Feedback please: foundation of a laptop and desktop work group

[richardtoohey2]

One suggestion is to automatically install a light weight GUI.

Think this one was argued (and argued and argued!) recently on the forums.

Some percentage of users (myself included) are more interested in FreeBSD as a server environment, and it is nice not to have anything installed that isn't necessary (for that use case.)

But if "someone" did the work there could be a magic tickbox that was "install the default lightweight GUI environment". That will kick off the argument about what "lightweight" means, of course. And Wayland. Etc. etc.

And "someone" else would need to test that new install option, keep it up-to-date, test each new version, test the installer works properly for the option being ticked/not-ticked, deal with the fallout from different architectures/platforms, etc.

Ultimately you end up with something like Linux Mint - so you might as install that.

 

[astyle]

Do you think people LIKE having to replace kit that they bought "a couple of years ago" because their newest PC/laptop/phone can't deal with it?

Well, that's how Apple has more money than Uncle Sam...

IIRC, the box in question has a PERC H730(?) in it. The GENERIC/INSTALL kernel won't recognize it without setting a switch in sysctl. Of course, IT didn't tell me this -- despite being able to at least partially use the interface (to tell me how many drives I had and the capacities of each!)

Yeah, you have specialty hardware, not stuff that someone can easily find at a Best Buy (A US-centric tech retailer).

"Gaming" is how the GAMBLING (note my parenthetical annotation in my post) refers to itself. It is a regulated industry (except for the "grey markets" -- which aren't supposed to exist)

You can build a gambling machine from a BeagleBone board if you tried. It's not that hard to write software that runs and shows a rigged game on that. Hell, people have replicated arcade games like PacMan and Street Fighter using nothing more than mass-market components and a Raspberry Pi board.

... because the pilot (or skipper) is relying on devices that DO know about those things. Do you think those devices just magically appear because someone decides they need one?

If I'm flying to Hawaii, I don't want to end up in Miami because the pilot didn't have an internal sense of where they're going. There's kind of a reason those devices appeared in the first place, to make navigation easier.

 

[Deleted member 81054]

Yeah, you have specialty hardware, not stuff that someone can easily find at a Best Buy (A US-centric tech retailer).

I see quite a few people rescuing old SMALL servers (the box in question is 1U) for non-Windows uses. I ended up using this one as an ESXi server as that would be a good use for the memory and disks it supports. The fact that it wouldn't (easily) support a fancy display adapter is then unimportant.

Regardless, if you also want to support non-newbies, these are issues that you have to address. I suspect there are some "brand spanking new" boxes that would similarly have problems; the one thing Windows has going for it is the wide support base.

You can build a gambling machine from a BeagleBone board if you tried.

Sure. Most deployed games have far less horsepower. But, they all have market issues baked in that a developer unaware of them would miss (and disqualify his design as a result). E.g., there is actual CASH involved so a big incentive for "users" to try to coax the machie into "rewarding them", unjustly. Or, outright hacking the hardware (even under the watchful eyes of CCTV monitoring!)

When designing such a game, you have to assert to the regulatory agencies that it is "fair" and "unbiased". ObTrivia: pinball machines originally had no flippers. The ball would just fall down and "randomly" land <wherever>. This made them a game of CHANCE (i.e., a GAMBLING device! Subject to legislation!). Adding flippers converted them to "games of skill" -- to sidestep the legal issues.

[A similar reasoning exists for "10 pin" bowling]

If I'm flying to Hawaii, I don't want to end up in Miami because the pilot didn't have an internal sense of where they're going. There's kind of a reason those devices appeared in the first place, to make navigation easier.

It's actually pretty hard to get anywhere without some form of assistance -- whether it is maps, GPS/LORAN, landmarks, etc. In ages past, an ACCURATE timepiece was an essential navigation aid!

 

[richardtoohey2]

IIRC, the box in question has a PERC H730(?) in it. The GENERIC/INSTALL kernel won't recognize it without setting a switch in sysctl.

This particular issue (I think!) is being discussed:

'IBM ServeRAID M5110e and other mfi/mrsas users - call for testing / request for information' - MARC

Not really a big part of the ongoing discussion, but might prove useful to someone reading.

 

[Deleted member 81054]

This particular issue (I think!) is being discussed:

Yes. The magic (pre-boot) was:

hw.mfi.mrsas_enable=1​

Of course, nothing tells you that you need this (even though the probe() obviously knows you have an adapter that is affected by this switch).

Had the array not been seen AT ALL, it would have been easier to troubleshoot. The fact that the installer could see the drives AND query their capacities, labels, etc. initially suggested that the controller was supported/operational.

Providng the smarts to make such diagnosis/recommendations is likely beyond the expectations of a generic installer. But, if you expect people to be using rescued hardware, then these situations might be more common (AFAIK, all of my machines -- not just rack units but towers -- have some sort of "advanced" HBA sitting between the CPU and the media)

 

[Deleted member 81054]

Ah, I've completely forgotten quite, quite important thing, accessibilities.
So I've listed "audible" UI as an example. Voice recognitions in various languages (maybe Japanese would be one of the most difficult one, I guess) would be strongly wanted, too. Of course, not at all limited with FreeBSD, though. My thought is that implementing it on hardware or firmware level and make it possible to use it on ALL possible OS'es which can run on the hardwares/firmwares as runtime services/BIOS calls are mandatory. Making this kind of things OS dependent is crazy.

Do you expect users to have (external) devices to provide these interfaces? E.g., a DECtalk for speech output?

Or, do you suggest the OS host services that can provide those capabilities during installation and, later, during use? (If so, can you provide pointers to your preferred/imagined packages?)

My current project caters to folks of varying abilities so I already have a framework for applications that have to be "universally accessible". But, it ties in with devices/services (and hardware) that I've built (2D/3D gesture recognizers, haptic feedback, speech i/o, etc.) so I'm not sure how easily I could extricate it from them. However, having built tthe framework with those requirements in place is a considerable head start than trying to imagine the various types of interfaces that could be used.

 

[ralphbsz]

I'd love to help and provide a new user's perspective. I just started using FreeBSD on my laptop just over a month ago.

Welcome! And glad to hear you like it. And thank you for making constructive suggestions.

The only part which was a but confusing was I couldn't use the automatic partitioner for ZFS if I didn't dedicate the whole disk.

Given that this is indeed a common use case for open source operating systems (as a second OS on a Windows machine), the installer should learn how to do that.

One suggestion is to automatically install a light weight GUI.

Yes, but don't make it mandatory. I nearly only install headless machines these days (those that have no video output once in production, and are either servers or embedded). These machines have no need at all for Xwindows or any GUI software to be installed. One of the reasons I like FreeBSD is that the minimal install is kept lean and simple.

An option for console only, light weight GUI, full Gnome or KDE in the installer would be fine with me, as long as it is an option.

And please, please, please install a user friendly text editor like micro by default. Let's not subject another generation of *Nix users in the 21st century to shortcuts from the 1970s and 80s. This will put people off adoption of the OS.

The default editor that comes with FreeBSD (it's ee, also available under the edit alias) is indeed pretty weak. That doesn't bother me (as soon as the machine is on the network, I install my favorite editor, which happens to be emacs). Some Linux flavors seem to ship with nano as the default editor. Would that perhaps be a better choice?

 

[Deleted member 81054]

Yes, but don't make it mandatory. I nearly only install headless machines these days (those that have no video output once in production, and are either servers or embedded). These machines have no need at all for Xwindows or any GUI software to be installed. One of the reasons I like FreeBSD is that the minimal install is kept lean and simple.

NetBSD breaks the install tarballs into finer-grained chunks:

This allows picking and choosing just the parts that you are likely to need. The above shows the "required" sets. The "X11" and "Source" selections open another level of menus to allow more control over the sets within those groupings.

While most of my (BSD) machines are headless, I still install many X clients so I can connect to them with an X server and have a more comfortable work environment (vs. trying to do everything through TELNET/SSH text terminals). This is particularly helpful if I want to cut and paste between different machines.

As they run headless, there is no need for an X server on each box (and, often their video capabilities are really pretty basic -- like for an administrative console). I used to be more interested in running RDP or VNC on those hosts but decided it was easier to just "standardize" on using an X server. on a host with a physical display(s).

I mention this as it (VNC or RDP -- both widely supported on "foreign" OS's) may be an option for a GUI without all of the clients that might otherwise want (based on preferences) to appear on a host.

 

[T-Aoki]

The default editor that comes with FreeBSD (it's ee, also available under the edit alias) is indeed pretty weak.

Unfortunately, the default is still vi, not ee.
Although ee is not a feature-rich editor, it would be far more easier to use for anyone not familiar with modal and command based editiros like vi.

If more rich editor than ee (but not command-based modal ones) is wanted, it must NOT be GPL'ed (or any other BSD-incompatible from BSD's sight of view licensed). So unfortunately the candidates are quite, quite and quite limited. Most of the editors in editors category of ports tree are GPL'ed.

A candidate I could find is editors/turbo.

 

[astyle]

NetBSD breaks the install tarballs into finer-grained chunks:

This allows picking and choosing just the parts that you are likely to need. The above shows the "required" sets. The "X11" and "Source" selections open another level of menus to allow more control over the sets within those groupings.

While most of my (BSD) machines are headless, I still install many X clients so I can connect to them with an X server and have a more comfortable work environment (vs. trying to do everything through TELNET/SSH text terminals). This is particularly helpful if I want to cut and paste between different machines.

As they run headless, there is no need for an X server on each box (and, often their video capabilities are really pretty basic -- like for an administrative console). I used to be more interested in running RDP or VNC on those hosts but decided it was easier to just "standardize" on using an X server. on a host with a physical display(s).

I mention this as it (VNC or RDP -- both widely supported on "foreign" OS's) may be an option for a GUI without all of the clients that might otherwise want (based on preferences) to appear on a host.

FreeBSD has a very similar offering for the installer - and just like NetBSD, you have to pick an installer that is compatible with the architecture of the processor. amd64 covers laptops, desktops, and servers. One architecture, many different form factors. Pretty convenient, I'd say.

 

[Deleted member 81054]

FreeBSD has a very similar offering for the installer

The choice (and number) of tarballs that the FreeBSD installer presented to me was much coarser. E.g., I couldn't elide the compilers, X components, man pages, etc.
Or, are they missing, by default, and need to be installed in a "post-installation" activity?

 

[astyle]

The choice (and number) of tarballs that the FreeBSD installer presented to me was much coarser. E.g., I couldn't elide the compilers, X components, man pages, etc.
Or, are they missing, by default, and need to be installed in a "post-installation" activity?

Yeah, those need to be installed separately, from ports. FreeBSD does offer installer iso's that include a selection of pre-compiled packages (just pick an amd64-dvd1.iso.

 

[Deleted member 81054]

those need to be installed separately, from ports.

So, man pages aren't offered with EVERY install?

 

[astyle]

So, man pages aren't offered with EVERY install?

I think manpages for some basic userland utilities (like man and ls) are bundled with even the minimal installer that offers a base and kernel. Well, FreeBSD offers an even slimmer (think about 50 MB or so) installer where EVRYTHING is fetched over the Internet. You still have to select the installer for the processor architecture, true.

 

[T-Aoki]

I think manpages for some basic userland utilities (like man and ls) are bundled with even the minimal installer that offers a base and kernel. Well, FreeBSD offers an even slimmer (think about 50 MB or so) installer where EVRYTHING is fetched over the Internet. You still have to select the installer for the processor architecture, true.

If I recall correctly (I don't use installer as [actually] installer for quite a long time), all manual pages built as part of base are contained in man pages tarball and simply extracted if installation of manuap pages are selected.

FreeBSD has a bunch of build knobs, some defaulted ON and others OFF.
Scripts/Makefiles to create release tarballs use the results of the build depending on the knobs.

This means, anybody can produce release tarballs with different knobs than official release specified locally.

 

[aji_pineapple]

Also see tasksel a Debian tool that is run post OS install to select commonly used configurations. An interesting approach which can be a part of the installer or can be used afterwards.

https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/tasksel-install-group-software-in-command-line/

 

[richardtoohey2]

I can see why that appeals to some users but it would drive me nuts. What does "web server" mean - will I get Apache, nginx, lighthttpd? Will it install PHP? mod_php or not? What version? How do I change that? (Maybe there are other screens after this that would cover all that.)

Sounds like it is an extra tool - tasksel - so at least it wouldn't be in my face unless I wanted?

But again, "someone" has to write this tool, maintain this tool, test this tool. And that's where these things can fall over, unless someone really wants to scratch this itch (or pay someone to do the work.)

No harm in discussing wish lists, but it often drifts to the "why isn't FreeBSD like X" discussion that goes downhill fast. Just use X. (Bah, that sounds like I mean use Twitter!)

 

[Espionage724]

Connecting to wifi is probably my biggest challenge with a laptop. I've messed with command-line doing Ethernet, but have only ever really connected to different wifi APs on devices through GUI (old-school Ethernet management, modern-day UX for wifi management)

Currently it's easiest for me to USB tether to an Android phone that's then connected to the wifi I want, and have ue0 on DHCP.

The lack-of AC speeds doesn't have me rushing to figure out how to properly set-up wifi yet (I found a long Ethernet cable instead ), but I wonder how others tolerate this?

I looked briefly at some GUI apps and was confused about what at a minimum I needed in rc.conf. Some guides say ifconfig_wlan0="WPA DHCP", but that doesn't make sense to hard-code if I'm connecting to different APs and might want static?

 

[astyle]

I can see why that appeals to some users but it would drive me nuts. What does "web server" mean - will I get Apache, nginx, lighthttpd? Will it install PHP? mod_php or not? What version? How do I change that? (Maybe there are other screens after this that would cover all that.)

I'd want to do a bit of research beforehand - there should be info somewhere on the Internet about that. A few minutes of research up front can save hours of guessing, thinking, and making mistakes.

The lack-of AC speeds doesn't have me rushing to figure out how to properly set-up wifi yet (I found a long Ethernet cable instead ), but I wonder how others tolerate this?

I just swap in an Intel-branded card - I know that will work fine.

 

[cracauer@]

Connecting to wifi is probably my biggest challenge with a laptop. I've messed with command-line doing Ethernet, but have only ever really connected to different wifi APs on devices through GUI (old-school Ethernet management, modern-day UX for wifi management)

I find the wifi config on FreeBSD (via editing wpa_supplicant config by hand) to be a huge advantage over NetworkManager driven Linux. When not having a X11 server at hand.

It doesn't help that most Linux distros makes wifi configuration an applet, not a standalone program that can be used via remote X11.

 

[astyle]

It doesn't help that most Linux distros makes wifi configuration an applet, not a standalone program that can be used via remote X11.

Even that applet is a decent convenience that hides a ton of complex stuff that people will otherwise be required to know if they are to even start using wifi on FreeBSD. Absence of even that - it does drive new users away, and that's the hard truth. This is why people flock to new projects that offer it.

 

[cracauer@]

Even that applet is a decent convenience that hides a ton of complex stuff that people will otherwise be required to know if they are to even start using wifi on FreeBSD. Absence of even that - it does drive new users away, and that's the hard truth. This is why people flock to new projects that offer it.

Yeah, but try to set up a headless Debian system on wifi.

 

[kpedersen]

I can see why that appeals to some users but it would drive me nuts. What does "web server" mean - will I get Apache, nginx, lighthttpd? Will it install PHP? mod_php or not? What version? How do I change that? (Maybe there are other screens after this that would cover all that.)

And worse, it changes with each release. No stable base, a complete mess.

What is in the "Laptop" section too? Just random cruft.

Plus, tasksel used to look like this until recently. Good luck guessing what "standard system utilities" are. FreeBSD will hopefully *never* become like this. Linux is a gross sticky mess of freeware and egos.

And worse, you can't just check the debian sources.list for this grouping. The priorities used during the installer are completely different:

http://ftp.debian.org/debian/indices/override.bookworm.main.gz

 

[astyle]

Yeah, but try to set up a headless Debian system on wifi.

Yeah, think a newbie will try THAT as the first thing?

When I was new to Linux back in 2001, a usable graphical installer from Mandrake was the thing that got me started. I did turn away from text-based installers at first. That's why Mandrake was my first UNIX-like adventure, and not Debian/RedHat.

TBF, I still haven't tried doing a headless install, but at least now I know to study instructions/documentation until I have an idea on how to even proceed.

 

[Jose]

Given that this is indeed a common use case for open source operating systems (as a second OS on a Windows machine), the installer should learn how to do that.

Yeah, I've looked at that. That's one hairy piece of shell, man!