Does Desktop have a future on BSD?

Agree - download speed even with the geoip chosen repository servers is dismal. I have no numbers but it is noticeably slower. I have far less bandwidth than you, mainly because the US lags far behind in provided Internet speeds than other countries. That is the fault of the companies providing our Internet connections so probably not much will change that...
 
I do understand they may not have the funding for fast connections or servers. Open source projects live and die by donations or people that can afford to support the project. I have donated a couple of times to the foundation because I like FreeBSD and want to keep using it. I don't care if it doesn't move forward at the speed of light like the progress does on some Linux distros - I rather prefer a slower pace and stability. As long as security issues are fixed of course :)
 
Sevendogsbsd said:
Oddly enough on Linux, I have always used a desktop environment, typically Mate`.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this is due to the trend of Linux moving to reliance on big DEs. The whole role of systemd is to be automated from GUI tools rather than use directly from the command line. Same with ip compared to ifconfig etc.
I would even go so far as to say systemd (and surrounding utilities) is very flexible... but it just isn't powerful.

Possibly the best example is wpa_supplicant. Its default systemd unit doesn't even listen on a unix socket for wpa_cli. It instead connects to dbus to be fiddled around with via the GDM. That is not a sane choice if Linux ever wants to pretend that it has a good focus on servers or command line.

Not all Linux is like that I suppose. Some are still trying to remain well designed. Anything with a text based installer can probably be trusted. alpine, arch, void, etc.

I have no preference between Windows and Linux these days. I cannot believe that happened. I actively avoid investing any time in learning any new Linux "feature". I honestly feel that any time spent is a waste of time. I might just be fatigued ;)
 
Arch is typically the distro I use if on Linux. Text install, lean and fast. I also steer clear of anything related to Gnome. The desktop experience on Arch is good for the most part; I have never had an issue running it. I just miss FreeBSD when on Linux so end up switching back, mainly because systemd seems to be moving so rapidly, I always feel “unsettled” on Linux, like I am standing on a flying carpet...
 
kpedersen said:
Possibly the best example is wpa_supplicant. Its default systemd unit doesn't even listen on a unix socket for wpa_cli. It instead connects to dbus to be fiddled around with via the GDM.
Click to expand...

What?? I'leave Linux sooo far ago but this is insanity .. R.I.P little penguin
or at least enjoy your last years
 
I don't have any problems with any Linux packages, but I am also not a developer so don't know what is happening behind the scenes. I know systemd has managed to worm its way into nearly every facet of Linux which I find odd but I don't want this thread to devolve into a systemd bashing thread. I also don't understand behind the scenes everything systemd does.
 
The only thing I find really annoying with FreeBSD is not desktop-related, it's the way packages are built. While a package is being built, the previous version becomes unavailable.

This means that when you install FreeBSD, you never know if you'll be able to complete the installation. You may have to wait 2-3 days until the new version becomes available.

It also means every time you update your packages, you must be very cautious to avoid having your whole desktop environment uninstalled due to a rebuild in progress.

Very annoying, indeed. It is even worse with NetBSD, though, but particularly well managed with Void Linux - yet a rolling release.
 
Do you mean if a package fails to build on the main FreeBSD repository that it will flag as unavailable and an update pulls it? That is annoying. Not enough for me to move away but does make me want to try and use ports, again... I have never had success at that though. I can use ports for a few days then something stupid happens and I start having failed builds that I have to troubleshoot. Reminds me of my Gentoo days years ago...
 
I don't know what it does behind the scene, but when you run pkg update, the package being rebuilt will be deleted from your system. You'd better run this command in a terminal window so you can scroll up and read everything carefully before confirming the update...

This is something people trying FreeBSD regularly come across, as can be seen on this forum. If the current version of the package was kept until the build of the new one completes, such problems would not happen.

Sevendogsbsd said:
Do you mean if a package fails to build on the main FreeBSD repository that it will flag as unavailable and an update pulls it? That is annoying. Not enough for me to move away but does make me want to try and use ports, again... I have never had success at that though. I can use ports for a few days then something stupid happens and I start having failed builds that I have to troubleshoot. Reminds me of my Gentoo days years ago...
Click to expand...
 
20-100-2fe said:
I don't know what it does behind the scene, but when you run pkg update, the package being rebuilt will be deleted from your system. You'd better run this command in a terminal window so you can scroll up and read everything carefully before confirming the update...

This is something people trying FreeBSD regularly come across, as can be seen on this forum. If the current version of the package was kept until the build of the new one completes, such problems would not happen.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are correct. I've often build a new package while running the old package. FreeBSD won't delete the old package until after the new one is build. If the compile fails, the old package remains.
 
Sevendogsbsd said:
I can use ports for a few days then something stupid happens and I start having failed builds that I have to troubleshoot. Reminds me of my Gentoo days years ago...
Click to expand...

OpenBSD does a bit better here. By default rather than recursing into a port dependency and building it will download and install a package instead.

So on FreeBSD I tend to do the same. For example if I was going to build dia, I would do $ make all-depends-list and just use pkg to fetch them.

I didn't run into too much breakage, compiling code needlessly just felt a bit wasteful to me. Also ultimately *every* port needs to have a clean Jail created for it to build in a completely deterministic manner and I could not justify that pressure on my hardware ;)
 
lasuit said:
I don't think you are correct. I've often build a new package while running the old package. FreeBSD won't delete the old package until after the new one is build. If the compile fails, the old package remains.
Click to expand...

I am talking about the official repos, not personal repos. If a package fails to build in the official repos and you do a pkg update, it will pull the file that is no longer in the repos because it didn't build.
 
I have been using FreeBSD on desktop since 2008, on servers since 1995. Never faced any serious hardware compatibility problems, however this has been a question of philosophy for me - which is primary, the software or the hardware. Naturally wantint to run FreeBSD I am selecting proper hardware, not just hoping to run it on any random crap.

Back in 2008 I ran into compatibility issue with Nvidia Quadro. Nvidia just did not release the hardware specs these days and there was only Linux driver available. But you can run Linux drivers on FreeBSD (not vice versa). So I got the Linux drivers working on my desktop. Today I am just trying to avoid any hardware with closed specs.

Today I have a desktop machine with several WM-s installed at the same time - Xfce, Mate, Gnome 3, KDE and OpenBox. For login I am using SDDM. Depending on mood, I can select the wondow manager I like. I like some applications on different WM packages, for example Gnome System Monitor, KDE Konsole, etc. Also have Crhomium, Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, Freeplane and others.

Best regards!
 
Argentum said:
Nvidia just did not release the hardware specs these days
Click to expand...
NVidia never did.

and there was only Linux driver available.
Click to expand...
There have been Linux, Solaris and FreeBSD drivers available for as long as I can remember. At least since I started with FreeBSD around the 3.0 era.

But you can run Linux drivers on FreeBSD (not vice versa).
Click to expand...
No, you can't.

So I got the Linux drivers working on my desktop.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt that.

I suspect you're confused about the Linux compatibility on the NVidia driver, most people seem to misunderstand this. That compatibility is there so you can use the driver with the Linux compatibility layer. It is not required for the driver to work.
 
Seriously, I don't see the point of the question. A "future"? FreeBSD can be used on desktops, and as FreeBSD is a general purpose OS, this usecase is supported by porting (and, if necessary for correct operation on FreeBSD, patching) a lot of desktop-related software.

There seems to be a misunderstanding as well: Some people expect some automated installs and configurations for a fully working desktop. FreeBSD doesn't provide such a thing (and doesn't provide it for servers either), as the philosophy is to deliver third-party software as little modified as possible. So, FreeBSD isn't a "good choice" for someone expecting a desktop installation to work "out of the box". But it isn't rocket science either to install a fully working FreeBSD desktop -- you don't have to compile anything, everything you need can be installed from packages, all you need to do is a little manual configuration here or there.

Therefore, if by "future", you think of that out-of-the-box "experience", that will probably never happen. That doesn't mean desktop usage isn't supported, it is and I assume this won't change either.
 
Zirias said:
Therefore, if by "future", you think of that out-of-the-box "experience", that will probably never happen.
Click to expand...
I'd say the "future" of FreeBSD is way brighter without any out-of the-box-desktop. We are a nice niche and it's worth to stay with this.

As having been said by others: One can use a desktop with FreeBSD. It's a relative low hurdle but a very very useful one. That's like a little FreeBSD-exam one has to take.
 
I would like to have more users ... I don't care if I use niche software or mainstream software as long as I am satisfied with the product per se. For some solutions I use linux, but native FreeBSD would of course be nice ... eg. helping out via teamviewer (well, I hate that piece of crap! but I'd like to have it in a jail to help my family members), or various video conferencing software.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top