speed of operating system. In the end, I often think that people pull up lots of technical arguments to justify what often seems to be an emotional decision. (Not an original statement on my part--I think the first time I saw similar phrasing was in an old mailing list article about Mutt vs. Pine.) :)

Seriously, try it, see if you like it. It might not be for you, and there's nothing wrong with that either. Obviously, most of us like it or we wouldn't be here, but speed of booting, in my less than humble opinion, is a feature that doesn't necessarily mean quality.
Click to expand...

The boot speed thing: I know, it just was first thing what I noticed. I know about boycottsystemd.org and hope that it will have some results. I hate systemd. If it was just init system then very good, make it stable, make it do one thing and one thing only and properly. But it is with every update more bloated cancer-like thing - I am so affraid that it will became so tight up with linux kernel, that all distros would just be redhat clones in different colors, wallpaper and package system...I don't want to sound just like hater/troll but systemd is wrong in every way possible and redhat want or already seized linux future - systemd is forced on linux users...
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

freethread said:
Anyone who complains about the fact that a machine takes too long to boot and shut down (one or two minutes?), most probably has nothing to do in the remaining time.
Click to expand...
Anon
Click to expand...

Don't take my comment on speed too seriously - I use debian stable with zfs-on-linux, ecryptfs and when I came home I just push the power button and in the meantime change my cloths - my pc boots cca 30s-60s - I never bothered to count...
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Durden said:
The http://boycottsystemd.org/ website is also a major troll. I'm not a systemd fan but every point that site makes is false and the guy goes full retard at the end in his last claim. If we're going to avoid a systemd future we'll need to do so honestly, http://boycottsystemd.org/ is not that type of site.
Click to expand...

That may be, but I installed centos 7 on some machine and read redhat's doc - systemd is all over system, other projects (totally unrelated to it) start to have dependencies on it. Systemd took over udev, it blows up to ship itself with ntp, dhcp and whatever - it is not just init system. But ok, every linux user wants uniform base system for better penetration, support etc. - but its devs are so arrogant, their bugs either throw on other's shoulders or say that it is a feature...and mostly as the whole it kills unix philosophy.

For example the most important thing on any server/pc whatever - logging. Binary log is just so stupid idea and that arrogance/ignorance:
https://www.libreoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64116

But this argue doesn't belong on freebsd forum, so everyone can keep her/his opinion...
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

drhowarddrfine said:
Many years ago, when I first stumbled across that blog, I tried to find out who that anonymous person was. Most people who know what they're talking about don't post a lot of articles without revealing who they are. After a lot of searching and following posts on the mailing lists and some forums, I convinced myself this guy is someone who wanted to be a FreeBSD contributor. He may have actually contributed some code at one time and he wanted to do more. However, what he wanted to contribute was often outrageous to the point where he was ignored. He would rant on the mailing lists about how everyone else was crazy if they didn't do things his way. His ideas were so far out of line that no one would even consider any of his thoughts. This infuriated him.

It was shortly after some incident online (removed his account from the mailing lists?) that this blog appeared.

So my impression became, while he may be technically competent, he directs all that knowledge against the system he feel has wronged him. His rants spew things out that look real but are either false, supposed to work that way, or "who cares?".

So put no effort into reading that thing.
Click to expand...

Man I am really pissed - that post what I did on his page (attachment) - HE DELETED IT! He must be really weirdo...
 

Attachments

  • Výběr_007.png
    Výběr_007.png
    22.6 KB · Views: 1,029
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

bsdkeith said:
The only reason Linux boots quicker than FreeBSD is that they load some parts of the system in parallel, whereas FreeBSD loads sequentially as did Linux originally.

Edit: Does it really hold you back? It is probably less than 1 minute difference.
Click to expand...

No, not at all, I just noticed it - on just installed freebsd, should not be too much of services to start up to begin with, so it just was obvious "flaw"
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

osp said:
that post what I did on his page (attachment) - HE DELETED IT! He must be really weirdo...
Click to expand...

That's another thing. iirc, most of the comments are known to be made by him under different names. At least that's what someone else figured out. Those are as outrageous as his blog and, as you found out, yours will never show unless you state something equally contemptuous.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

osp said:
Man I am really pissed - that post what I did on his page (attachment) - HE DELETED IT!
Click to expand...
This is exactly what he's after. Getting you aggravated and not being able to do anything about it.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

You should always count boot time under the following conditions:
  • Machine is fully booted.
  • User has logged in.
  • All basic applications are started (for me: Firefox, Claws-Mail, Chat-Client)
  • The harddisk is totally quiet and idle.

Check this and you will see how quick FreeBSD is. The second thing is.. you boot only one time a day. And I tell you a third thing: FreeBSD has never shown any problems with booting and I have tried out systemd on many different configurations, all of them showing race conditions during boot phase (How do you see it when you need to boot twice because the keyboard is not initialized when slim is started and you cannot type your username/password? Or NFS shares are not mounted, or you cannot shut down the PC?). Come on... I want a PC that is stable and not a lottery device.
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

nakal said:
You should always count boot time under the following conditions:
  • Machine is fully booted.
  • User has logged in.
  • All basic applications are started (for me: Firefox, Claws-Mail, Chat-Client)
  • The harddisk is totally quiet and idle.

Check this and you will see how quick FreeBSD is. The second thing is.. you boot only one time a day. And I tell you a third thing: FreeBSD has never shown any problems with booting and I have tried out systemd on many different configurations, all of them showing race conditions during boot phase (How do you see it when you need to boot twice because the keyboard is not initialized when slim is started and you cannot type your username/password? Or NFS shares are not mounted, or you cannot shut down the PC?). Come on... I want a PC that is stable and not a lottery device.
Click to expand...

I know, systemd is my primary and probably only reason why I want to switch to FreeBSD. If it was just init system and they (lennart and redhat people) make it stable, cut the arrogance, doesn't make it dependency to other unrelated stuff and throw away journald (systemd binary logging crap), I would not have problem with it that much actually. But that is not the case - on linux, there soon won't be a place to hide from it, unfortunately :(
 
Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD

Recently seen it claimed (from systemd apologists) that BSD users should be 'for' a systemd system as it mirrors BSD design. They believe that Lennarts ideal of creating a base system under the governance of systemd is no different than what we have when using a base system with FreeBSD.
/bonkers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top