this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2023
518 points (86.4% liked)
linuxmemes
21378 readers
1357 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry will not be tolerated.
- These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudoin Windows. - No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now. ย
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm actually curious what BSD provides in comparison to Linux. What does it add, do better, or worse?
The only thing I know is that they introduced some stuff way before linux did, but that's simply due to the age. BSD jails for example have been around for a long time. Buy beyond that, it was never apparent to me why linux took off and BSD didn't.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Bsd is a complete package and tested as such. All the software and everything. It's like windows, when it's released you install it and you get wordpad, edge, calculator etc. Bsd is the same that way. Linux is just a kernel, with the distributions bolting on the gnu software. I know it sounds kinda the same but it's not.
Also the license. With Linux I think you need to cite it's use and you can't charge for something build with it (of course there's exceptions, like packages you create do not need to be for example), but bsd license is the most permissive. You can charge a customer for it and dress it up however you want.
No systemd.
There's some other stuff too
You don't need to cite, you need to provide source code. The point of GPL is to allow the user to inspect and modify the software. You can even sell it as long as you provide the modified source code under the same license.
Thanks, that's the best explanation I've gotten so far ๐
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
I would say the biggest advantage is that OpenBSD is a very security-focused distribution, in a way that I don't think any Linux-based distro has adopted.
The other advantage is ZFS. 10-20 years ago, there was no equivalent, and btrfs was in its infancy. These days, btrfs has proven that it is pretty stable and resilient. There might still be some advantages of ZFS over btrfs, but I haven't used either one at all, so I can't really be sure.
Outside of that, the BSDs are basically just different distros. Back in the 90s, when there was a lot more diversity in Unix, a lot of people just started out with *BSD because there was no clear choice at the time. People just like to use what they are more comfortable with - but most new users pick Linux over BSD these days, and a lot of people who started out on BSD have assimilated onto Linux.
Still, diversity is a good, nice thing, especially with the advent of systemd. So I'm glad we still have the BSDs around, even if I disagree with their stance toward the GPL.
Also zfs on Linux has been a thing for a while now
Still, now I'd use BTRFS over ZFS any time.
Curently, there are none. In fact, BTRFS has outperformed ZFS in every aspect in the past few years, including filesystem growth (when changing drives, put in bigger ones, something you could never do with ZFS).
The main reason is more drivers and software. Sure, it might be fun compiling from source when you're young, but at the end of the day, when you wanna get work done, you really can't tell your customer (or boss) "look, I really can't deal with this right now, I'm building FF from source". Also, one of the main reasons why Gentoo and LFS have a fairly small user base.
There are distros that don't use systemd, Void being the most prominent of them all (mainly because of the number of packages it has in it's repo).
You get to write your own drivers from scratch, so you know for sure no one is spying on you ๐.
Linux took off because, one, it wasn't backed up by an institution or a company, just one guy doing weird stuff with his computer, and two, because of the license. People don't like investing time in something that others might use for free in their commercial products. And not only that, but they're not bound by law to release the source for that. And this is the reasson why every printer out there runs a BSD variant, not Linux.
Yea I don't use Linux much but both my router and nas are running BSD. Also I found out the PS5 runs BSD. Guessing the benefits are a stable OS as my router/nas often have uptime in the months with my NAS once running over a year without being restarted.
No, it's because BSD has a permissive license, unlike Linux. You have to release source if you change the source, which is not what BSD is about. BSD says "here's the source, do whatever you want with it".
ZFS is stable as fuck there. Perfect for running a file server.
BTRFS is there as well in the past few years or so.