I run the older BSD and it's pretty great with a good group of users that are helpful as the setup can be somewhat cumbersome at first. Great Video DJWares! It good to see Free BSD to get some cool recognition amongst the zoo of linix distros! ❤🎉
It was the first unix system I sort of used in 97-98 because university email run on this so first apps i knew were pine and pico. But I wonder how useful it is today. I tried it briefly for two days and failed. It feels even harder than Slackware which I used before 2000 but it's more similar to it than Linux today. I had several issues with it: on old notebook I was unable to stop fan from running at full speed. Wifi worked only in one mode (2.4ghz/b?). On my computer I was unable to run network card, usb wifi dongle (no surprise, it does not work even with 5.x Linux kernels) and chance of successfully running xserver with xfce was like 50/50. Then exFat on USB drives is not supported. At this point I gave up. I could have used some small SD card with FAT and compile exFAT and network card drivers, but it was too much. I tried it in VirtualBox, it boots like 4 times longer than Linux, but I was able to run XServer and KDE on it. Now I tried it after maybe 8 months, run pkg update, it failed in resolving some dependencies. I would like to try it because of nostalgia and it's somewhat easier to manage than Linux in some ways, on the other hand it likely requires certain, very common hardware and it's own ecosystem - my other issue is that I have a few services in docker containers.
I like FreeBSD. It's a well designed and architected system. Unlike what feels like a messy hodgepodge of various tools and trinkets such as Linux ecosystem. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing on Linux, as there are some benefits in its crowd sourced development approach. But I feel that if you want a serious, reasonable, stable, well organized system FreeBSD is better.
@@jensputzlocher8345 From my understanding, the XNU is a hybrid kernel but otherwise you're right! Must've gotten it mixed up while thinking about its POSIX compliance 😵😵
Does FreeBSD work with Ksh? I was trained in UNIX at AT&T Bell Labs in Denver way back in the late 80s. Playing with this would bring back some fond memories as the first UNIX system rhat I was the Administrator for was a pre V.4.0 that ran a customized merging of both AT&T UNIX & BSD UNIX. Unless you read the man files included, you were never sure if a command was AT&T or BSD. They even had front ends to each command's parameters to match either AT&T or BSD. The funny thing is is that I didn't find the flag to activate the Front Ends until I had been creating sh scripts for more then two(2) years so I never used it Unfortunately, for my UNIX usage anyway, I had to switch to MS Windows when I started writing custom software. As my target clients were Law Offices & manufacturers of clothing & vertical blinds (what a combo). My accounting software really only needed the GUI modified for each client and I never had to change the GUI for my manufacturing software.
Yes FreeBSD supports "ksh", there are several variants of it, of course the original versions of ksh were I believe closed source, the different packages in FreeBSD are all public domain versions and attempt to replicate the functions of the original. I tried out ksh for a time, and always drifted back to sh. ast-ksh and ksh are closer to the AT&T ksh. However, I am not expert in ksh, so would be hard for me to comment on completeness. And yeah I remember running into differences in commands as well with System V version 4.x. Nice story on your journey through software development with different clients. Thanks for sharing that
Thanks for the great look at this, :) FreeBSD is one of the systems I used a lot during the late 90's and into the late 2000's,(along with the other opensource BSD's(specifically Open and Net) , there were a few more along with the forks from the 4.4 and 5.3 changes, :) don't quote my version numbers please, lol been a while, hehe
Thank you for covering this release! FreeBSD is an awesome OS, I just wish it had better support for newer laptops. The new iwlwifi driver is a step in the right direction. But there are still issues with suspend/resume, power management and wifi on many models.
Welcome, and yes I agree, the more of us who switch over to these platforms the more interest there will be in getting drivers to us by the hardware makers (IMHO)
Been running FBSD since 3.5 and still running it as one of my VM's and TrueNAS core for my storage server. Solid overview, once you get used to the installer it's a quick and painless install and ports/pkg is as well. Support for 1024 cores might seem crazy but ARM can do 384 in a dual socket system so not as crazy as it seems.
Thank´s for giving a BSD some much deserved attention. I think most Linux users don´t even know it exists. And we need to change that. It´s a good alternative to Linux for 99% of the users. I once heard that "Linux is for people who hates Windows, BSD is for people who love UNIX". Anyway, thanks for a great video as always.
Interesting tidbit of info @ 5:28. Im going to dig a bit deeper into GPU pass through. I rely on it in Linux 10:34 TiL Linux compatibility layer? Gosh, I think I gotta spin up a BSD VM and learn a lot more!
4:40 "I am held accountable..[sic].. I have to give them back" No. No. And no. You do NOT have to give changes back. You have to pass them along to anyone you distribute binaries, of you modified version, to. You do not have to contact the official maintainers in any capacity. And if you never distribute your changes [outside of your organization] you're not required to lift a god damn finger. This is a VITAL distinction. In BSD freedom it's the software itself that is free. In GNU freedom it's the user who is free, and the GNU license prohibits you from taking that freedom away from others if you redistribute the software . But you're ONLY bound by the license if you distribute binaries of the modified software. And you're only obligated towards the one(s) you distribute it to. Nothing more. Nothing less. And lastly: ZFS is under the CDDL license which is pretty much identical to GPL, except incompatible, so FreeBSD is actually not 100% "free" according to their own definition.
The eternal difference between those who think forced freedom is more free than complete freedom. BSD is so free you can make it unfree if you want. Michael W Lucas once said something like this on the subject that Microsoft took OpenBSD´s ip-stack and close sourced it: "Imagine the amount of human suffering if they (MS) made it themselves". That´s what the BSD license is about. It´s free like in do exactly whatever you like. So if you look, there are tons of BSD code running all over the place in the closed world. And the end result is better for all of us. And those closed companies wouldn´t open source it anyway. So let them have some good stuff instead. It´s the least worst. BSD is hero´s in the silence while GNU is more about shouting about it, in my "humble" opinion. :)
@@michaelheimbrand5424 A) FreeBSD has one of its most important features (ZFS) under a license that is more restrictive than GPL (the CDDL) so the whole argument went down the drain a long time ago. B) If someone expects to sell me back code I wrote I want a cut of all sales. C) The rare exceptions where it is vitally important that everyone runs the same code are the projects where companies actually pitch in. You'll see MS, Oracle, SAS, IBM, Apple, etc patches in quite many of the reference implementations by standards governing bodies (Khronos, IEEE, etc) because they are... represented in the standard governing bodies themselves. You can beat this dead horse until the cows come home every time this topic comes up all you will... Doesn't change the fact that my original comment was about a misconception about GPL/CDDL and every other Copyleft licences: You're not required to push chances upstream.
@@edgarmatzinger9742 The GPL and LGPL licenses are some of the most easily read licences ever. No twisted legal language where the words don't mean what they usually mean. And they spell it out quite clearly: 1) You can do anything you want, for your own personal (or organisational) use without even accepting the license. 2) Only when you (re-)distribute the code do you signify that you accept the license, and the license requires that you pass the code along under the exact same terms you got it, no more and no less. Really, you should spend the 10 minutes or so it takes reading it. It's quite the elegant "hack" on copyright law.
I was going to comment something similar, except that the GNU p. license allows you to distribute binaries freely and give an offer to get the sources somewhere, then you only have to produce the sources to those who received binaries from you AND asks for them within 5 years.
When FreeBSD gets better support for Wayland and things start to "just work" more, Linux sysadmins and hardcore users will have a great alternative! Of course, I'm not saying FreeBSD is not already great, don't want to start a "war". All I'm saying is that at this point, a lot of things needs tweaking and to spend time on them so for a lot of people, there is no point to jump.
Well the folks working on FreeBSD are trying to make things easier for us and I think that is always a good thing, thanks godnyx177 for sharing a point of view many miss
@@CyberGizmo I'm glad that you found my comment entraining, and I also want to thank you for sharing your thoughts! FreeBSD's devs are working hard, and I'm very helpful as the more time pass, the more I am afraid of Linux's future and how much it can be trusted from both a Stability standpoint and from the Security one!
A minor note @8:40, KDE Plasma (the desktop environment) doesn’t have YY.MM version numbers. You might be thinking of KDE Gear, the application collection?
Did you manage to get the SPICE video mode working so you could exit the window (without shutting down the guest?) I'm having the same issue with FreeBSD 14.
@@CyberGizmo Thank you. I’m an aspiring techno enthusiast in my mid 40’s with a technical background from the late 90’s. With my retirement from the Navy on the horizon, I long to learn much about *nix system at a low level moving up. Not for money, it likes or subs or subscribes. Purely academic at best. Just an enthusiast. Great videos!
apple is killing off old hardware and open core legacy patcher almost bricked my Mac Pro. Ghost BSD for me! I turned to BSD sort of as a last resort because OCLP Mac OS and Linux Mint wouldn't function. BSD saved my hardware from becoming useless .
That's awesome, I never thought that freebsd could save mac hardware. I'm very happy for you. I'm the opposite, I bought a mini PC just to use Freebsd. Because I wanted to get away from Linux, though I still use it for gaming and some applications I don't use it as a daily driver anymore.
I tried to run FreeBSD in virtualbox and it's basically impossible to install guest additions + a desktop env. Just way too many weird bugs and errors during the whole process. I got so frustrated after a couple days that I just ended up deleting it and doing it on Arch instead, which was a breeze by comparison.
I run Proxmox on the Debian version it comes with, the server is a 12th Gen Intel CPU, Fedora is running on my Workstation, that is a Mac Mini M1 running Ashai / Fedora 39
@@CyberGizmo Oh my, absolute NEWBIE here, can't even tell which 'thingy' to download, release or stable etc, very confusing, FreeBSD looks like something I WANT . . . OK so you're saying Proxmox is actually an OS type, right?
@@savagepro9060 Proxmox is a Virtual Machine manager, I always use it to test out new versions of software, I would suggest installing on hardware from my experience it works out the best, I had to fiddle around quite a bit with the Virtual machine,
I used to run security applications in 2000s on the Free BSD platform until CentOS came along. Free BSD was extremely stable and could be locked down pretty nicely from Security perspective.
I'm still waiting on building my pfSense because I wanted to build it over 10Gbps and unfortunately the only network card I could find with 4 ports so I could plug our switches into in it and everythig but the only card I could find that large on ebay was like 400 bucks and the time and I just won't be able to justify that kind of expense for quite some time. eventually though. This is necessary because my ISP is alreasy giving me 2gbps, it will keep getting faster.
@@CyberGizmo Will do! Honestly I only started looking into it becauseI figured out how to get Gentoo up and made a breakthrough in my own understanding of it by learning how to edit the ./xintrc file to bring it up into XFCE, and am looking into dwm and suckless. But the big thing was my ISP took away a lot of power for itself and I'd like to be able to control what our DNS servers were by default and point them at cloudflare but also my um, subscription to OVPN has support for pfSense but not Gentoo linux so I was like if I want to leverage my VPN while using Gentoo to do things like scan with nmap I wouldn't be ble to do that unless I implement a router set it up to use ovpn and flip my modem over into bridged mode and use it. so I bought a 500 dollar box that's sitting in a corner somewhere waiting on this network card. my VPN provider is suiper good too, they don't store anytthing to disk other than the software needed to run it so there's no logging and that claim has been proven in court.
The kernel supporting 1024 cores is notable, actually, as Linux only supports 256. Ampere's latest ARM chips break that limit and have had to submit patches to increase the limit to 512 (still too low imo!)
on x86_64 the Linux kernel supported thousands of cores since like 14 years ago. RHEL 8 and 9 support 8000 cores, so whatever you said is total nonsense. Linux is the one running the supercomputing clusters of the world with thousands of CPUs not FreeBSD.
@@mrb180 ah, i think this limitation was for ARM, and specifically distro kernels which dont enable the flag for allowing higher core counts by default. Cant link but check news for "Ampere one core count linux kernel"
no need to put a hostname in the form of a domain in this version? freebsd is great. for my purposes i like openbsd more. wouldn't use any of these for desktop though.
boy folks sure do get touchy about OS's. my point with installing Ghost BSD on a Mac Pro 5.1 was that Apple Sonoma is most likely the last version of Mac OSX my computer will run. I'm simply trying to future proof the computer and BSD just happened to install and run unlike Linux . that's is ...period. lol
why do people poo poo each others choice of OS? I really don't understand why people argue over software. At least it works and I can keep it up to date .lol
Beats me @jcammeron2937...I thought that was the whole point of so many choices you can find the one or ones that works for you...I run a bunch of OS's from FreeBSD, to MacOS to Linux in my lab. And yep keeping the systems up to date is better than putting the box in the land fill.
at around 4:44 DJ is totally wrong if you modify the source code you can keep it to YOURSELF (this could be individual or organization) only if you provide it to others you must share your modifications ... You can also distribute it BUT IT MUST BE UNDER the same license GPL I hate when people purporting themselves some expert and "explain" GNU/GPL and they are just plain wrong, and just spread rumor and misconceptions. PLEASE DJ READ the license or DO NOT TALK ABOUT it.
I dont know anything about KDE, because i use XFCE. And you really can give XFCE almost any style: Currently my desktop looks like MacOSX 10.6 Snow Leopard.
Whatever. "Linux" most commonly refers to full system, as you describe for FreeBSD. If I tell my camera club "I run Fedoras," the members would be looking for a hat to photograph. If I say, "I run Linux.| I will get about 100% recognition. In practice, however you define "Linux," everyone installs a complete system, based off RHEL/Fedora, Debian or a handful of other distros. Even peole hacking on the deep depths of the linux kernel, where if it actually boots they want to find quick and easy ways to break it. Your comparison of install times isn't wellfounded. A typical Linux install includes a full working desktop, commonly featuring Gnome. If I want to fork the Linux kernel, there is no requirement for me to contribute my changes to the official kernel. I do have to publish those changes as soon as I start distributing the binaries, and the Linux folk are at liberty to take my changes and incorporate them into the official kernel, or not. For me as a user, I prefer "no secrets." If I fork the FreeBSD kernel, I can keep my changes secret. As a software distributor, I might prefer my little secrets.
FreeBSD14 is the worse version so far with good chance for the user not to be able to setup graphic desktop on older computers due to incompatibilities between drivers and xorg ABI version. There's no info what is compatible with what, no info how to eventually downgrade xorg to work properly with available drivers. FBSD14 comes also with utmost stupidity - lack of portsnap in basic install. A lot of unnecessary tricks are required to install proper ports tree. As for me - a failure, there were no such problems with older versions. Result - using Ubuntu instead, waiting for new version from branch 13.x.
A lot of nitpicking at linux. Makes your video unbelievable. And 1024 CPU core support? So what? Who has a system with 1024 CPU cores at home? Or at work? And are you claiming that Solaris is a BSD derivative (hint: It's not).
SunOS was BSD based. Bill Joy was IIRC involved in the Berkley UNIX / BSD. When they changed the name to Solaris, I think they went for SysV. Did DJ even mention Solaris? And what do you mean by "nitpicking"? If I have made the video there would have been a lot of nitpicking of Linux. FreeBSD is probably one of the best if you even care about the UNIX philosophy. Compared to any of the modern BSD´s Linux has basically become Windows. But that´s just my (not so) humble opinion. :)
@@michaelheimbrand5424 You seem to be conflating the GUI of linux (which is available on BSD too) to be the pinnacle of linux. You have a choice of GUI's which one can run on linux. KDE, XFCE, Mate, to name a few. And yes, gnome is way to bloated. But, it's relatively easy to use. All *my* linux servers are text based only. And yes, SunOS was BSD-based. And I'm not defending linux, nor am I a linux fan. And DJ was complaining about GPL being to restrictive. As if each and every package available for linux is GPL'ed.
I didn't mention Solaris except as the source for the Trusted components of FreeBSD and as the source for OpenBSM. However Solaris does have BSD code in it (it is an officially licensed UNIX OS) and is based on SysV.4 (the short hand) for what we called this: In the spring of 1988, AT&T took the standardization a step further. First, it collaborated with SCO to merge System V and Xenix into System V/386. Next, it sought collaboration with Sun Microsystems (vendor of the 4.2BSD derivative SunOS and its Network File System) to merge System V, BSD/SunOS and Xenix into a single unified Unix, which would become System V Release 4. I know, I worked for AT&T Data Systems Group in 1988.
I really enjoy you YT channel BTW. I really like your non biased point of view. Also there is not much out there on BSD except maybe for Robonuggie.
I run the older BSD and it's pretty great with a good group of users that are helpful as the setup can be somewhat cumbersome at first. Great Video DJWares! It good to see Free BSD to get some cool recognition amongst the zoo of linix distros! ❤🎉
Most welcome, I am happy they are still around!
It was the first unix system I sort of used in 97-98 because university email run on this so first apps i knew were pine and pico. But I wonder how useful it is today. I tried it briefly for two days and failed. It feels even harder than Slackware which I used before 2000 but it's more similar to it than Linux today. I had several issues with it: on old notebook I was unable to stop fan from running at full speed. Wifi worked only in one mode (2.4ghz/b?). On my computer I was unable to run network card, usb wifi dongle (no surprise, it does not work even with 5.x Linux kernels) and chance of successfully running xserver with xfce was like 50/50. Then exFat on USB drives is not supported. At this point I gave up. I could have used some small SD card with FAT and compile exFAT and network card drivers, but it was too much. I tried it in VirtualBox, it boots like 4 times longer than Linux, but I was able to run XServer and KDE on it. Now I tried it after maybe 8 months, run pkg update, it failed in resolving some dependencies.
I would like to try it because of nostalgia and it's somewhat easier to manage than Linux in some ways, on the other hand it likely requires certain, very common hardware and it's own ecosystem - my other issue is that I have a few services in docker containers.
18 tasks running? FreeBSD just became a valid option
I like FreeBSD. It's a well designed and architected system. Unlike what feels like a messy hodgepodge of various tools and trinkets such as Linux ecosystem. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing on Linux, as there are some benefits in its crowd sourced development approach. But I feel that if you want a serious, reasonable, stable, well organized system FreeBSD is better.
This was a really good one. Haven't ever seen any sort of BSD in action before. Really cool!
Haven't you ever seen MacOSX? It's kernel is a kind of BSD.
@@jensputzlocher8345 From my understanding, the XNU is a hybrid kernel but otherwise you're right! Must've gotten it mixed up while thinking about its POSIX compliance 😵😵
@@jensputzlocher8345The usage experience is completely different. people use Android phones every day doesn’t mean people know how to use gnu linux😅
Does FreeBSD work with Ksh? I was trained in UNIX at AT&T Bell Labs in Denver way back in the late 80s. Playing with this would bring back some fond memories as the first UNIX system rhat I was the Administrator for was a pre V.4.0 that ran a customized merging of both AT&T UNIX & BSD UNIX. Unless you read the man files included, you were never sure if a command was AT&T or BSD. They even had front ends to each command's parameters to match either AT&T or BSD. The funny thing is is that I didn't find the flag to activate the Front Ends until I had been creating sh scripts for more then two(2) years so I never used it
Unfortunately, for my UNIX usage anyway, I had to switch to MS Windows when I started writing custom software. As my target clients were Law Offices & manufacturers of clothing & vertical blinds (what a combo). My accounting software really only needed the GUI modified for each client and I never had to change the GUI for my manufacturing software.
Yes FreeBSD supports "ksh", there are several variants of it, of course the original versions of ksh were I believe closed source, the different packages in FreeBSD are all public domain versions and attempt to replicate the functions of the original. I tried out ksh for a time, and always drifted back to sh. ast-ksh and ksh are closer to the AT&T ksh. However, I am not expert in ksh, so would be hard for me to comment on completeness. And yeah I remember running into differences in commands as well with System V version 4.x. Nice story on your journey through software development with different clients. Thanks for sharing that
Thanks for the great look at this, :) FreeBSD is one of the systems I used a lot during the late 90's and into the late 2000's,(along with the other opensource BSD's(specifically Open and Net) , there were a few more along with the forks from the 4.4 and 5.3 changes, :) don't quote my version numbers please, lol been a while, hehe
Such a nice surprise!
With a username like yours I can understand your enthusiasm! Indeed I too found this a great surprise 🤓❤
Thank you for covering this release! FreeBSD is an awesome OS, I just wish it had better support for newer laptops. The new iwlwifi driver is a step in the right direction. But there are still issues with suspend/resume, power management and wifi on many models.
Welcome, and yes I agree, the more of us who switch over to these platforms the more interest there will be in getting drivers to us by the hardware makers (IMHO)
Been running FBSD since 3.5 and still running it as one of my VM's and TrueNAS core for my storage server. Solid overview, once you get used to the installer it's a quick and painless install and ports/pkg is as well. Support for 1024 cores might seem crazy but ARM can do 384 in a dual socket system so not as crazy as it seems.
Given enough time, we will look back at 1024 cores and laugh...
Love this guy already. Subbed
Thank´s for giving a BSD some much deserved attention. I think most Linux users don´t even know it exists. And we need to change that. It´s a good alternative to Linux for 99% of the users. I once heard that "Linux is for people who hates Windows, BSD is for people who love UNIX". Anyway, thanks for a great video as always.
A Great review of a Great OS, Thank You.
You're welcome!
FreeBSD rules. Glad to see the iwlwifi driver - it's what my motherboard's integrated wifi chip uses.
Cool man
Interesting tidbit of info @ 5:28. Im going to dig a bit deeper into GPU pass through. I rely on it in Linux
10:34 TiL Linux compatibility layer? Gosh, I think I gotta spin up a BSD VM and learn a lot more!
4:40 "I am held accountable..[sic].. I have to give them back" No. No. And no. You do NOT have to give changes back. You have to pass them along to anyone you distribute binaries, of you modified version, to. You do not have to contact the official maintainers in any capacity. And if you never distribute your changes [outside of your organization] you're not required to lift a god damn finger.
This is a VITAL distinction. In BSD freedom it's the software itself that is free. In GNU freedom it's the user who is free, and the GNU license prohibits you from taking that freedom away from others if you redistribute the software . But you're ONLY bound by the license if you distribute binaries of the modified software. And you're only obligated towards the one(s) you distribute it to. Nothing more. Nothing less.
And lastly: ZFS is under the CDDL license which is pretty much identical to GPL, except incompatible, so FreeBSD is actually not 100% "free" according to their own definition.
Yes, this was my idea too.
The eternal difference between those who think forced freedom is more free than complete freedom. BSD is so free you can make it unfree if you want. Michael W Lucas once said something like this on the subject that Microsoft took OpenBSD´s ip-stack and close sourced it:
"Imagine the amount of human suffering if they (MS) made it themselves".
That´s what the BSD license is about. It´s free like in do exactly whatever you like. So if you look, there are tons of BSD code running all over the place in the closed world. And the end result is better for all of us. And those closed companies wouldn´t open source it anyway. So let them have some good stuff instead. It´s the least worst.
BSD is hero´s in the silence while GNU is more about shouting about it, in my "humble" opinion. :)
@@michaelheimbrand5424 A) FreeBSD has one of its most important features (ZFS) under a license that is more restrictive than GPL (the CDDL) so the whole argument went down the drain a long time ago.
B) If someone expects to sell me back code I wrote I want a cut of all sales.
C) The rare exceptions where it is vitally important that everyone runs the same code are the projects where companies actually pitch in. You'll see MS, Oracle, SAS, IBM, Apple, etc patches in quite many of the reference implementations by standards governing bodies (Khronos, IEEE, etc) because they are... represented in the standard governing bodies themselves.
You can beat this dead horse until the cows come home every time this topic comes up all you will... Doesn't change the fact that my original comment was about a misconception about GPL/CDDL and every other Copyleft licences: You're not required to push chances upstream.
@@edgarmatzinger9742 The GPL and LGPL licenses are some of the most easily read licences ever. No twisted legal language where the words don't mean what they usually mean. And they spell it out quite clearly:
1) You can do anything you want, for your own personal (or organisational) use without even accepting the license.
2) Only when you (re-)distribute the code do you signify that you accept the license, and the license requires that you pass the code along under the exact same terms you got it, no more and no less.
Really, you should spend the 10 minutes or so it takes reading it. It's quite the elegant "hack" on copyright law.
I was going to comment something similar, except that the GNU p. license allows you to distribute binaries freely and give an offer to get the sources somewhere, then you only have to produce the sources to those who received binaries from you AND asks for them within 5 years.
DJ Ware on the mic!
Drop that hard bsd!
Fucking love how you handle your videos
Seems there is a nasty bug in OpenZFS 2.2 causing loss of data when operations like block copy is done.
OpenZFS 2.2.2 was just released to fix this bug ;)
@@godnyx117 has FreeBSD adopted the patches though?
@@breadmoth6443 I do not know about that. But even if it didn't, it probably will in the next 2-3 days.
When FreeBSD gets better support for Wayland and things start to "just work" more, Linux sysadmins and hardcore users will have a great alternative!
Of course, I'm not saying FreeBSD is not already great, don't want to start a "war". All I'm saying is that at this point, a lot of things needs tweaking and to spend time on them so for a lot of people, there is no point to jump.
Well the folks working on FreeBSD are trying to make things easier for us and I think that is always a good thing, thanks godnyx177 for sharing a point of view many miss
@@CyberGizmo I'm glad that you found my comment entraining, and I also want to thank you for sharing your thoughts!
FreeBSD's devs are working hard, and I'm very helpful as the more time pass, the more I am afraid of Linux's future and how much it can be trusted from both a Stability standpoint and from the Security one!
What's the use of Wayland exactly? I think it's overrated by people who believe everybody runs a full desktop suite like KDE...
@@manuell3505 I don't want to star a Wayland vs X11 (xorg) war.
I just use Wayland, that's all.
I have Ghost BSD on a Mac Pro 5.1
A minor note @8:40, KDE Plasma (the desktop environment) doesn’t have YY.MM version numbers. You might be thinking of KDE Gear, the application collection?
well I read them right off the pkg search command...so apparently FreeBSD uses them
Obrigado por responder essas perguntas.
Muy bienvenido
Many thanks for the presentation on FreeBSD.
I think it uses Gpt disk partitioning approach
Yes it does!
Did you manage to get the SPICE video mode working so you could exit the window (without shutting down the guest?) I'm having the same issue with FreeBSD 14.
haven't tried it recently been working on other stuff for the channel, and so it goes.
Wish theyd come out with a package manager like apt or yum which can seamlessly upgrade everything from one release to the next
Interesting that they claim risc-v support. I wonder how it performs.
Well, every year it's going to improve. So maybe it's too young to actually shine yet.
Neatly presented. Thank you DJ Ware. BTW, Does anybody know the name to the outro music playing during the last 15 seconds?
Thank you @chickywilly, Its been a year since I put that music into the outro and I have slept since then, but I'll see if I can find it.
What DE are you using? Gnome?
I use KDE, but I benchmark whatever DE is the flagship for the distro, most of time its GNOME.
@@CyberGizmo Thank you. I’m an aspiring techno enthusiast in my mid 40’s with a technical background from the late 90’s. With my retirement from the Navy on the horizon, I long to learn much about *nix system at a low level moving up.
Not for money, it likes or subs or subscribes. Purely academic at best. Just an enthusiast.
Great videos!
@@knoxduder Thank you and thank for your service
apple is killing off old hardware and open core legacy patcher almost bricked my Mac Pro. Ghost BSD for me! I turned to BSD sort of as a last resort because OCLP Mac OS and Linux Mint wouldn't function. BSD saved my hardware from becoming useless .
That's awesome, I never thought that freebsd could save mac hardware. I'm very happy for you. I'm the opposite, I bought a mini PC just to use Freebsd. Because I wanted to get away from Linux, though I still use it for gaming and some applications I don't use it as a daily driver anymore.
@@MitchellJBridges Both macOS and FreeBSD share a lot of code, actually.
@@Noodles.FreeUkraine Mac is proprietary software so it's worse. But at least it's better than windows.
I tried to run FreeBSD in virtualbox and it's basically impossible to install guest additions + a desktop env. Just way too many weird bugs and errors during the whole process. I got so frustrated after a couple days that I just ended up deleting it and doing it on Arch instead, which was a breeze by comparison.
What am I seeing there, you running proxmox on Fedora?
I run Proxmox on the Debian version it comes with, the server is a 12th Gen Intel CPU, Fedora is running on my Workstation, that is a Mac Mini M1 running Ashai / Fedora 39
@@CyberGizmo Oh my, absolute NEWBIE here, can't even tell which 'thingy' to download, release or stable etc, very confusing, FreeBSD looks like something I WANT . . . OK so you're saying Proxmox is actually an OS type, right?
@@savagepro9060 Proxmox is a Virtual Machine manager, I always use it to test out new versions of software, I would suggest installing on hardware from my experience it works out the best, I had to fiddle around quite a bit with the Virtual machine,
@@CyberGizmo thank you
I used to run security applications in 2000s on the Free BSD platform until CentOS came along. Free BSD was extremely stable and could be locked down pretty nicely from Security perspective.
big performance jumps!
Keep going old man!
I'm not much of a fan of the alternative :)
18:18 lol, someone discovered the hell that is scrollback on their default shell or whatever... have to SSH in, joy.
That's why they are called terminals LOL
4:23 You dont need to share changes in code under GNU license. As long, You dont share binary compiled from this modified code.
bullshit, went through the legal system on that one...they do not agree with your opinion
@@CyberGizmo so if I have modified Linux kernel on my personal laptop, then I need to share this couple lines of code? I dont think so.
Can you explain Wasm to us?
I could not boot BSD on my NUC.
I'm still waiting on building my pfSense because I wanted to build it over 10Gbps and unfortunately the only network card I could find with 4 ports so I could plug our switches into in it and everythig but the only card I could find that large on ebay was like 400 bucks and the time and I just won't be able to justify that kind of expense for quite some time. eventually though. This is necessary because my ISP is alreasy giving me 2gbps, it will keep getting faster.
I would like to know how this turns out for you, keep us posted, please!
@@CyberGizmo Will do! Honestly I only started looking into it becauseI figured out how to get Gentoo up and made a breakthrough in my own understanding of it by learning how to edit the ./xintrc file to bring it up into XFCE, and am looking into dwm and suckless. But the big thing was my ISP took away a lot of power for itself and I'd like to be able to control what our DNS servers were by default and point them at cloudflare but also my um, subscription to OVPN has support for pfSense but not Gentoo linux so I was like if I want to leverage my VPN while using Gentoo to do things like scan with nmap I wouldn't be ble to do that unless I implement a router set it up to use ovpn and flip my modem over into bridged mode and use it. so I bought a 500 dollar box that's sitting in a corner somewhere waiting on this network card. my VPN provider is suiper good too, they don't store anytthing to disk other than the software needed to run it so there's no logging and that claim has been proven in court.
The kernel supporting 1024 cores is notable, actually, as Linux only supports 256. Ampere's latest ARM chips break that limit and have had to submit patches to increase the limit to 512 (still too low imo!)
on x86_64 the Linux kernel supported thousands of cores since like 14 years ago. RHEL 8 and 9 support 8000 cores, so whatever you said is total nonsense. Linux is the one running the supercomputing clusters of the world with thousands of CPUs not FreeBSD.
@@mrb180 ah, i think this limitation was for ARM, and specifically distro kernels which dont enable the flag for allowing higher core counts by default. Cant link but check news for "Ampere one core count linux kernel"
I am waitting for FreeBSD 14.1
I am aware of DJ Ware.
freebsd-update time.
No IPv6? :(
well I did turn it on for my laptop version...:)
no need to put a hostname in the form of a domain in this version?
freebsd is great. for my purposes i like openbsd more. wouldn't use any of these for desktop though.
nope works without the domain, openbsd is where all of the security features for the bsd's came from so not a bad choice, and their songs are awesome.
👍
boy folks sure do get touchy about OS's. my point with installing Ghost BSD on a Mac Pro 5.1 was that Apple Sonoma is most likely the last version of Mac OSX my computer will run. I'm simply trying to future proof the computer and BSD just happened to install and run unlike Linux . that's is ...period. lol
Using FreeBSD/riscv64 13.2 inside the QEMU emulator.
Thank you, @JackBender. Makes sense.
11:55
Love from China.
why do people poo poo each others choice of OS? I really don't understand why people argue over software. At least it works and I can keep it up to date .lol
Beats me @jcammeron2937...I thought that was the whole point of so many choices you can find the one or ones that works for you...I run a bunch of OS's from FreeBSD, to MacOS to Linux in my lab. And yep keeping the systems up to date is better than putting the box in the land fill.
@@CyberGizmo yes sir!
I was born on twelfth of Feb. So now you know how old I am.
„Much faster than Linux“
Based on what?
Huh? Oh you mean the installer...yeah its faster, way faster to install than Linux is
Proof
at around 4:44 DJ is totally wrong if you modify the source code you can keep it to YOURSELF (this could be individual or organization) only if you provide it to others you must share your modifications ... You can also distribute it BUT IT MUST BE UNDER the same license GPL I hate when people purporting themselves some expert and "explain" GNU/GPL and they are just plain wrong, and just spread rumor and misconceptions. PLEASE DJ READ the license or DO NOT TALK ABOUT it.
So license is why Sony do not need resale their Play Station operating system. Sad.
Must have ethernet to install wifi drivers good luck if
That's why I use an Intel WiFi card, less problems for both Linux and BSD
Haha, the presenter is the kind of old dude that uses this system. Sadly me too
There is a cure for old age....a good hobby :)
they should give it a MacOS style KDE theme out of the box with a global menu. people generally feel more at home with MacOS interfaces than Gnome.
I dont know anything about KDE, because i use XFCE. And you really can give XFCE almost any style: Currently my desktop looks like MacOSX 10.6 Snow Leopard.
MacOS shows HEIC thumbnails but Windows hasn't dumbed down its GUI enough to be inferior yet.
DJ, Too much switch back and forth from your person with ppt.
Disagree with you sir. Video is well put together he's just putting it out for our information in an easy intake format.
"modern" :)
Whatever. "Linux" most commonly refers to full system, as you describe for FreeBSD. If I tell my camera club "I run Fedoras," the members would be looking for a hat to photograph. If I say, "I run Linux.| I will get about 100% recognition. In practice, however you define "Linux," everyone installs a complete system, based off RHEL/Fedora, Debian or a handful of other distros. Even peole hacking on the deep depths of the linux kernel, where if it actually boots they want to find quick and easy ways to break it.
Your comparison of install times isn't wellfounded. A typical Linux install includes a full working desktop, commonly featuring Gnome.
If I want to fork the Linux kernel, there is no requirement for me to contribute my changes to the official kernel. I do have to publish those changes as soon as I start distributing the binaries, and the Linux folk are at liberty to take my changes and incorporate them into the official kernel, or not. For me as a user, I prefer "no secrets."
If I fork the FreeBSD kernel, I can keep my changes secret. As a software distributor, I might prefer my little secrets.
FreeBSD14 is the worse version so far with good chance for the user not to be able to setup graphic desktop on older computers due to incompatibilities between drivers and xorg ABI version.
There's no info what is compatible with what, no info how to eventually downgrade xorg to work properly with available drivers.
FBSD14 comes also with utmost stupidity - lack of portsnap in basic install. A lot of unnecessary tricks are required to install proper ports tree.
As for me - a failure, there were no such problems with older versions. Result - using Ubuntu instead, waiting for new version from branch 13.x.
A lot of nitpicking at linux. Makes your video unbelievable. And 1024 CPU core support? So what? Who has a system with 1024 CPU cores at home? Or at work? And are you claiming that Solaris is a BSD derivative (hint: It's not).
SunOS was BSD based. Bill Joy was IIRC involved in the Berkley UNIX / BSD. When they changed the name to Solaris, I think they went for SysV. Did DJ even mention Solaris? And what do you mean by "nitpicking"? If I have made the video there would have been a lot of nitpicking of Linux. FreeBSD is probably one of the best if you even care about the UNIX philosophy. Compared to any of the modern BSD´s Linux has basically become Windows. But that´s just my (not so) humble opinion. :)
@@michaelheimbrand5424 You seem to be conflating the GUI of linux (which is available on BSD too) to be the pinnacle of linux. You have a choice of GUI's which one can run on linux. KDE, XFCE, Mate, to name a few. And yes, gnome is way to bloated. But, it's relatively easy to use. All *my* linux servers are text based only. And yes, SunOS was BSD-based. And I'm not defending linux, nor am I a linux fan. And DJ was complaining about GPL being to restrictive. As if each and every package available for linux is GPL'ed.
I didn't mention Solaris except as the source for the Trusted components of FreeBSD and as the source for OpenBSM. However Solaris does have BSD code in it (it is an officially licensed UNIX OS) and is based on SysV.4 (the short hand) for what we called this:
In the spring of 1988, AT&T took the standardization a step further. First, it collaborated with SCO to merge System V and Xenix into System V/386. Next, it sought collaboration with Sun Microsystems (vendor of the 4.2BSD derivative SunOS and its Network File System) to merge System V, BSD/SunOS and Xenix into a single unified Unix, which would become System V Release 4.
I know, I worked for AT&T Data Systems Group in 1988.