Next step: macOS.
BSD will always be faster. That’s a given. It is not flexible, however. It has a very specific purpose. This is why Apple chose this as the origin for OS X, which has now been bastardized to an unrecognizable variation, but if you check the main kernel, will still read as DragonFlyBSD.
Faster in what sense? Would you kindly point me to the benchmarks used? It’s easy to find the opposite results so I’m curious.
Smaller footprint in general, compiled as one (not multimodal kernel+extensions), simpler security models, and simpler init system. All of these will make it snappier out of the box than Linux, just not in the ways you’d want, say, a desktop to be faster.
I’m not sure how much I’d buy into phoronix benchmarks in this case. CentOS Strea, 9 was performing as good, if not better than, the recently released Ubuntu 24.04 and 2 week old FreeBSD 14.1 despite having a 3 year old kernel and being compiled with an equally old version of GCC. Linux is currently suffering from a pstate bug with AMD, too.
There’s a reason the BSDs are hardly used in HPC.
JFC. The end all be all of Linux benchmarks, and you’re standing up to discredit their results? Photonic practically wrote the modern book on Linux benchmarks, but please tell us how they are wrong,nor mistaken.
3 other commentors have deleted theirs already for their inane fanboyisms. You want want to make 3, or do you have some new energy to bring to the conversation?
Why are you being inflammatory for no reason? I’m just saying I don’t think it’d be correct for an OS 3 years in the past to be neck and neck with modern stuff. Log off the computer and go outside lmao
Why are you? Touch grass.
FreeBSD doesn’t have desktop environment built in. So maybe running from command line or installation is a lot faster.
BSD might be faster but companies choose BSD because the BSD License is much more flexible than the Linux General Public License. Apple was even able to create their own license, the APSL. They would not be able to do that using Linux.
Wollte that is true, the question is whether that’s a good thing, or not, and for whom.
It’s a good thing for the owners of the codebase, but often, a bad thing for the community (even if the community contributes to said codebase).
For example, FOSS maintainers sometimes will (want to) relicense to protect their income stream:
https://github.com/CaffeineMC/sodium-fabric/issues/2400
https://github.com/LizardByte/Sunshine/pull/150
While corporations might literally have maintainers sign away their rights so they can take the work from their own community:
https://lwn.net/Articles/937369/ (canonical requires a CLA, though this + the subsequent re-license might have happened anyway)
https://lwn.net/Articles/935592/ (RPM spec files are MIT licensed at the Fedora level. There are likely chnages to RPM files contributed by the community that are now source-restricted in RHEL)
https://networkbuilders.intel.com/docs/networkbuilders/accelerate-snort-performance-with-hyperscan-and-intel-xeon-processors-on-public-clouds-1680176363.pdf (See section 2.2. Previously, this work was BSD)
Mixed bag, really.
I have 3 *BSD vms on proxmox, OpnSense and TrueNAS as well as a GhostBSD desktop for ‘play’. The TrueNAS started as a bare metal install and is now in it’d
3rd4th serverI also have 2 Macs in the house…
So I guess *BSD is well represented here, looking forward to the read
Hey! This is a Linux community
Sometimes we need to talk about grandpappy.
That’s why I shared here. Because BSD community already running BSD :)
Now, where did I put that Katana?🤔
The audacity. Do YOU see US going into windows communities to shill linux?
Oh. Yeah. Carry on then.
Look if you go to Windows community which is not similar to Linux/Unix like system it’s bad on you. But BSDs and Linux are very similar in design philosophy and are dependent on each other. While windows is different thing of its own.
But BSDs and Linux are very similar in design philosophy and are dependent on each other.
Interesting. Would you mind elaborating on the bold parts? Thank you in advance :D !
I think when it comes to tooling, some Linux tools are actually BSD software that works because of POSIX compliance. An example is OpenSSH.
Sorry for my wording. What I meant was While BSD and Linux are not dependent on each other, they do share a common Unix heritage and have influenced each other over the years.
Frequently software developed for one is commonly used on the other, such as openssh, iirc.
That makes a lot more sense. Thank you for clarifying!
Excuse me while I light my pitchfork
Thank you, i’ve never used a BSD variant myself but am a long time Linux user. Very curious to the next posts!
Lowendbox doing it is what really interests me
Have you guys tried secCBSD?
All of
politicsinformation technology is sexual pathology.Edit: bruh wtf its a real thing what, als o i cant read im leaving this as proof of me being a debil
Do you mean SecBSD?
No. Not sexy enough.
Love the analogy of visiting Canada as an American to explain how BSD is different from Linux.
Very excited to see the rest of this series. I still run some BSD box’s. I really really enjoy it. I really wish they would support Docker at this point but it’s complex and I get it with the developers they have. Jails still work so so well. I am on a box I think I installed end of FreeBSD 9 or 10 on and just keep upgrading. That’s probably get to the 10 year mark at this point. I will have to go and check. It’s such a smooth system to run really a dream. Wish more people tried it especially
Agreed and FreeBSD keeps getting better at each upgrade.
Also there is podmon (testing version), https://wiki.freebsd.org/bhyve & https://bastillebsd.org/
NetBSD prefers qemu as far as I know.
But bhyve is a hypervisor ( VMs ) and Bastille is jails. Neither of those is a solution for running OCI containers.
