What is the future of FreeBSD?

I

Ilovehotdog

What is the future of FreeBSD?
I used to see FreeBSD as a base system much like Arch Linux—one that gives users all the choices but doesn't provide an official desktop environment. Recently, however, FreeBSD 15 announced (and subsequently delayed to 15.1) that it would ship with an official KDE desktop. On the other hand, the KDE project stated this year that it will be dropping support for FreeBSD.
So where does this leave FreeBSD going forward? Will it remain a foundational system that leaves everything to the user, or is it moving toward becoming a more standard, desktop-integrated system like Debian? Could it even evolve into something more akin to Ubuntu, Zorin, or Deepin, with official support for new technologies such as AI?
On a related note, I’d also like to clarify: does FreeBSD actually have a plan to officially support a KDE desktop, rather than leaving users to install or compile it themselves as is currently the case?
 
Ilovehotdog, I get the impression that you're relatively new to FreeBSD. There's a discussion here about the desktop, but one point made several times is that even if it is included, it will just be an option. So, even if it included an *option* for a Wayland desktop, no one has to install it, and can just install an X11 window manager (or a Wayland one if they want) after installation.

Unfortunately, on these forums, we tend to get sidetracked into bikeshed discussions. https://bikeshed.com/ If you're unfamiliar with the term, it refers to rather unimportant discussions where everyone can have an opinion. I
Anyway, FreeBSD is probably more basic than ArchLinux, and even if a desktop does get offered in some release or another, it will be something that can be ignored.
 
scottro said:
Ilovehotdog, I get the impression that you're relatively new to FreeBSD. There's a discussion here about the desktop, but one point made several times is that even if it is included, it will just be an option. So, even if it included an *option* for a Wayland desktop, no one has to install it, and can just install an X11 window manager (or a Wayland one if they want) after installation.

Unfortunately, on these forums, we tend to get sidetracked into bikeshed discussions. https://bikeshed.com/ If you're unfamiliar with the term, it refers to rather unimportant discussions where everyone can have an opinion. I
Anyway, FreeBSD is probably more basic than ArchLinux, and even if a desktop does get offered in some release or another, it will be something that can be ignored.
Click to expand...
Thats like Arch users losing their shit because new ISOs now include installer. You can still install it the Arch way, but they chose to go ape shit crazy anyway.
 
Sincerely, FreeBSD if comparing to a Linux distro is more like Debian server edition, RHEL server edition or Alpine.
  • Server by omission
  • Desktop works fine if you install the relevant packages
  • Reading the documentation is a good idea if you don't want to mess up
In any case, if someone wants a Desktop experience with FreeBSD out of the box and doesn't want to read documentation and/or install binary packages there's always GhostBSD.

As for KDE, I see no issue for FreeBSD in the near/medium term future. Both X11 and Wayland are supported by FreeBSD (in a comparable way to Linux), the only thing that FreeBSD does not have (and thank you very much for that) is SystemD, which only affects the Plasma Login Manager, all the other Login Managers work (i.e. SDDM, LightDM, etc).
 
fahrenheit said:
Sincerely, FreeBSD if comparing to a Linux distro is more like Debian server edition, RHEL server edition or Alpine.
  • Server by omission
  • Desktop works fine if you install the relevant packages
  • Reading the documentation is a good idea if you don't want to mess up
In any case, if someone wants a Desktop experience with FreeBSD out of the box and doesn't want to read documentation and/or install binary packages there's always GhostBSD.

As for KDE, I see no issue for FreeBSD in the near/medium term future. Both X11 and Wayland are supported by FreeBSD (in a comparable way to Linux), the only thing that FreeBSD does not have (and thank you very much for that) is SystemD, which only affects the Plasma Login Manager, all the other Login Managers work (i.e. SDDM, LightDM, etc).
Click to expand...
I'm not following the systemd discussion anymore. What are the critisizers talking about? Now it's related to age verification? Are they trying to close the services startup framework or bake it into hardware as ROM/firmware?
 
MG said:
I'm not following the systemd discussion anymore. What are the critisizers talking about? Now it's related to age verification? Are they trying to close the services startup framework or bake it into hardware as ROM/firmware?
Click to expand...
No systemd will be integrating with virtual terminals. We are the borg of systemd. Resistance i futile.
 
fahrenheit said:
Sincerely, FreeBSD if comparing to a Linux distro is more like Debian server edition, RHEL server edition or Alpine.
  • Server by omission
  • Desktop works fine if you install the relevant packages
  • Reading the documentation is a good idea if you don't want to mess up
In any case, if someone wants a Desktop experience with FreeBSD out of the box and doesn't want to read documentation and/or install binary packages there's always GhostBSD.

As for KDE, I see no issue for FreeBSD in the near/medium term future. Both X11 and Wayland are supported by FreeBSD (in a comparable way to Linux), the only thing that FreeBSD does not have (and thank you very much for that) is SystemD, which only affects the Plasma Login Manager, all the other Login Managers work (i.e. SDDM, LightDM, etc).
Click to expand...
FreeBSD works fine as desktop. Been running for years. You must be hallucinating. Offcourse you need to install x11 if you want to run x11. Offcourse you need to install firefox-esr , if you want firefox. For the unknown there is Ubuntu. But don't break it. Then you can only RE-INSTALL everything. I would prefer Gostbsd as a package i can install on FreeBSD, pulling in necesarry packages. A fork, which added value does it gives. None.
drhowarddrfine said:
To emphasize what scottro said, KDE is not FreeBSD. It's never been part of the installation in the past. If it goes away, that doesn't affect the FreeBSD operating system whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I installed Artix using Calamares. Easy. But i don't know what happened under the hood.
 
From my limited knowledge, FreeBSD is always been focus on being a server grade OS for stability, security and throughput. Hence, GUI applications including desktop will be provided via ports and probably will never be landed onto the base system, which I find it reasonable and logical.

That is why you will find out that FreeBSD kernel + base system all are cli based, following UNIX philosophy. Because is less complicated like GUI that prone to errors. The based tools are proven running with stability and securely in production.

So my personal view is let not compare FreeBSD with Linux or other OSes, which of course tend to fit much broader audiences and requirements due to support by larger corp with thick wallet.

That being said, You need to first accept FreeBSD way of doing things. FreeBSD will always put the power onto the users and up to users how to use it.

For me, I believe is a good things because I learned more.
 
Alain De Vos said:
FreeBSD works fine as desktop. Been running for years. You must be hallucinating. Offcourse you need to install x11 if you want to run x11. Offcourse you need to install firefox-esr , if you want firefox. For the unknown there is Ubuntu. But don't break it. Then you can only RE-INSTALL everything. I would prefer Gostbsd as a package i can install on FreeBSD, pulling in necesarry packages. A fork, which added value does it gives. None.

I installed Artix using Calamares. Easy. But i don't know what happened under the hood.
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood, or read in the diagonal, what I wrote.
I never said that FreeBSD Desktop is not possible, I said that FreeBSD is an OS that by default is geared to servers. If you want to make it a desktop you just need to install the relevant packages and follow the online documentation, the same as taking a Debian server install and use it as a desktop by installing some DE.
 
Alain De Vos, it does seem that X will be here for a long time. Shucks, it'll probably outlast me. There are also various alternatives, Xlibre being the best known, but there are others, including wayback by some alpine people which should (last time I looked), enable you to run xorg window managers and other apps.
On the other hand, if using a default RH workstation, which runs Wayland, you might not even notice the difference. But, like I said, I doubt X is going anywhere soon on FreeBSD.
 
Alain De Vos said:
No systemd will be integrating with virtual terminals. We are the borg of systemd. Resistance i futile.
Click to expand...
What if you start something else after init instead of the usual services configuration including systemd? Are some trying to enforce it by binding it to the default physical console I/O support, like, you get no stdio without systemd?
I'm not using rc.d either. Difference is that you have to know how to bring up everything you need with your own procedure.
 
claudiuschan said:
From my limited knowledge, FreeBSD is always been focus on being a server grade OS for stability, security and throughput. Hence, GUI applications including desktop will be provided via ports and probably will never be landed onto the base system, which I find it reasonable and logical.

That is why you will find out that FreeBSD kernel + base system all are cli based, following UNIX philosophy. Because is less complicated like GUI that prone to errors. The based tools are proven running with stability and securely in production.

So my personal view is let not compare FreeBSD with Linux or other OSes, which of course tend to fit much broader audiences and requirements due to support by larger corp with thick wallet.

That being said, You need to first accept FreeBSD way of doing things. FreeBSD will always put the power onto the users and up to users how to use it.

For me, I believe is a good things because I learned more.
Click to expand...
Compare , we always must do, take the good , the bad ...
 
cracauer@ said:
This is just another doom thread based on a premise that to my knowledge is not true.

Can you link to a statement where KDE says they will not support FreeBSD anymore? (and not their stupid display manager that is systemd integrated, I don't use that anyway)
Click to expand...
Doom , we will all die. But FreeBSD foundation will make sure. Even without systemd. KDE will work. And they will give it desktop as boot install option. Mortals like , me we install, then we do pkg install. Much fuss about nothing.
 
cracauer@ said:
This is just another doom thread based on a premise that to my knowledge is not true.

Can you link to a statement where KDE says they will not support FreeBSD anymore? (and not their stupid display manager that is systemd integrated, I don't use that anyway)
Click to expand...
Google AI:
"As of early 2026, the KDE project has officially dropped support for FreeBSD in the KDE Plasma Login Manager (sddm-kcm) because it requires systemd/logind, which is not supported on FreeBSD. While the login manager is impacted, most other KDE components and applications continue to function on FreeBSD"

It feels like part of the OSS vs proprietary code war. Systemd, age-verification, Rust-kernels, anti-cheat facilities. All seem hostile corporate attempts to seize the authority of the physical owner of a computer.
 
fahrenheit said:
the only thing that FreeBSD does not have (and thank you very much for that) is SystemD, which only affects the Plasma Login Manager, all the other Login Managers work (i.e. SDDM, LightDM, etc).
Click to expand...
About this, let's thank Gleb Popov (arrowd) for working on a crossplatform logind implementation: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=290403#c8.
This way even non-systemd OSes could benefit of software that relies on systemd-logind without systemd itself.
 
Hi
The possibilities of FreeBSD regarding the type of installation a user can use are almost infinite.
It has already been mentioned that the possibility of installing a workstation with KDE is not the only choice (regarding FreeBSD in pure graphical mode).
It is precisely the wide variety of possible installations that is a strength.
For 26 years, FreeBSD has been evolving and offering more and more possibilities.
Personally, I hate KDE, MATE, and XFCE; I only install the latter to have access to certain tools.
Otherwise, my graphical environment is Openbox, Fluxbox, and Fvwm(3).
My connection manager is XDM, with a completely customized interface.
That's all, thank you to all the developers for their work.
 
MG said:
Google AI:
"As of early 2026, the KDE project has officially dropped support for FreeBSD in the KDE Plasma Login Manager (sddm-kcm) because it requires systemd/logind, which is not supported on FreeBSD. While the login manager is impacted, most other KDE components and applications continue to function on FreeBSD"

It feels like part of the OSS vs proprietary code war. Systemd, age-verification, Rust-kernels, anti-cheat facilities. All seem hostile corporate attempts to seize the authority of the physical owner of a computer.
Click to expand...
Who cares about login managers. Ubuntu users ...
Even with "ly" or "gdm" , you can start KDE wayland ...
At no time systemd needed. Trust me i use redcore-linux & artix-linux. They don't have systemd. But KDE works fine. And will.

& as far as i know no rust in "linux zen kernel" nor in "freebsd kernel". You sound like A.I.

Future, systemd on linux will integrate with virtual terminals. But FreeBSD , will have solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top