systemD is coming to a port near you!

[fel1x]

I quite agree. FreeBSD became an alternative of linux for companies who don't want to reveal their source code. Even raspberry pi 4 is not fully supported(wifi, sound) and I quite agree that the proportion of community engagement of FreeBSD is obviously lower than Linux. I think it should increase the number of individual users who can discuss on the community and it will help increasing users if essential programs such as Gnome, firefox, KDE etc offcially support FreeBSD.

The reason that more people use Linux is
a. FreeBSD is not proper for newbies who just started unix-like os. They will likely use user-friendly and automated os like ubuntu. When I first tried unix-like, I chose Ubuntu because its installer was much friendly for newbies. It looks similar to Windows which is the first os for most people.
b. Lack of software. Even Linux has poor software support than Windows. (Even though there is Wine, it's not perfect, and most people prefer native Windows.) Individual users(I mean who just surf the internet, playing games, watching youtube) wants a number of games, browsers, and other programs. But in FreeBSD the supported browser amongst Firefox, Edge, Chrome is only Firefox, and games that runs on Linux sometimes do not work on FreeBSD. Vulkan does not support FreeBSD(Wikipedia), and it is very sad thing for gamers like me.

Yet, the only cheerful news is that the market share of FreeBSD has risen recently according to Distrowatch. (but it is not that credible)

Summary: It is true that FreeBSD is dying, but there is still hope to increase the users.

 

[fel1x]

"I'm old and don't like change"

not always. FreeBSD adopted ZFS as the first filesystem in 13. I quite agree that it does not change much, but it can be important for users who want high compatibility. See what happened to macOS. They adopt metal and threw away opengl just in one update, and that bothered developers very much.

 

[kpedersen]

If FreeBSD fails to re-build its init system simply because of "being allergic to innovation" or lack of manpower, it will become even more irrelevant. Which is sad, but it may be inevitable.

I would honestly rather be running an irrelevant operating system than one that is unusable.

I am certainly not saying that Linux is *unusable* but it is certainly getting further and further away from what I came to UNIX-like for in the first place.

Plus oddly enough for things that are "old" or "obsolete" or "inefficient" on FreeBSD, I can't really see a market for the effort required to seriously do a good job on and improve. Because... well, why don't they just use Linux?

[Unsubstantiated musing ahead]
I almost fear that one day these "improvements" to FreeBSD will entirely come from rejects that couldn't hack it in the Linux world or make a celebrity name for themselves, so they come to FreeBSD instead where it is less crowded with less competition and try to needlessly change it whilst pushing their agenda making a worse Linux than Linux (but with *their* name on it).

Yet, the only cheerful news is that the market share of FreeBSD has risen recently according to Distrowatch. (but it is not that credible)

I honestly feel FreeBSD is getting more popular. Though I believe it is not because FreeBSD has gotten particularly better, it is just that Linux has gotten worse. Systemd is probably the best thing that has happened to FreeBSD's user-count.

Its a race to the bottom guys! Soon we will be begging for MS-DOS!

 

[hardworkingnewbie]

The thing is FreeBSD is in much stuff you don't see as such. It runs e.g. Netflix and Whatsapp, also quite a lot of the top 500 web sites when looking over at netcraft.com. Furthermore many NAS solutions.

And on top of it's driving the Nintendo Switch, Sony Playstation 4 and 5 (if this info is correct).

 

[Tieks]

"I'm old and don't like change"

That could be me. But how many companies like change? To companies, an OS is merely a tool. If it comes to their tools, they may be better served with evolution than revolution.

 

[mer]

FreeBSD adopted ZFS as the first filesystem in 13

What do you mean "first filesystem"? ZFS has been in FreeBSD since at least FreeBSD-9. FreeBSD-13 switched to OpenZFS-2.0 (ZoL). Before that is was basically "CDDL release from Solaris plus updates"

 

[fel1x]

What do you mean "first filesystem"? ZFS has been in FreeBSD since at least FreeBSD-9. FreeBSD-13 switched to OpenZFS-2.0 (ZoL). Before that is was basically "CDDL release from Solaris plus updates"

Sorry. I meant that the first filesystem on the list when we install freebsd. In FreeBSD 12, the UFS was on the top, but in 13, ZFS is on the top.

 

[fel1x]

Moreover, due to FreeBSD licence, things that came from FreeBSD(Netflix, playstation, Nintendo switch etc) do not always help FreeBSD. They sometimes contribute to FreeBSD source, but compared to Linux, the situation that big comapanies such as Red hat and SUSE apply their code to linux does not much happen in FreeBSD.

 

[dd_ff_bb]

At this point, FreeBSD is already dead: it's market share has reached the point of being irrelevant,

No, Its not

If FreeBSD fails to re-build its init system simply because of

Systemd is not a init system, its a almost complete new OS

the biggest single problem with SystemD is that Lennart is an a**h***

No, its not.

Biggest single problem; Systemd is almost another OS on top of Linux based OS which means it doesn't matter if you were using a Linux distribution for the last 10-20 years because now you have to learn how to use Systemd OS.

You want to change your resolv.conf nope you can not, you have to do it through systemd and add some packages to do that.
Change hostname? nope you have to ask systemd to do it for you etc.....

Meaning whatever you think you knew about your OS is not working as you might expect. You simply CAN NOT do that. You can not make batshit crazy changes to 30 years old operating system (same applies for programming languages)

I was using Red Hat Linux 6.2 (not red hat enterprise) but today if i sit in front of a Red Hat Enterprise Linux i cant do anything except cat and grep.

Does Systemd OS has advantages? possibly but i want to run FreeBSD OS not Systemd OS.

And let me tell you this Systemd would not stop until it completely infects Linux and takes over its host(its almost done). So bringing Systemd into "how ideal init system should be" argument is non sense.

 

[mark_j]

I quite agree. FreeBSD became an alternative of linux for companies who don't want to reveal their source code. Even raspberry pi 4 is not fully

That's because raspberry pi foundation chose to use a linux-based os. Why? Because linux kernel had a lot of the drivers for the hardware they wanted, broadcom was already using linux and the developers of the Pi were familiar with linux.
Henceforth, it has always been a struggle for other OS to work with it.
I've read of developers of the Pi saying it's no big deal, just read the Linux code and there's the driver information. Well sure, but they forget about the licencing system which prevents this.
So, your argument is not with FreeBSD it's with the raspberry pi developers.

The reason that more people use Linux is
a. FreeBSD is not proper for newbies who just started unix-like os. They will likely use user-friendly and automated os like ubuntu. When I first tried unix-like, I chose Ubuntu because its installer was much friendly for newbies. It looks similar to Windows which is the first os for most people.

This is quite true, as I see it also. I rank skill and knowledge of computing (in general terms) required to use an operating system as such.
1. Apple OS.
2. Microsoft OS.
3. Linux
4. FreeBSD
5. Solaris, other esoteric OS.

Of course, it's only based on those 5 and because they can be used by home users. 1 is easy, 5 is harder.

b. Lack of software. Even Linux has poor software support than Windows. (Even though there is Wine, it's not perfect, and most people prefer native Windows.) Individual users(I mean who just surf the internet, playing games, watching youtube) wants a number of games, browsers, and other programs. But in FreeBSD the supported browser amongst Firefox, Edge, Chrome is only Firefox, and games that runs on Linux sometimes do not work on FreeBSD. Vulkan does not support FreeBSD(Wikipedia), and it is very sad thing for gamers like me.

This is just a general statement, not particularly aimed at you, but you do raise a good point.

I do not understand this constant push for FreeBSD to have everything gnu/linux has. It seems to me, if you need those things, why not run linux?
Ok, sure, you might prefer FreeBSD, and yes, it might be great if those things ran on FreeBSD, but they don't. Sometimes you have to lower your expectations. If you can't live with that, then change to another OS (hopefully without systemD ).

Surely everyone only needs X11, a lightweight WM, xterm, xeyes and ctrl-alt-backspace? Ok, I admit, xneko is probably mandatory as well.

Yet, the only cheerful news is that the market share of FreeBSD has risen recently according to Distrowatch. (but it is not that credible)

Summary: It is true that FreeBSD is dying, but there is still hope to increase the users.

FreeBSD is dying? Seriously? FreeBSD will die when developers stop wanting to develop for it. What their motivation is, I do not know, but I would guess it isn't user-base expansion. An OS like NetBSD has flourished with a minuscule amount of money, developers and users; look at all the code pulled in from NetBSD (drivers, init system etc).

More users would help potentially bring more money to the project and this would be a good thing.

 

[mark_j]

Zirias I couldn't agree more.

I think the essence of the "Tradgedy of Systemd" talk by Benno Rice is summarizing this situation pretty well.
Systemd might not be the solution for FreeBSD (although I am not qualified to judge this) but we (as in the FreeBSD community) should certainly take it serious and properly analyze it in an objective manner. There are certainly things (i.e. concepts) in there which would greatly benefit FreeBSD too. Sure, the implementation might not be suitable for FreeBSD but that doesn't mean that we should just bash it and plainly ignore the benefits such a system layer would introduce.

You are correct, of course. That's why people are developing this initware software.

That's what is good about FreeBSD, you have choice. You can change your init system from rc. It's not trivial but it's fairly easy to do.
SystemD, on the other hand, is attempting to make it OBLIGATORY to use it on linux-based OS.

Not only that, as Rice says, the incessant scope creep of systemd is inevitable.
The developers find some process that does not conform to their latest set of changes and so they need to re-write a perfectly good utility. See hardworkingnewbie's post for a not-so-exhaustive list (who forgot systemD handles coredumps as well ).

SystemD might have started at linux with its foot in the door via init, but it's now inside trying to sell you carpet cleaner for your wooden floor and you can't get it to leave. Calling the cops won't help, they own the cops.

 

[Deleted member 56028]

At this point, FreeBSD is already dead

Glad you said that so I can use this website:

https://isbsddeadyet.com/

 

[ayleid96]

I would not worry about it, systemd will never happen in BSD world. BSD doesn't have any need for it.

EDIT:
Reminder that systemd has over 1.2 million lines of code, BSD world could develop something with drastically less code to suit its use.

 

[ayleid96]

...
I honestly feel FreeBSD is getting more popular. Though I believe it is not because FreeBSD has gotten particularly better, it is just that Linux has gotten worse. Systemd is probably the best thing that has happened to FreeBSD's user-count.

Its a race to the bottom guys! Soon we will be begging for MS-DOS!

That is the case really. I started using FreeBSD because of mess that linux became.

EDIT:
Luke Smith from youtube started to experiment with OpenBSD after a video about how linux is getting worse for average computer user. Its interesting stuff, check it out.

 

[Beastie7]

EDIT:
Reminder that systemd has over 1.2 million lines of code, BSD world could develop something with drastically less code to suit its use.

That's actually bigger than ZFS itself. I can only imagine how bad the stench of that code base is. Jesus.

 

[a6h]

About two years ago, a random fella came to the OpenBSD mailing-list and proposed the stupid idea of replacing Perl with Lua in the OpenBSD base.
He got mocked and told go fork your OpenLuaBSD.

In some projects -- OpenBSD for example, there is always someone to shut trends down.
In the FreeBSD, it's the Core job to CRUD new features.

New ideas and trends come and go, and some will stay. Consequently, they will divide a project in two fractions:
One group is cheering, the other keep whining, and that's normal. If you think it's not normal, then you are abnormal.

Some examples: ZFS, Forth/Lua, CVS/SVN/Git, X/Wayland, init/systemd, GitHub, c∅c, etc.

If you believe FreeBSD is heading in the wrong direction -- due to bad judgment, being under peer-pressure; or some fellas have difficult time to say "NO", ...
then you have to change the Core. There is no other way around. We can whine forever, but this is how you can do it:

1. Roll up your sleeves, buy some time by not watching Netflix.
2. Use the extra time to report bugs, port new programs, ... be active in the mailing lists.
3. Aim at getting Commit bits.
4. Build a circle of like-minded Beasties, of course with Commit bits.
5. Vote them into the Core, in a biennial basis.
6. By taking control of the Core => if something works, Keep it in stasis.

 

[sidetone]

About two years ago, a random fella came to the OpenBSD mailing-list and proposed the stupid idea of replacing Perl with Lua in the OpenBSD base.
He got mocked and told go fork your OpenLuaBSD.

It's not a bad idea, but it forces everything to change, and makes it something else. That something else would also be good. It would be a lot of work, just to change a language, whether it were forked or hypothetically adopted. It sounds like they're scared it might work well.

I would laugh if the person had the capability to fork it or fund that kind of project, and it turned out to be a success. It's unlikely that the person would actually do it, but the theory of undertaking it is possible. A mathematical scripting language makes a lot of sense in itself. I can't make sense of the syntax though, but I know barely enough to make use of very few scripting languages.

If such a thing happened, it would likely mostly come out of Brazil, maybe in large part from a university in that country. That's a country where Lua is popular, and Lua came out from a university from there.

 

[Deleted member 30996]

We can whine forever, but this is how you can do it:

I've got a Kali box sitting next to this FreeBSD box. I like FreeBSD the way it is.

If FreeBSD changes more than I like and want to run a SystemD box, I already know how to do it and have a USB stick readymade to get on it.

 

[a6h]

I would laugh if the person had the capability to fork it or fund that kind of project, and it turned out to be a success. It's unlikely that the person would actually do it

A diff-less proposal is not a proposal.

 

[Vull]

FreeBSD may not be for everyone. If you just want an easy-to-use desktop, you might be better off using Debian, or even Linux Mint, or even some other non-Debian derivative. Many of my friends are only happy with Windows or MacOS. To each their own. Some crazy people like me might be more interested in server software. Some slightly more sane people might even be interested in deploying server software in order to make a living, or for other such mundane purposes.

But that's not me anymore. I'm retired now. In my dotage, operating systems are just a hobby to me (just a hobby! Ya hear?) where I sometimes occupy my addled brain by maintaining some old web application software of my own warped design, and keeping it up to date.

FreeBSD is my top choice for web server deployment because it significantly outperforms the few Debian-derived Linux systems against which I've tested it. This chart compares times for my two favorite testing benchmarks, an interactive, browser-based, encrypted SQL backup program, and it's counterpart decrypting restore program. These time tests were run on one of my multi-boot systems, where I can compare how these systems run, using the exact same hardware, and using the exact same encrypted SQL backup file, to restore and prepare matching databases using commonplace FOSS on both the server side (PHP, PostgreSQL, and Apache) and the client side (Firefox, ECMAScript, and XMLHttpRequest) to implement both the backup and restore interactively.

 

[jbo@]

I would not worry about it, systemd will never happen in BSD world. BSD doesn't have any need for it.

I think in here lies the core of the problem? (Free)BSD certainly doesn't have a need for it, but a lot of 3rd-party apps that one might want to run on his (Free)BSD machine does. This will result in less software being usable/runnable under (Free)BSD which can eventually reduce the user base. BSD might not need it, but it needs an active community, which means it needs users, which means users need to be able to use somewhat modern tools (both hard- & software!) - one way or another.
Again: I am not advocating here.

See hardworkingnewbie's post for a not-so-exhaustive list (who forgot systemD handles coredumps as well ).

How does that even work on a technical level??

 

[mer]

I think in here lies the core of the problem? (Free)BSD certainly doesn't have a need for it, but a lot of 3rd-party apps that one might want to run on his (Free)BSD machine does.

That right there is the problem, at least to me.
Let's just look at the list way back in post 61.
NTP Client, DNS resolver, system logging, cron, automount, inet: an application can get those without systemd.
Own console driver: why in the world would an application need to depend on this from systemd?
Unified configuration for many system aspects....: Seems like every single Desktop environment Settings or Preferences menu item. If one must have "one place to go for configuration", that's an application on top of existing utilities like date, host, ifconfig.
D-bus integration: If dbus is present why do messages need to go through systemd or does this mean "systemd responds to dbus messages"?
login tracking: that already happens without systemd.
Docker support: meaning what? systemd can start docker containers if docker is installed?
Device Event Managing Daemon: gee the OS layers of device drivers and devfs/devd/devmatch already do this, so now systemd has to manage them too? This is a concrete example of "systemd is an OS".
system-homed: an application should never be depending on a users "home folder" format.

I've never anything provided by systemd that an application should be depending on coming from systemd. It's a lazy approach to programming, it's pushing security and best practices into a chunk of software too big to actually understand and vet.

 

[fel1x]

In my opinion, the Linux distro that mostly resembles FreeBSD is arch linux(no gui, port, administrator should manage the system manually, less automated parts than other distros) According to Distrowatch, the number of users of FreeBSD is 2/3 of Arch Linux. It is astonishing and we can say FreeBSD is doing its best now even though it cannot run linux binaries(there is linuxulator, but there are problems with some programs like Chrome).

The documentation and active community are the advantages for newbies. (I've never seen a Linux distro that documentation is more detailed than FreeBSD.) However, most people think that FreeBSD is kind of old because its UI does not look like Windows(which they primarily use). Linux distros that are recommended for beginners have GUI from the installation process, whereas in FreeBSD, you should install gnome and xorg, modify xorg, add some line to rc.conf.

Any distro that a person used first is likely to use forever. (example: my first linux distro is Fedora, and that is my primary distro until now) Changing distro may not be a good thing for most people because they have to move their data for installation and should be get used to the new one.

I think, at least, if FreeBSD releases a disk image with GUI on their website, there will be a significant increase for both hardcore uses and newbies.

 

[jbo@]

That right there is the problem, at least to me.
[...]
I've never anything provided by systemd that an application should be depending on coming from systemd. It's a lazy approach to programming, it's pushing security and best practices into a chunk of software too big to actually understand and vet.

Certainly! I fully agree! I didn't mean to say that it's a good thing that 3rd-party software relies on this.

In my opinion, the Linux distro that mostly resembles FreeBSD is arch linux(no gui, port, administrator should manage the system manually, less automated parts than other distros) According to Distrowatch, the number of users of FreeBSD is 2/3 of Arch Linux. It is astonishing and we can say FreeBSD is doing its best now even though it cannot run linux binaries(there is linuxulator, but there are problems with some programs like Chrome).

Arch Linux was my main distro before I switched to FreeBSD. I guess I'm not alone there
Not that this matters (in this discussion or at all), but I did never really became buddies with pacman.

I think, at least, if FreeBSD releases a disk image with GUI on their website, there will be a significant increase for both hardcore uses and newbies.

There are ongoing efforts: https://www.freebsd.org/status/report-2021-04-2021-06/#_experimental_installer
Sure, one might now complain about this being a web interface... but one might also complain about pretty much anything else if so desired.

 

[a6h]

According to Distrowatch,

Distrowatch is not a reliable source for statistics. Nobody knows how many people are using what, where, when ....

I think, at least, if FreeBSD releases a disk image with GUI on their website

There's no need. Just follow the instructions at Building A FreeBSD Desktop From Scratch by Trihexagonal