Even as a Debian user, I can't express *enough* how absolutely perfect the FreeBSD Handbook is. It's some of the best technical writing since K&R's C Programming Language.
Real nice video! I'm learning about C programming, and saw a good implementation to avoid buffer overflow attacks when using strcpy and strcat, and it was made by OpenBSD, it's called strlcpy and strlcat.
Now that I am now retired I'll have some time to 'play' with FreeBSD. Was introduced to UNIX System V back in the late 1980's on TI 1500 systems. Love 'C' - not yet on OOP kind of guy.
Its RU-vid users who seek attention have made video's for the sake of it giving out false information about a time they never lived, wiki is great but i see 80% false on there especially from my time of the early 80's..
When AT&T decided to pull its code out, the guys who replaced the code were the professors who closely monitored AT&T’s code and had access to it, atleast at the time of 4.3BSD. So the replaced code is pretty much the original, though not in name. Now don’t tell me this is the same as what Linus Torvalds did with the Linux kernel. Linus had no access to the Unix source, so he reverse-engineered the Unix kernel. I don’t call the FreeBSD job reverse-engineering.
This is an awesome follow-up to Neal's earlier presentation! (The video/blog post which followed your FreeBSD Launch in February.) Great to see the momentum.
Tried to get a basic FreeBSD install today, had nothing but issues with wifi config first (fixed it), AMD GPU driver conflicting with framebuffer, got Xorg setup with KDE5 and acceleration, most KDE apps were crashing. Just felt like everything was working against me. Really really wanted to like it, but went back to Arch. I'll probably give it another go when I have more time to waste.
Just spent a week trying to get BSD onto a 2007 Dell Optiplex with standard intel equipment. The FreeBSD basic system went fine as a text only system. However, efforts to install KDE, Gnome3 or Xfce just ended with no audio, failure to recognise the DVD drive, flawed packages and little community help. I love the structure of anything Unix and will try anything using a terminal but for now the Desktop Environments just are so "last century." At least anything Linux on older equipment just works out of the box as well as the apps. I can put MInt 19 on just about anything and that trumps any beautiful structure BSDs may have. Tried GhostBSD and TruOS, too. Wouldn't even install. Therefore, leave BSD to the servers and mainframes. The average Linux user is better to leave BSD alone for now. Sorry....Joe user shouldn't have to be a Cisco networking pro or assembler person to make one's workstation run on FreeBSD. No, BSD isn't Linux and has a way to go before it can be considered mainstream. Love the BSD Handbook, now if it only would work without endless tweaking.
This is an old comment but I wanted to respond in case you want to give it another shot. There's a PKG that can be installed with standard pkg install desktop-installer. Download that package and run it, and it takes care of everything you need to get X, a desktop environment or window/tiling managers, and your graphics drivers working great. Follow the prompts and you've got a rock solid system that is as easy as Linux.
@@oldpain7625 I just tried, but. Running KDE requires several steps: VirtualBox knows that FreeBSD runs on a toaster, so it gives it 1GB of RAM by default. Also, default display must be switched to VBoxSVGA mode for resolution above 1024x768. Using more than one CPU for VirtualBox makes system likely to freeze sooner or later depending on the system load (might be VBox bug actually). Still KDE seems unstable: baloo_file.core, kcminit.core are in my home directory.
BSD doesn't run on laptops. Not on my laptops, anyway, despite multiple attempts over the last 10 years or so. No graphical environment, or not one worth using, and not much hope of wireless. The one honorable exception was Open Indiana a few years back, that installed on a logical partition on my hard disk (most BSD's demand a primary partition) and ran rather well. The most annoying part is that BSD's write some subpartitions (slices) on the hard disk, so after I give up on an installation I have to write zeros over all the disk before installing something else. Otherwise grub gets fits. So now I leave BSD's to people with bigger machines and wired internet. I learned my lesson. There is always a Linux distro running Xfce with a working wireless applet that is happy to share a hard disk with three other Linux distros, so that's what I will use until I hear of something better.
While true, that doesn't actually answer the intended question. When people are talking about JUST the kernel, they always say "the Linux Kernel". I can't recall ever hearing the kernel referred to as simply Linux (aside from by overly pedantic assholes). When people ask about the differences between Linux and FreeBSD, what they're actually asking about is the difference between "the Linux Kernel + GNU userland" and FreeBSD. Attempting to pedantically correct them ("Linux is just a kernel [bla bla bla]") helps and informs no one.
“BSD is what you get when a bunch of UNIX hackers sit down and try to port a Unix system to the PC. Linux is what you get when a bunch of PC hackers sit down and try to write a Unix system for the PC.”
FreeBSD is completely different unix kernel. More conservative and more stable (by stable I mean, it's basically unchanged in 20 years - Linux renamed devices, completely changed init scripts, firewall changed like 3 times and so on).
Too bad M$ can't have this logic. This won't happen until developers change their ways as well these OS's can efficiently be a pure gaming rig for ALL games. Old and new.
Openbsd is. It's run by cryptographers. Didn't hear about that fbi thing. I know ssl was made by NSA but its implementation is peer reviewed code so may be secure unfortunately little you can do
Made me chuckle. I love when "hardcore Linux nerds" run Ubuntu. You want Linux cred? Arch, Gentoo, Slackware or LFS, anything else is not hardcore, it's just clicking buttons.
since a few days i'm in the process of setting up freebsd. still i don't get the difference and why this difference is important (linux-unix) so i let this video run. 19 minutes in i'm so fed up with the vanity this person is spreading. like he mentioned many many many times he's working on this and that like he's a important person in the bsd world. that just made me rethink trying freebsd.
He is a very important person in the BSD world... if still have problems to get FreeBSD working, let people know, ask for help... Linux is so nice, it works out of the box, FreeBSD is another story, but you can get nice setup if you have an afternoon to set it up...
Yet another FreeBSD dev using a Macbook. Maybe they need to title their talks "Mac OS X is not FreeBSD"? I'd be very surprised if he's not running Mac OS X, with BSD in a vm.
*Surely* the target of FreeBSD is not _the typical enthusiast user of __*_nix_** ***_Desktop_***, but there's *some effort* put to make FreeBSD somewhat *_usable_* on Desktop
True. There is, but he uses that machine for lectures and presentations and then actually develops the networking stack on FreeBSD id say the dude is technical enough to use whatever he wants. And in this case use OSX because its a derivative and works out of the box for things like presentations and media.
Its well known that FreeBSD is run by socialists and how this deters would-be contributors. I saw more videos with this game dude and drew the same conclusions as you.
