Arch-BSD

exapplegeek · 2012-07-27 12:31:28

Any progress?

check · 2012-08-10 20:59:03

Hm, why don't you port the Kernel of DragonFly over here? Isn't it more advanced through it's micro architecture?

bohocmasni · 2012-08-12 10:57:26

will use freeBSD and Debian packages?

check · 2012-08-13 17:26:08

Still wating for ArchBSD ;D
i will love this

bangkok_manouel · 2012-08-13 17:30:54

you won't be able to.
http://bsd.slashdot.org/story/11/07/16/ … nt-anymore

check · 2012-08-14 20:54:53

Sure? Only GNOME has shown to follow this way.
FreeBSD and other BSD's still have a little Bonus through their ZFS filesystem. Btrfs hasn't most of the features implemented yet.
http://rudd-o.com/linux-and-free-softwa … than-btrfs
On the other side is the FreeBSD kernel not very good at all.
I've seen no EFI integration yet.
Benchmark:
http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/

But from GNU/kFreeBsd i've seen that you could do stuff like that

Last edited by check (2012-08-14 23:07:55)

slint · 2012-08-14 22:49:18

check wrote:

why shouldn't SystemD be ported to BSD?

systemd (small d) is optimized for linux and relies on some things that aren't existing on other unixes (cgroups, udev)

check · 2012-08-14 23:06:37

slint wrote:

check wrote:
why shouldn't SystemD be ported to BSD?
systemd (small d) is optimized for linux and relies on some things that aren't existing on other unixes (cgroups, udev)

And not exist in the standard Ubuntu Kernel. Which is really quite funny, that "the" main stream Distro is not using Systemd

Last edited by check (2012-08-14 23:10:26)

ewaller · 2012-08-15 01:46:44

check wrote:

[And not exist in the standard Ubuntu Kernel.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, over?

One would hope it is not in the kernel

grufo · 2012-08-15 02:27:25

Why carry the BSD kernel with that stupid license into the GNU/Linux world??

Rather, if you want to work on an alternative kernel, consider the "Hurd" possibility and the Arch Hurd project, which despite the really big steps done is always in need of help.

Last edited by grufo (2012-08-15 15:50:01)

ANOKNUSA · 2012-08-15 03:16:52

Hmm, seems this thread's previous potential for constructive work and discussion has been replaced with a budding flamewar. Wonder how that happened...

Zancarius · 2012-08-15 03:21:02

ANOKNUSA wrote:

Hmm, seems this thread's previous potential for constructive work and discussion has been replaced with a budding flamewar. Wonder how that happened...

Agreed. It seems to me that the tone of the last few posts have been running afoul of this. The BSD (or MIT) license isn't "stupid," it just uses a different concept of free than the GPL.

Please be respectful of other distros, otherwise this very interesting thread will wind up closed.

Last edited by Zancarius (2012-08-15 03:21:11)

grufo · 2012-08-15 04:07:26

Zancarius wrote:

Agreed. It seems to me that the tone of the last few posts have been running afoul of this.

I apologize if I was offensive.

Zancarius wrote:

Yhe BSD (or MIT) license isn't "stupid," it just uses a different concept of free than the GPL.

Yes, that concept allows to donate a free and collective work to the market. It's like to say that democracy, among the other freedoms, should have also the freedom to destruct itself in favor of a dictatorship, without laws that prevent this. **But this is only my point of view.**

Zancarius wrote:

Please be respectful of other distros, otherwise this very interesting thread will wind up closed.

I have **FULL** respect of BSD operating system, BSD code, BSD people, etc. etc. The **evil** is only its license. **But this is only for me**

I close here the discussion about the various licenses, because it is completely offtopic. And sorry if I have introduced it.

Last edited by grufo (2012-08-15 15:48:32)

check · 2012-08-15 21:34:16

[Deleted my rant of the GPL, write me if you want to read it]

Last edited by check (2012-08-15 22:06:47)

Amzo2 · 2012-08-20 23:37:55

I haven't stopped this project yet, just been extremely busy, and it is a lot of work to do on my own. I know some people dislike this idea / project, but we all have different opinions, and I prefer FreeBSD, and it's packages are never as up to date as the port tree.

I already made a bootable iso, using syslinux, to boot a FreeBSD memory FS and speed up the boot time considerably, but i'm going to rewrite my makepkg completely. It's a mess atm

senorsmile · 2012-08-21 01:47:50

Amzo2 wrote:

I haven't stopped this project yet, just been extremely busy, and it is a lot of work to do on my own. I know some people dislike this idea / project, but we all have different opinions, and I prefer FreeBSD, and it's packages are never as up to date as the port tree.
I already made a bootable iso, using syslinux, to boot a FreeBSD memory FS and speed up the boot time considerably, but i'm going to rewrite my makepkg completely. It's a mess atm

This is a very interesting idea indeed. Keep up the good work. I look forward to trying this out.

Amzo2 · 2012-08-21 17:57:09

I was wonder if someone would be able to help me port the Arch Linux RC scripts. I know FreeBSD have their own RC, but I like the syntax style of Arch Linux rc.conf instead of the {DAEMON_ENABLE}.

CEPfister · 2012-08-22 14:08:20

I just want to say that Arch OpenBSD would have been a far better idea than FreeBSD.

Still keep up the good work !

Last edited by CEPfister (2012-08-22 14:12:09)

dhave · 2012-08-22 15:26:58

CEPfister wrote:

I just want to say that Arch OpenBSD would have been a far better idea than FreeBSD.

Why would Arch OpenBSD be better than Arch FreeBSD?

Last edited by dhave (2012-08-22 18:07:23)

bohocmasni · 2012-08-22 18:40:24

i think netBSD kernel is the best BSD kernel, Arch-knetBSD can be much better -.-

CEPfister · 2012-08-22 18:56:30

dhave wrote:

Why would Arch OpenBSD be better than Arch FreeBSD?

Well I am an OpenBSD fanboy to be honest. I consider the overall code quality of OpenBSD (malloc, rthread, firmware code, etc...) much more better than in FreeBSD.

bohocmasni: I also like NetBSD a lot ! OpenBSD and NetBSD have very good ideas. But I see what you did there...

Well, I know it's not appropriate to tell such things because of flame war and the likes, but as I said, that's only something I wanted to say. Don't take that too seriously. It's just a dream : Arch OpenBSD. *drool*

Zancarius · 2012-08-22 21:11:18

CEPfister wrote:

Well I am an OpenBSD fanboy to be honest. I consider the overall code quality of OpenBSD (malloc, rthread, firmware code, etc...) much more better than in FreeBSD.

This may be true (I had OpenBSD on some servers years ago), but FreeBSD has in general wider support and a larger community. I think that makes it a better initial target for a project like ArchBSD. Of course, I'm sure Amzo wouldn't have any heartburn if you were to take his work and apply it to another BSD at some point in the future. In fact, that might be a good idea, if you were willing to take it up.

I respect the work that has gone into the BSDs, and I was fond of OpenBSD for quite sometime due in part to its reputation of security and correctness. However, I had to dump it in favor of FreeBSD because, in my experience at least, OpenBSD has generally had worse performance than either NetBSD or FreeBSD (NetBSD generally being the fastest) on the same hardware. I'm sure this has changed in the years since, but it seems to me that I remember they were late in adopting kqueue.

check · 2012-08-25 11:58:28

0

Last edited by check (2012-08-25 13:18:03)

Jristz · 2012-10-10 13:37:56

nah, I prefer dragonflyBSD but ok

How run the project now??
any advance or retrocess
I check the github arch-bsd and the last commit is around 2 month ago

Is still live or is a zombi now this project??

Amzo2 · 2012-10-15 11:54:13

Yeah, I haven't added anything to the github in a while. I've just been testing and experimenting at home.

I made a bootable distro, which used the GNU userland, FreeBSD kernel + pacman, and syslinux as the bootloader, but it was highly unstable. I've also been experimenting using grub and a memoryFS, but it's slow at booting the root system.

I'm slowly making progress, but with the new baby being born I haven't getting much done, still planning and experimenting.

Last edited by Amzo2 (2012-10-15 11:54:36)

Arch Linux

#26 2012-07-27 12:31:28

Re: Arch-BSD

#27 2012-08-10 20:59:03

Re: Arch-BSD

#28 2012-08-12 10:57:26

Re: Arch-BSD

#29 2012-08-13 17:26:08

Re: Arch-BSD

#30 2012-08-13 17:30:54

Re: Arch-BSD

#31 2012-08-14 20:54:53

Re: Arch-BSD

#32 2012-08-14 22:49:18

Re: Arch-BSD

#33 2012-08-14 23:06:37

Re: Arch-BSD

#34 2012-08-15 01:46:44

Re: Arch-BSD

#35 2012-08-15 02:27:25

Re: Arch-BSD

#36 2012-08-15 03:16:52

Re: Arch-BSD

#37 2012-08-15 03:21:02

Re: Arch-BSD

#38 2012-08-15 04:07:26

Re: Arch-BSD

#39 2012-08-15 21:34:16

Re: Arch-BSD

#40 2012-08-20 23:37:55

Re: Arch-BSD

#41 2012-08-21 01:47:50

Re: Arch-BSD

#42 2012-08-21 17:57:09

Re: Arch-BSD

#43 2012-08-22 14:08:20

Re: Arch-BSD

#44 2012-08-22 15:26:58

Re: Arch-BSD

#45 2012-08-22 18:40:24

Re: Arch-BSD

#46 2012-08-22 18:56:30

Re: Arch-BSD

#47 2012-08-22 21:11:18

Re: Arch-BSD

#48 2012-08-25 11:58:28

Re: Arch-BSD

#49 2012-10-10 13:37:56

Re: Arch-BSD

#50 2012-10-15 11:54:13

Re: Arch-BSD

Board footer