By too much investing in systemd ecosystem I meant Fedora using poorly documented BootLoaderSpec. Sheesh, I spent 4 hours figuring out how to make GRUB config persist

While in one distro you can find package, in other distro there is no package. FreeBSD UNIX has massive advantage in central packaging and development workflow

systemd... It's just... so... /invasive/. it gets in the way of everything. even as a former Gentoo user, it's what drove me to FreeBSD.

The issue with Linux distributions is either too much investing in systemd ecosystem, or using defunct tooling such as NetworkManager. I always find myself first thing doing when setting up server Linux is nuking NM and configuring systemd-networkd.

how's it "defunct"? it works

While in one distro you can find package, in other distro there is no package. FreeBSD UNIX has massive advantage in central packaging and development workflow

that's a biggie, tho

how's it "defunct"? it works

Defunct for server needs. Only systemd-networkd can configure IPIP and Xfrm tunnels

Defunct for server needs. Only systemd-networkd can configure IPIP and Xfrm tunnels

"server needs" is a seriously broad term, tho

like, I have encountered ip-ip, but not that much

(also, "defunct" mostly means "no longer supported to the point it's effectively not working and no one cares". think ifconfig on linux)

like, iproute2 looks into some interfaces in the linux kernel which ifconfig literally knows nothing about, and there's no one to teach it that, and no one cares anymore. that's "defunct"

that's a biggie, tho

This situation pretty much renders useless many distros who suffer with package availability

This situation pretty much renders useless many distros who suffer with package availability

yes. but the point is, no one has ever guaranteed any suitability for whatever needs, so you're actually left with a very narrow selection of distros that are kinda suitable for anything other than someone thinking he's The Mighty Creator Of Yet Another Linux Distro No One Knows Or Cares About

(also, creating a package for linux is easier, but harder, than creating a port for FreeBSD. paradox intended)

(also, creating a package for linux is easier, but harder, than creating a port for FreeBSD. paradox intended)

creating package for linux is easier, if you dont value time spent on maintaining it on bleeding edge deliveries 😁

yes. but the point is, no one has ever guaranteed any suitability for whatever needs, so you're actually left with a very narrow selection of distros that are kinda suitable for anything other than someone thinking he's The Mighty Creator Of Yet Another Linux Distro No One Knows Or Cares About

in this case stuff like what's it called, flatpak? yes, that. stuff like flatpak is kinda useful

in this case stuff like what's it called, flatpak? yes, that. stuff like flatpak is kinda useful

Flatpaks are saviors of Linux. But I dont get why Arch gets native package, and me on Fedora have to collect flatpaks

creating package for linux is easier, if you dont value time spent on maintaining it on bleeding edge deliveries 😁

in this case, however, you have the same problem with FreeBSD. unless you contribute it making it the community's headache, that is

Flatpaks are saviors of Linux. But I dont get why Arch gets native package, and me on Fedora have to collect flatpaks

fedora might have a Policy™ that might prevent you from having a bunch of packages (selected randomly) like on debian where I can't get the network card to work out of the box because fuck your Russian face Maxim they have a no-blob policy and "care" about "free software" or something

yes. but the point is, no one has ever guaranteed any suitability for whatever needs, so you're actually left with a very narrow selection of distros that are kinda suitable for anything other than someone thinking he's The Mighty Creator Of Yet Another Linux Distro No One Knows Or Cares About

So I come to question - whats server distro to go today? Debian - yes, but additional actions with systemd-networkd & nftables required. RHEL? Cool, firewalld is functional, but locked forums

So I come to question - whats server distro to go today? Debian - yes, but additional actions with systemd-networkd & nftables required. RHEL? Cool, firewalld is functional, but locked forums

ubuntu for me, however weird that might sound

ubuntu for me, however weird that might sound

Yes I use it too

on a virtual machine debian might actually work

I'm a bit biased against rpm-based distros, can do nothing about that

on a virtual machine debian might actually work

especially where idgaf about being "bleeding edge" or something

on a virtual machine debian might actually work

Of course VMs, of course #HyperConverged

So I come to question - whats server distro to go today? Debian - yes, but additional actions with systemd-networkd & nftables required. RHEL? Cool, firewalld is functional, but locked forums

Also firewalling on compute is not way to go as they say - that might explain situation with firewalls in Linux. It is implies you use hardware based firewall or pfSense (BSD). Though I mention nftables because it is required when you dealing with rented VPS

Also firewalling on compute is not way to go as they say - that might explain situation with firewalls in Linux. It is implies you use hardware based firewall or pfSense (BSD). Though I mention nftables because it is required when you dealing with rented VPS

that's something new. how and when is that required?

genuine question

that's something new. how and when is that required?

You're not gonna expose all ports to public net, are you? 99% times UFW is enough. I personally have need to deal with many tunnels going to VPS, kinda what DMVPN is about. UFW cannot do NAT or allow arbitrary IP protocols

You're not gonna expose all ports to public net, are you? 99% times UFW is enough. I personally have need to deal with many tunnels going to VPS, kinda what DMVPN is about. UFW cannot do NAT or allow arbitrary IP protocols

I mean, why have a service if you don't wanna expose it?..

I mean, why have a service if you don't wanna expose it?..

Mm.. Right.

however, I see where you're going. sorry, I thought you said "they require you to use a specific piece of software as firewall"

However I would not say that my nftables usecase is common or standard for VPS deployment. Rather Im pitching to the fact how entire nu-linux software stack falls apart when you need to change 1 thing

However I would not say that my nftables usecase is common or standard for VPS deployment. Rather Im pitching to the fact how entire nu-linux software stack falls apart when you need to change 1 thing

that's a great, very descriptive phrase, btw

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k69Hw4z1oUo&pp=0gcJCX4JAYcqIYzv

whats this "common" package, showed up during pkg upgrade

whats this "common" package, showed up during pkg upgrade

https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/conmon/

https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/conmon/

i think i might have a vision problem

i think i might have a vision problem

Well it is sadly common in our field .

i think i might have a vision problem

Welcome to the club I guess, make sure to develop the habit to take your glasses OFF before heading to bed

And don't be as stupid as me, thinking putting them on the side of your bed will be fine

Welcome to the club I guess, make sure to develop the habit to take your glasses OFF before heading to bed

XD alr

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzEXrxXs4rQ

https://wiki.freebsd.org/BootTime why aren't they using boottrace instead of tslog

also since the tracing starts after loader starts, how should i go around tracing boot2 and boot1 times

well actually, more then that, can boottrace or tslog can help in figuring out why loader takes so damn long to initialize

Hello everyone, I hope you're doing well and staying strong. I've been using FreeBSD for a long time, and I can almost say I've become quite interested in BSD-family operating systems. I had developed a set of tools with a specific goal in mind. You could say it's something similar to GNU, but with different objectives. I wanted to ask: Are all the packages and code included in the fresh, default installation of FreeBSD strictly under the BSD License? What I mean is, are all the tools, libraries, and every line of code written in FreeBSD by default, immediately after installation, under this license? I haven't installed any additional software or tools, I'm only asking about the built-in BSD tools. If there are any packages with different licenses, could you please mention what those licenses are and perhaps provide an example of those tools and packages? For example, you could say that a specific tool is under the LGPL and not under the BSD License. I’d really appreciate any help! Thank you for your time. Mahdi.H.A.

I intend to make a fork of FreeBSD as CloseSource, and I have read all the terms and details of the BSD license. I am fully aware of the strict requirements of GPL, LGPL, and some other licenses, but I'm not sure if such projects are used in FreeBSD. In the FreeBSD source code , there is a folder named 'GNU'. What is that?

I intend to make a fork of FreeBSD as CloseSource, and I have read all the terms and details of the BSD license. I am fully aware of the strict requirements of GPL, LGPL, and some other licenses, but I'm not sure if such projects are used in FreeBSD. In the FreeBSD source code , there is a folder named 'GNU'. What is that?

Commands and libraries under the GNU General Public License (GPL) or Lesser General Public License (LGPL). from https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/README.md

Commands and libraries under the GNU General Public License (GPL) or Lesser General Public License (LGPL). from https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/README.md

Oh, so you're saying that almost all the commands and libraries that FreeBSD uses are under the GPL or LGPL license? So, only the FreeBSD kernel is under the BSD license?

Oh, so you're saying that almost all the commands and libraries that FreeBSD uses are under the GPL or LGPL license? So, only the FreeBSD kernel is under the BSD license?

dialog,libdialog, diff3 and tests related to them are the only things in the gnu dir

So, if I want to take a specific fork of FreeBSD and make it proprietary, do I need to rewrite all the commands and libs? Mac has commands similar to Unix. Did they rewrite all of them?

dialog,libdialog, diff3 and tests related to them are the only things in the gnu dir

Oh, in the message above, you quoted that all the commands are under the GPL.

Commands and libraries under the GNU General Public License (GPL) or Lesser General Public License (LGPL). from https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/README.md

this

this

that was reply to your question about the gnu dir

that was reply to your question about the gnu dir

ok. sorry, i understand

So, if I want to take a specific fork of FreeBSD and make it proprietary, do I need to rewrite all the commands and libs? Mac has commands similar to Unix. Did they rewrite all of them?

you should check out the tools you are going to include separately and their licenses separately, for example clang is under apache license, openbsm under bsd license etc

Oh, in the message above, you quoted that all the commands are under the GPL.

It doesn't say all

So, if I want to take a specific fork of FreeBSD and make it proprietary, do I need to rewrite all the commands and libs? Mac has commands similar to Unix. Did they rewrite all of them?

Take the code but at least give a few millions to the project. Get a good ride getting rich and give a few millions more then

Does anyone know a pci card with usbs for an pci passthrough? I would like to pass usbs to a VM and im looking for a pci card thats proven to work fine. (Supported drivers for freebsd etc)

I already bought an card from aliexpress but its not working on freebsd unfortunately :/

I already bought an card from aliexpress but its not working on freebsd unfortunately :/

what if you passthru it to linux vm and then do usb over tcp?

Its not recognised at all on freebsd so i think i cannot even do that

Take the code but at least give a few millions to the project. Get a good ride getting rich and give a few millions more then

Do you mean donating to the project? If I make any significant and essential changes to the FreeBSD source code that could contribute to the advancement and security of FreeBSD, I will definitely apply them to the project. Additionally, I will redirect a portion of the financial profit generated from it to the FreeBSD project. I am fully committed to free software, and the only reason for making the FreeBSD fork exclusive is the exclusivity of my hardware, which will make it so that no one else will be interested in developing it. I fully understand the efforts of FreeBSD developers for the project, and unlike companies like Apple and Microsoft that have forgotten their past, I will never stop donating to FreeBSD. All it takes is for my project to reach a reasonable net profit. That's it.

I am exactly optimizing the FreeBSD kernel for my hardware, and then I will carefully match my tools with FreeBSD, which may take years, but I will definitely achieve financial profit and it will lead to donating to the project :)

I am exactly optimizing the FreeBSD kernel for my hardware, and then I will carefully match my tools with FreeBSD, which may take years, but I will definitely achieve financial profit and it will lead to donating to the project :)

Thats nothing if we're talking about x86-64

You dont need to customize kernel on x86-64 in 99% of cases. Unless you need to compile specific enterprise driver, like RDMA

Just one question. Does the BSD license allow changing the license? For example, let's say I fork a project that is developed under the BSD License and then continue developing it under the Apache or Mozilla license. Is this possible?

Thats nothing if we're talking about x86-64

No, it's not x64 architecture.

FreeBSD needs a lot of optimization in the areas of UEFI and booting, in my opinion, and I am trying to find simpler and faster ways to boot the operating system. Many thanks for the comprehensive documentation of FreeBSD, which I have not seen anything like it in any other project. I mean, I haven’t seen such complete documentation in any project. Thank you.

The comprehensive documentation of FreeBSD was the most important reason I became interested in this project. In contrast to the scattered documentation of Linux, which arose due to the scattered nature of its tools, and the man command trying to gather them in one place, even in this case, the information shared by the man command is not complete for me and doesn't serve my needs.

Do you mean donating to the project? If I make any significant and essential changes to the FreeBSD source code that could contribute to the advancement and security of FreeBSD, I will definitely apply them to the project. Additionally, I will redirect a portion of the financial profit generated from it to the FreeBSD project. I am fully committed to free software, and the only reason for making the FreeBSD fork exclusive is the exclusivity of my hardware, which will make it so that no one else will be interested in developing it. I fully understand the efforts of FreeBSD developers for the project, and unlike companies like Apple and Microsoft that have forgotten their past, I will never stop donating to FreeBSD. All it takes is for my project to reach a reasonable net profit. That's it.

Apple's and microsoft's past was about making more money… i don't think they have forgotten it…

Apple's and microsoft's past was about making more money… i don't think they have forgotten it…

It was funny and interesting. What I meant exactly was that Apple used tools and features from BSD operating systems, and Microsoft also uses many tools from BSD families, like OpenSSH. They use these tools, and on the other hand, they act against free software. But don’t think that Microsoft and Apple open-sourcing some of their software like VSCode and their compilers was because of a genuine interest in open projects. They realized that the cost of developing compilers and such was very high, and by open-sourcing them, they could take advantage of free developer labor. At the same time, they claim to support free software, when in reality, their goal is nothing more than profit. If Microsoft cared a little about free software, they could have, for example, developed Wine to make things easier for us, or at least provided complete documentation for Windows syscalls so that we could improve Wine.

Right now, it's surprising that Wine and similar tools can run Windows games with Steam, while there is not enough documentation for windows syscalls. Maybe we need someone like Linus Torvalds to rewrite Windows syscalls instead of the POSIX syscalls. 😂

Right now, it's surprising that Wine and similar tools can run Windows games with Steam, while there is not enough documentation for windows syscalls. Maybe we need someone like Linus Torvalds to rewrite Windows syscalls instead of the POSIX syscalls. 😂

Mr Poettering is great pick for sabotage (useless rewrites and such). Unfortunately, after Debian betrayal of open source, Mr Poettering now ravages Linux software stack

If you ever wonder why systemd, why wayland - evil lies within debian.

Mr Poettering is great pick for sabotage (useless rewrites and such). Unfortunately, after Debian betrayal of open source, Mr Poettering now ravages Linux software stack

What did Debian do? What does Debian have to do with Wayland and systemd? Wayland is developed under the MIT license, which is similar to BSD.

It was funny and interesting. What I meant exactly was that Apple used tools and features from BSD operating systems, and Microsoft also uses many tools from BSD families, like OpenSSH. They use these tools, and on the other hand, they act against free software. But don’t think that Microsoft and Apple open-sourcing some of their software like VSCode and their compilers was because of a genuine interest in open projects. They realized that the cost of developing compilers and such was very high, and by open-sourcing them, they could take advantage of free developer labor. At the same time, they claim to support free software, when in reality, their goal is nothing more than profit. If Microsoft cared a little about free software, they could have, for example, developed Wine to make things easier for us, or at least provided complete documentation for Windows syscalls so that we could improve Wine.

Good news is that microsoft with current direction wont change any APIs or ABIs, since all they do nowadays is Azure and adding UI layers on top of older UI layers

What did Debian do? What does Debian have to do with Wayland and systemd? Wayland is developed under the MIT license, which is similar to BSD.

I think Wayland was a much better choice for Xorg, but I don’t understand why systemd goes against the conditions and principles of free software.

But they will screw up people whenever there is possibility to introduce fake obstacles to make move everyone to win 11. Like, some drivers wont install on win 10 with artificial limit to win11 only