1. 13
  1.  

  2. 3

    OK, OK, great, nice, really helpful.

    But all of those tutorials about desktopping on *BSD lack a single convincing point, which I don’t need (I use OpenBSD on desktop more or less actively) but others would appreciate:

    How such BSD desktop solution would be appealing for some casual Ubuntu user who just clicks “ok” button and gets on with things? I don’t want to deprecate or make it feel worse in any way, just looking for some points or features which can be nice for people using some mainstream Linuxes (Ubuntu, RHEL, CentOS, Fedora) on they work/private machines just to click things?

    The only thing like that I’ve seen was “OpenBSD is not for you if…” paragraph in OpenBSD desktop practives howto. But it’s actually an opposite for what I’m looking for :)

    1. 5

      How such BSD desktop solution would be appealing for some casual Ubuntu user who just clicks “ok” button and gets on with things?

      I think we need to find a difference between a ‘desktop’ term for regular people (not IT related) and a ‘desktop’ term for technical IT people.

      My guide is definitely for the second group, such FreeBSD Desktop is not suited for a regular user, the NomadBSD may be suited that way, the TrueOS Desktop may be suited that way but definitely such ‘custom’ setup.

      I am sharing this knowledge as I use FreeBSD on the ‘desktop’ since 15 years and when I wanted to have FreeBSD desktop it was not such easy task as it is now, but still requires some configuration and that I wanted to share.

      Is CentOS/RHEL better suited for the ‘desktop’ then FreeBSD? Depends, Linux has the advantage here that a lot of software out of the box supports these distributions, yet when you compare the freshness and count of packages between these system families its on the FreeBSD side - https://repology.org/statistics/newest - you have to configure many additional repositories with CentOS/RHEL like EPEL and on FreeBSD you just type pkg install so its more friendly here.

      CentOS/RHEL has graphical installer on which You can select to install X11 desktop which is easier for less advanced users, that is the CentOS/RHEL advantage over FreeBSD, but when we compare it that way, OpenIndiana based Illumos distribution is even easier to use and install then CentOS/RHEL as its installer is more easy then the CentOS/RHEL one ;)

      So its a long discussion without end really :>

      1. 4

        How such BSD desktop solution would be appealing for some casual Ubuntu user who just clicks “ok” button and gets on with things?

        The real selling point is “fearless upgrades”. Pushing the upgrade button in Ubuntu feels like russian roulette, you never know what’s going to break this time.

        ZFS is nice - RAID-like resilience, LVM-like convenience, and filesystem snapshotting for history/“undo” for the same amount of admin effort it would take to set up one of those things on Linux - but the biggest feature of BSD for me is more of an anti-feature: they just don’t keep randomly breaking everything.

        1. 3

          The real selling point is “fearless upgrades”. Pushing the upgrade button in Ubuntu feels like russian roulette, you never know what’s going to break this time.

          A somewhat relevant data point: the Fedora folks have been working for a while on atomic workstation, now Team Silverblue. It uses OSTree for atomic updates/downgrades. You pretty much boot in an OS version, similarly to FreeBSD boot environments (of course, the implementation is very different). The idea is to use Flatpak for installing applications, though you can still layer RPMs with rpm-ostree.

          Although it is probably not a solution for a tech user’s desktop. It seems interesting for the ‘average’ user in that it provides updates that don’t fail when yanking out the plug in the middle of an update and offers rollbacks. The OS itself is immutable (which protects against certain kinds of malware) and applications are sandboxed in by Flatpak.

          ZFS is nice - RAID-like resilience, LVM-like convenience, and filesystem snapshotting for history/“undo” for the same amount of admin effort it would take to set up one of those things on Linux

          Ubuntu also supports ZFS out of the box. With some work, you can also do ZFS on root.

          but the biggest feature of BSD for me is more of an anti-feature: they just don’t keep randomly breaking everything.

          I think this is the biggest selling point for BSD. I have given up on Ubuntu for my personal machines a long time ago. Stuff breaks all the time and Ubuntu/Debian/etc. are so opaque that it takes a long time to get to the bottom of a problem. Arch Linux is a reasonable compromise, stuff breaks sometimes due to it being a rolling release, but at least it’s fairly clear where to look. Moreover, the turnaround time of submitting reports/patches upstream and trickling down to Arch is pretty short.

          But I would switch back to BSD in a heartbeat if there was good out-of-the-box support for amdgpu, Intel MKL, CUDA, etc. But apparently (haven’t verified) the Linux amdgpu tree has more lines of code than the OpenBSD kernel.

          1. 2

            I order to be able to easily undelete files I’ve setup zrepl to snapshot my system every 15 minutes. I have these snapshots expired after a while. In combination with boot environments this means I can mess with my system without having to worry about breaking it. I can simply reset it quickly and easily. This is very convenient.

          2. 1

            It’s been so long since I used it that it’s changed names, but TrueOS is the “I just want to have FreeBSD with a desktop and don’t want to learn how to edit kernel modules with vi” answer.

          3. 3

            The AutoAddDevices option is set to restore the old bahavior of handling the input devices (keyboard/mouse/…). Without this there is big chance that You will have to mess with hald(8) which is PITA.

            This is no longer needed. Xorg now has a devd(8) backend it can use to get informed about hotplugged devices instead of hald(8): https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-x11/2017-March/018978.html That’s working fine for me, even without moused(8).

            1. 1

              Thank you for that information, I added UPDATE 1 to the post regarding that case.

              I also modified the original post to not confuse future readers.