I'd set the ARC to 2 or 3 Gig.

zfs needs the cache to work well.

read the handbook.

I'd set the ARC to 2 or 3 Gig.

both min and max

just the max, let min autotune

so it can fluctuate with need

it needs a certain amount for data structures, etc.

Thanks. I'll update you after a few days and see how the system goes.

handbook section: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/zfs/

handbook section: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/zfs/

i set max to 4gb. Thanks

Enjoy.

Enjoy.

it works. Thanks

hi

I get this error when I try to install a package: The pkg-config script could not be found or is too old. Make sure it is in your PATH or set the PKG_CONFIG environment variable to the full path to pkg-config. Alternatively, you may set the environment variables GLIB_CFLAGS and GLIB_LIBS to avoid the need to call pkg-config. See the pkg-config man page for more details.

How can I fix it ?

Can you give some more info? What version or the distribution? from a fresh install? Etc etc

How can I fix it ?

Which pkg version do you currently have? Have you tried to update it? Also can you find the pkg-config and share it?

pkg —version: 1.17.5

pkg-config: command not found

https://pkgconfig.freedesktop.org/releases/pkg-config-0.29.tar.gz

Seems like pkg-config has been replaced with pkgconf https://www.freshports.org/devel/pkgconf/

https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/pkg-config.42767/

Is there anything like 'Swapiness' in FreeBSD like in Linux? If so, where can I tune it?

Is there anything like 'Swapiness' in FreeBSD like in Linux? If so, where can I tune it?

Nope

i use top and i noticed that zfs arc uses too much ram

It's for ZFS xisk cache

It's for ZFS xisk cache

I solved it by setting vfs.zfs.arc_max = 2048.

I solved it by setting vfs.zfs.arc_max = 2048.

Thanks for this hint. I already experimented a lot with this setting. If you set it to such a low value, your performance will suffer a lot. Currently, I have one machine with vfs.zfs.arc_max = 4096 and another with 60%(?) of the available system RAM (32GB). I faintly remember to have read such a recommendation somewhere in the handbook or other FreeBSD literature.

Handbook section on ZFS: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/zfs/

I hope you enjoy this wallspapers

I hope you enjoy this wallspapers

Anyone using freebsd on desktop? I mean, freebsd isnt best option for regular use (desktop/laptop). Im sure its usable, but in my opinion linux is better.

Im using freebsd on my router. I can imagine using it on server, but even there i choose linux.

I'm usiing it on all my laptops and desktops except for one. I don't think I'm alone.

No offense, freebsd is awesome and secure af. Its capabilities to run linux software does really help to use it sucesfully on servers

I'm usiing it on all my laptops and desktops except for one. I don't think I'm alone.

Why? Just decided so, or there is something i dont know about that made you decide for freebsd?

I mean, i tryed freebsd on my laptop few years ago. It was working and overall experience was ok. But i think i can get more from linux.

zfs, jails, poudriere, and lack of systemd and Network Manager.

Cant say anything bad about bsd. Its stable and secure. Thats reason why i choose it as router os

depends on your needs, I use linux mainly for gaming, aside from that, FreeBSD is a very feasable desktop

zfs, jails, poudriere, and lack of systemd and Network Manager.

Zfa is ported to linux, chroot is alternative for jails. And about absence of systemd and networkmanager... Why?

Dont trying to change your mind. Just want to get that idea. Sure its about needs and exceptations, but its possible that i will change my mind and move to freebsd if i will get some more knowedgle that will change my opinion

zfs boot environments are not a thing on linux yet. chroot != jails. I've used uml, openvz, and lxc on linux and they're fine. but jails are not an add-on feaure of FreeBSD - it was purpose built with security in mind (looking at YOU, docker...)

zfs boot environments are not a thing on linux yet. chroot != jails. I've used uml, openvz, and lxc on linux and they're fine. but jails are not an add-on feaure of FreeBSD - it was purpose built with security in mind (looking at YOU, docker...)

So its mostly about security and ZFS?

I suppose. licensing is also a part of it.

I suppose. licensing is also a part of it.

Licensing?

Do you mean that linux must stay opensource and free, while bsd based things can stay closedsource and paid?

BSD (or MIT, Apache, etc.) is a lot more open than the GPL.

absence of systemd is a blessing 😂

GPL tainting stuff is a thing

1.4M lines of code for an "init system"? right...

absence of systemd is a blessing 😂

Faster boot and more lightweight?

superficial when booting from ssd

BSD (or MIT, Apache, etc.) is a lot more open than the GPL.

How more open? I thought linux is as open as possible.

superficial when booting from ssd

I have router on ssd, and booting takes long, but i guess its because of rest of hw is quite old.

my point is not speed, but simplicity, i have not touched freebsd in 15 years, yet, I can open /etc/rc.conf and 99% of the needed settings are still valid, talk about systemd/pulseaudio and linux "solutions" and making distros more complicated for whatever reason

And top layer is based on php. That can be also part of reason.

How more open? I thought linux is as open as possible.

Those licenses (BSD i.e.) don't force you to give back your changes like GPL

my point is not speed, but simplicity, i have not touched freebsd in 15 years, yet, I can open /etc/rc.conf and 99% of the needed settings are still valid, talk about systemd/pulseaudio and linux "solutions" and making distros more complicated for whatever reason

Got it. Makes sense

google might be better than me re: BSD vs. GPL we're in the process of un-GPLing our internal code at work, probably going to a BSD2-clause license.

google might be better than me re: BSD vs. GPL we're in the process of un-GPLing our internal code at work, probably going to a BSD2-clause license.

Why is gpl for you a bad thing? Apple took alot of BSD code and do not even contribute back. Some modules which having Linux compobents are undee gpl so apple has to share their modified code. If you really do like gpl gp to OpenBSD where only few components are under gpl such as gcc

I went from using FreeBSD as a home system to Gnu/Linux because of the BSD license long ago

Another flame war start?

GPL is used is to vendor lock code for example.

Why is gpl for you a bad thing? Apple took alot of BSD code and do not even contribute back. Some modules which having Linux compobents are undee gpl so apple has to share their modified code. If you really do like gpl gp to OpenBSD where only few components are under gpl such as gcc

Sony does not contribute back. Netflix does. IIRC Apple does too.

GPL is used is to vendor lock code for example.

Yes, they tried to stop that with version 3

Sony does not contribute back. Netflix does. IIRC Apple does too.

And they are using FreeBSD as core system

Why is gpl for you a bad thing? Apple took alot of BSD code and do not even contribute back. Some modules which having Linux compobents are undee gpl so apple has to share their modified code. If you really do like gpl gp to OpenBSD where only few components are under gpl such as gcc

I guess no license is perfect for everyone. Luckily we have where to choose. Some companies need to protect their development from the competency thus a BSD license is great in that case. Sony uses a FreeBSD based OS for their PlayStation, and they didn't release their code, but eventually they contributed with the project. Same happens with Netflix

This is good

I guess no license is perfect for everyone. Luckily we have where to choose. Some companies need to protect their development from the competency thus a BSD license is great in that case. Sony uses a FreeBSD based OS for their PlayStation, and they didn't release their code, but eventually they contributed with the project. Same happens with Netflix

Just if it means eventually does not mean they are doing it... The same is about propriatary software can be malware but also not... just eventually

Just if it means eventually does not mean they are doing it... The same is about propriatary software can be malware but also not... just eventually

They are not required to publish their code or to contribute. What’s the problem?

Just if it means eventually does not mean they are doing it... The same is about propriatary software can be malware but also not... just eventually

Indeed. But there's the point, we can choose what tools to use. If GPL GNU/Linux fits better on your tasks or projects, you can use it and no one should blame you for that. Same goes in the other side

Yeah, thats what does "free" means.

Yeah, thats what does "free" means.

Freedom not as in freebear

Free means free. Free to take, free to contribute if you want. No obligations.

GPL is always about some obligations. Cloud denial is a new thing to fight on.

Everyone should have a chance to make changes and share it with others. Big companies are relying on free software and they get bigger(going to monopols). Do you think it is fair taking code and not contributing from young students or people who are just doing it because they want to do something for the society in their freetime?

Everyone should have a chance to make changes and share it with others. Big companies are relying on free software and they get bigger(going to monopols). Do you think it is fair taking code and not contributing from young students or people who are just doing it because they want to do something for the society in their freetime?

Yes if they are ok with that

Well, BSD allows you to have the chance to make changes and share them with others, if you want. That's more freedom than forcing you to give back IMO

Companies relying on free software and getting bigger is part of the business. I'm completely OK if a company takes my code repo and decides to use it in their own project, and they don't give back anything. I'm doing my code for myself, to learn and enjoy, and I don't care on the use other entities can make from it. If I decide to monetize a tool or a project, I'll be dealing with other kind of licensing, or I would even not share the code at all and just distribute the binaries

We already came to the point when monopolies are actually using GPL to assert control over their code and make sure noone else will monetize it.