by oherrala on 3/20/17, 2:55 PM with 74 comments
by jcranmer on 3/20/17, 5:06 PM
At the end of the day, both OpenBSD and FreeBSD are niche systems. They don't have the popularity of Linux, and they probably never will. But that's not a problem. Both of them are major operating systems that do innovate, and hence they're worth paying attention to. That's where the compliment of FreeBSD as becoming Solaris's successor is really telling--Solaris was the operating system that brought us DTrace and ZFS, and it was FreeBSD who I believe had the first container system (jail).
by Mark_B on 3/20/17, 3:50 PM
This paper will look at some of the differences between the FreeBSD and OpenBSD operating systems.
It is not intended to be solely technical but will also show the different "visions" and design decisions that rule the way things are implemented. It is expected to be a subjective view from two BSD developers and does not pretend to represent these projects in any way.
We don't want it to be a troll talk but rather a casual and friendly exchange while nicely making fun of each other like we would do over a drink. Of course, we shall try and hit where it hurts when that makes sense. Obviously, we both have our personal subjective preferences and we will explain why. Showing some of the weaknesses may encourage people to contribute in some areas.
Most of the topics discussed here could warrant their own paper and talk and as such some may not get the deep analysis they deserve.
This is a totally biased talk from two different perspectives.
by tachion on 3/20/17, 7:13 PM
So, you may or may not know that, but you need FreeBSD and OpenBSD and they also need you! Every cent counts and so does every contributor, that helps the foundations keep their non-profit status.
by ploek on 3/20/17, 4:03 PM
by Esau on 3/20/17, 10:27 PM
NetBSD wants to run everywhere.
OpenBSD wants to be secure.
DragonFly BSD wants to advanced.
FreeBSD wants to be Linux.
TrueOS wants to be Ubuntu.
by ploggingdev on 3/20/17, 4:53 PM
As mentioned, the wireless and graphics areas are sorely lagging behind GNU/Linux os'. They only have support upto Haswell in the graphics department. Ouch. The priority of both BSDs is clearly not the regular desktop user where wireless and graphics support can be deal breakers. The FreeBSD based PC-BSD (now known as TrueOS) exists, but AFAIK it does not fix the wireless and graphics support situation.
Given that GPU based computing is becoming more prevalent with the advent of ML/DL, I wonder if there are efforts to improve support for graphics.
(It would have been interesting if a Linux guy also joined the conversation, along with a Windows guy and a MacOS guy.)
by tannhaeuser on 3/20/17, 6:30 PM
While Linux certainly works well, I'm instinctively against monocultures of any kind or form. With Linux-only containers (Docker and co.) there's now the danger that we're loosing the BSDs terminally as a replacement for Linux. But is the isolation (or lack thereof) and interfacing to the host system provided by Docker/runC/whatever really worth it (compared to portable POSIX-based primitives eg. chroot jails, or modern capabilities-based generalizations of it such as FBSD's capsicum)?
It's also odd that a GPL-licensed OS, of all things, is making it to the top in containerland. But then the nominal "default" host OS for Docker (Alpine Linux) uses musl (MIT-licenses libc) rather than glibc. I'm not complaining, and there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it legally, but the commercial Docker image ecosystem, to me, has the smell of a GPL-circumvention device of sorts in that many images routinely install the Debian/GNU userland tools on first load.
by mrstone on 3/20/17, 3:51 PM
Also, the title has a spelling error in it.
by anw on 3/20/17, 3:45 PM
— update: the title appears to now reflect that this is a PDF. It did not earlier.
by donpdonp on 3/20/17, 3:48 PM
by lacampbell on 3/20/17, 9:46 PM
by r0brodz on 3/20/17, 4:41 PM
by eriknstr on 3/20/17, 4:29 PM
>but the ports tree is a rolling release not tight to a FreeBSD release
should be
>but the ports tree is a rolling release not tied to a FreeBSD release