1. 28
  1.  

  2. 4

    (reposting my comment from the other site)

    many features that require toil to achieve on FreeBSD, such as suspend on lid close, working volume buttons, and decent battery life, work out of the box on OpenBSD

    Suspend on lid close worked out of the box for me on FreeBSD, on a ThinkPad X240. (Well, almost out of the box — had to disable the TPM in the firmware setup, otherwise the TPM would prevent it from waking up.)

    There’s NO WAY battery life could be better on OpenBSD though. OpenBSD is not even tickless!!

    I measured the power consumption of the SoC with Intel’s pcm tools, it’s ~1W when idling in GUI on FreeBSD. Does OpenBSD even have pcm.x? ;)

    1. 2

      Thinkpad X240 user here. Suspend on lid close works for me with FreeBSD as long as I’m running X. On a bare console it doesn’t wake up. I have TPM disabled as well from when I used OpenBSD on it. With OpenBSD, it worked both on the console and in X. At least, that was my experience. The battery life difference between OpenBSD and FreeBSD was negligible in my experience. For what it’s worth, I’ve switched from using OpenBSD to using FreeBSD on this thing for reasons of performance and ports. Maybe when I get another Thinkpad that one will become my FreeBSD machine and this X240 will be my OpenBSD box …

      1. 1

        Battery life could be better for OS A if OS B had some flaw in support for that specific hardware causing it to use excess battery. Also, based on what I read, FreeBSD seems to be optimized for performance and features more than OpenBSD. It might just be doing more stuff. Only speculating here based on stuff I used in the past with certain effects on battery life.

        1. 3

          Yeah, one well known problem on any OS would be not loading the GPU driver — that often leaves the GPU consuming a ton of power for some reason. Modern GPU support on FreeBSD appeared fairly recently (on OpenBSD too though).

          But “more stuff” — nah. Idle FreeBSD does nothing. It’s easy to observe with virtual machines: bhyve processes running Linux and FreeBSD consume 0% CPU. With OpenBSD and NetBSD, there’s constantly at least ~5% CPU activity. Because non-tickless (tickful?).

          1. 1

            Gotcha. I’ll try to remember those.

      2. 4

        This seems to be a lot of, erm, work. Is there a spin of OpenBSD or another BSD that just kinda… works out of the box?

        1. 2

          OpenBSD-based distros show up periodically but usually disappear. I occasionally Google them to see what’s out there hoping we eventually get an Ubuntu or Mint… even a fraction of that focused on critical things… based on it. The ones I remember finding were Anonym.OS, OliveBSD (link’s dead), and MirOS. Last one still has a website up.

          1. 1

            TrueOS, nee PC-BSD, based upon FreeBSD?

            1. 1

              This is close to what I was looking for. I see Project Trident is a spin-off of that…

              1. 2

                GhostBSD too.

                TrueOS itself was a ready to use desktop, but now they’re moving towards just being a fork with some differences (LibreSSL, OpenRC etc.)

            2. 1

              I’ve been very happy with NixOS for that. I’m using it at work for +6months and when I received my new xps13, it was so straightforward to have something close to what I’m used to, that it would be very hard for me to go back to something else…

            3. 3

              For some reason these tutorials always pop up a few days after I unsuccessfully try to install OpenBSD myself. There’s always something very attractive about using OpenBSD, at least on servers, that I never managed to actually achieve on a Laptop…

              I’m a bit busy right now, so I just installed Fedora (which I was impressed with in general, but the memory usage is too high, and I’m afraid about it’s general instability) until I have some more time. I hope this tutorial will be able to help me then. Things like the non-functioning middle-scroll-button, core-duping firefox (and I really don’t want to use Chromium) manual network/disk managment, semi-working DEs, … do annoy me.

              1. 3

                With OpenBSD on a laptop, it generally needs to be Thinkpads as that is what the developers use themselves. On Thinkpads, it works marvelously out of the box. On other laptops, not so much. On desktops, it works great as long as you make sure you use supported ether/wireless chipsets and you aren’t using nVidia graphics.

                1. 2

                  I had a good experience installing OpenBSD on the original Matebook X.

                  1. 1

                    Well that’s the thing, I have a Thinkpad x230, and it didn’t really work out of the box. But I guess that depends on what you compare OpenBSD to…

                2. 1

                  don’t they have signatures? like you don’t even need gpg! https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html#Download

                  1. 4

                    They do have signatures, but they use their own tool called signify https://man.openbsd.org/signify. it’s right there on the page you linked :)