Anonymous

I'm more of a Unix history avid reader, I've never seen an actual SYSV or sunOS Unix system

Well the country I grew up with was dominated by DOS, even in universities

neb

I'm more of a Unix history avid reader, I've never seen an actual SYSV or sunOS Unix system

I too appreciate UNIX history. I've also ran OpenIndiana, which is based on illumos, which is based on OpenSolaris, which is forked from Solaris....

Anonymous

Well the country I grew up with was dominated by DOS, even in universities

The only places you could find Unix were large scale industrial sites built before the 1979 revolution

neb

Well the country I grew up with was dominated by DOS, even in universities

Which one?

neb

Ah.

neb

🇮🇷

Anonymous

🇮🇷

Anonymous

Yes

neb

Anonymous

I used the automatic installer if your wondering

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

with a FreeBSD memstick installer you can pick any drive you have attached. So lets say your FreeBSD installer resides on one USB stick, The system will call this device da0. Your second USB target device device would then be called da1. FreeBSD can freely install to da1 and it works. The problem is at the end of installation you reboot and remove installer disk. Now all of a sudden what was once da1 is now trying to mount at da0. Failure. This is by design. So the suggestions here are showing you how to deal with the devices 'label' to successfully boot. Another way would be to edit /etc/fstab at the post install shell.

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

@solaris557 check out these links: https://gist.github.com/johnko/fa763b97f0a4671a3c60 https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/install-freebsd-usb-drive.60746/

Anonymous

with a FreeBSD memstick installer you can pick any drive you have attached. So lets say your FreeBSD installer resides on one USB stick, The system will call this device da0. Your second USB target device device would then be called da1. FreeBSD can freely install to da1 and it works. The problem is at the end of installation you reboot and remove installer disk. Now all of a sudden what was once da1 is now trying to mount at da0. Failure. This is by design. So the suggestions here are showing you how to deal with the devices 'label' to successfully boot. Another way would be to edit /etc/fstab at the post install shell.

I guess the installer didn't use UUID and just went with device names?

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

I guess the installer didn't use UUID and just went with device names?

I guess so, yes

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

@solaris557 check out these links: https://gist.github.com/johnko/fa763b97f0a4671a3c60 https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/install-freebsd-usb-drive.60746/

Also this one: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/nanobsd/

Anonymous

@n0madcoder is there a lsblk or blkid equivalent to see all the devices freebsd sees?

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

@n0madcoder is there a lsblk or blkid equivalent to see all the devices freebsd sees?

$ gpart show

Anonymous

$ gpart show

Thanks

Neruq

So I installed Freebsd on a USB, but for some reason the initramfs I suppose says that it can't find a certian device

How does freebsd work installed on USB and what are the characteristics of the USB to install the freebsd system on USB?

Anonymous

How does freebsd work installed on USB and what are the characteristics of the USB to install the freebsd system on USB?

It works fine with UFS, just remember to edit /etc/fstab manually after the installation, as the installer uses device names instead of lables or UUID

Anonymous

Well vi is certainly interesting, especially after coming from nano and vim

Neruq

It works fine with UFS, just remember to edit /etc/fstab manually after the installation, as the installer uses device names instead of lables or UUID

In the /etc/fstab file, what should I put?

Anonymous

In the /etc/fstab file, what should I put?

Sorry, by my last comment I meant replace device names with labels or device UUID

Anonymous

I suggest labels

Anonymous

http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/labels.html

Anonymous

http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/labels.html

Here's a handy guide to create labels for different filesystem's

Neruq

Here's a handy guide to create labels for different filesystem's

What will the data rate be like installing FreeBSD on USB connected to 1.0 ports of the computer?

Anonymous

What will the data rate be like installing FreeBSD on USB connected to 1.0 ports of the computer?

USB3.0 will give you a smooth experience, as for 1.0 probably a bad one

Anonymous

What will the data rate be like installing FreeBSD on USB connected to 1.0 ports of the computer?

Are you installing it on an old i386 machine?

Neruq

USB3.0 will give you a smooth experience, as for 1.0 probably a bad one

The computer is an old of port 1.0 computer

Anonymous

The computer is an old of port 1.0 computer

Then your better off installing it on a hard drive

Neruq

Are you installing it on an old i386 machine?

No, It gets very hot with freebsd.

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

No, It gets very hot with freebsd.

Have you tried powerdxx?

Neruq

Have you tried powerdxx?

The automatic installer is optimized by the system as much as possible, including powerdxx

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

The automatic installer is optimized by the system as much as possible, including powerdxx

I missed something I guess 🤔 since I always have to configure and tailor powerdxx after fresh installs

Neruq

I missed something I guess 🤔 since I always have to configure and tailor powerdxx after fresh installs

If you read the conversation above about this laptop with freebsd it gets very hot from 50. C upwards without doing anything, while in linux it is around 31. C

neb

Well vi is certainly interesting, especially after coming from nano and vim

I use ed(1) - it is much "simpler" 🤔 (The standard UNIX editor).

neb

Using a Piece of Paper as a Display Terminal – Ed vs. Vim (Score: 101+ in 1 day) Link: https://readhacker.news/s/4wKt4 Comments: https://readhacker.news/c/4wKt4

Anonymous

I use ed(1) - it is much "simpler" 🤔 (The standard UNIX editor).

Is there a reason to use it over vi?

Anonymous

Ok, so one question I have is this

Anonymous

I know freebsd is a complete OS, that being both kernel and userland

Anonymous

But how far does it go in terms of userland? Is it gnucoreutils level and init or even beyond that?

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

But how far does it go in terms of userland? Is it gnucoreutils level and init or even beyond that?

I guess it has all of gnucoreutils offer plus clang compiler and other tools

Anonymous

I guess it has all of gnucoreutils offer plus clang compiler and other tools

Wait freebsd project made LLVM?

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

Wait freebsd project made LLVM?

They didn't make it but use it instead gcc

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

Gnu stands for "gnu is not unix" and in the close to unix systems like FreeBSD, GNU tools are available but not shipped by default in userland

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

One of the selling key points of FreeBSD is they offer an environment with a license that allows the user to modify, use, and ship a product made with FreeBSD or with parts of it without having to expose code changes, and the ability to sell the product. With GNU you can't

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/explaining-bsd/

neb

Is there a reason to use it over vi?

vi(1) is slow in comparison, makes much more "noise" (visually, plus it does things you don't ask for), ed's commands are single characters, scripting is cleaner, you can evolve a huge working memory with ed (since it's a line editor), it's more likely to run in a borked system - even when vi won't (refer the article I linked),it is the standard and a piece of history and knowing a bit of ed should be mandatory for all Unix enthusiasts. From the top if my head...

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

vi(1) is slow in comparison, makes much more "noise" (visually, plus it does things you don't ask for), ed's commands are single characters, scripting is cleaner, you can evolve a huge working memory with ed (since it's a line editor), it's more likely to run in a borked system - even when vi won't (refer the article I linked),it is the standard and a piece of history and knowing a bit of ed should be mandatory for all Unix enthusiasts. From the top if my head...

Now you got my attention in ed 😅 I'm reading the man page and at the "see also" section they reference this one: B. W. Kernighan and P. J. Plauger, Software Tools in Pascal, 1981, Addison-Wesley. Do you happen to have it at your library? I'm getting a used one rn (:

Anonymous

vi(1) is slow in comparison, makes much more "noise" (visually, plus it does things you don't ask for), ed's commands are single characters, scripting is cleaner, you can evolve a huge working memory with ed (since it's a line editor), it's more likely to run in a borked system - even when vi won't (refer the article I linked),it is the standard and a piece of history and knowing a bit of ed should be mandatory for all Unix enthusiasts. From the top if my head...

Well I just tried ed, its very different to what I'm used to

Anonymous

Is this how people actually used to edit files on terminal teletypes?

ɴꙩᴍᴀᴅ

Hello and welcome @AryaSucks2021

Anonymous

can we get openrc or s6 on freebsd With parallelization ?