SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Linux fanboys who rubbish the BSDs just because *BSD is slow to poison itself with garbage like systemd, Mono, Gnome3, Unity and all the other toxic rubbish that has infested the GNU/Linux ecosystem in recent years are one of the biggest reasons I am fast moving away from Linux completely. To be honest it's just Slackware that's holding me here. All the rest of the *buntu and RPM crap repulses me, not to mention the explosion of deliberately dumbed-down blogs which are designed to keep Linux at the same infantile level for years to come. Please do your research before you come out with nonsense about BSD. If you don't use it or know how to use it then just stay quiet.
Wow, he tears Ubuntu 13.04 a new one, here. And this is appropriate to the discussion:
Quote:
Lucid worked well, even when the laptop was fairly new. Pangolin managed fine, too. Indeed, three years forward, you would expect handling this fairly mainstream hardware to be trivial. Only what happens is, things are getting worse. They killed Jockey, because it was not sexy, and since, installing proprietary drivers is a nightmare. They replaced System V with systemd and upstart, and now restarting your services is a nightmare. Not everything needs to be an abstract event-based object. It's not as if you make boot times faster than they used to be. And you get a heap of other problems to further undermine your confidence and make things even shakier than they are. So you can perpetually wonder when the next upgrade will break something, and you won't ever know why.
All that Ubuntu uses from systemd is logind as replacement for consolekit. Restarting services has nothing to with that, this seems to be an Upstart issue.
Forgive me if I take nothing else this person says seriously.
I'm fine with people having their reasons for not immediately adopting a new init system, but the criticism should at least come from a place of truth and knowledge.
Utter rubbish. Do you use these operating systems or do you just rely on hearsay? What makes you think the BSD devs want "anything new [in] the core of their systems"? What makes you say the various BSDs are not as fast, stable or scalable? Have you used them? I have a NetBSD gateway idling at this very moment in time at 16M of RAM and 0.00% CPU. This gateway serves over 70 users and peaks at about 30MB of RAM and 2 or 3% CPU. It's been running flawlessly for 256 days. There are so many things in NetBSD and OpenBSD which are light years ahead of their equivalents in GNU/Linux. ZFS in FreeBSD, for example. PF in OpenBSD and NetBSD. Pkgsrc in NetBSD. And, last but not least, a group of quiet devs who go about their business and don't need to trumpet their achievements around the 'net.
Linux fanboys who rubbish the BSDs just because *BSD is slow to poison itself with garbage like systemd, Mono, Gnome3, Unity and all the other toxic rubbish that has infested the GNU/Linux ecosystem in recent years are one of the biggest reasons I am fast moving away from Linux completely. To be honest it's just Slackware that's holding me here. All the rest of the *buntu and RPM crap repulses me, not to mention the explosion of deliberately dumbed-down blogs which are designed to keep Linux at the same infantile level for years to come.
Please do your research before you come out with nonsense about BSD. If you don't use it or know how to use it then just stay quiet.
Wouldn't write it better. Unfortunately xenophobia (read ignorance & zealotry) does also manifest in the world of IT and is getting more frequent as the userbase grows.
I'm excited about the existence *BSD systems and the consistency of the base system and relatively conservatism in development are god-blessings also for my business. Voluntarily sending financial donations to the FreeBSD project every year as it makes my living much more effortless. If power management, especially ACPI support, gets more mature, I don't see a reason to use Linux at all.
Utter rubbish. Do you use these operating systems or do you just rely on hearsay? What makes you think the BSD devs want "anything new [in] the core of their systems"? What makes you say the various BSDs are not as fast, stable or scalable? Have you used them? I have a NetBSD gateway idling at this very moment in time at 16M of RAM and 0.00% CPU. This gateway serves over 70 users and peaks at about 30MB of RAM and 2 or 3% CPU. It's been running flawlessly for 256 days. There are so many things in NetBSD and OpenBSD which are light years ahead of their equivalents in GNU/Linux. ZFS in FreeBSD, for example. PF in OpenBSD and NetBSD. Pkgsrc in NetBSD. And, last but not least, a group of quiet devs who go about their business and don't need to trumpet their achievements around the 'net.
Linux fanboys who rubbish the BSDs just because *BSD is slow to poison itself with garbage like systemd, Mono, Gnome3, Unity and all the other toxic rubbish that has infested the GNU/Linux ecosystem in recent years are one of the biggest reasons I am fast moving away from Linux completely. To be honest it's just Slackware that's holding me here. All the rest of the *buntu and RPM crap repulses me, not to mention the explosion of deliberately dumbed-down blogs which are designed to keep Linux at the same infantile level for years to come.
I'm a huge fan of the BSDs and run them on a regular basis. I say live and let live and use whatever OS you like. I enjoy and use both Linux and the BSDs.
To be honest it's just Slackware that's holding me here. All the rest of the *buntu and RPM crap repulses me, not to mention the explosion of deliberately dumbed-down blogs which are designed to keep Linux at the same infantile level for years to come.
Wow. It's like you're inside my head.
If it weren't for Slackware, I'd have dumped Linux 10 years ago!
The good part about FreeBSD is, most of the time, you can join the mailing list, talk with the developers, and if a feature, driver, or support vector needs to be added, they usually can add it if there is no possible level of support. As of right now even some of the 3D acceleration issues within X11 are being resolved for non-Nvidia hardware.
FreeBSD is an ask-for-it OS. It's only added if it's asked to be added.
The BSDs and Solaris based systems do have very nice and stable software.
ZFS is one of the most technologically advanced file systems for any UNIX and UNIX-like system. There are even patches to add it to Linux, but due to the GPL license Linux can't officially add it because ZFS is CDDL licensed software. In return Linux attempted to clone ZFS with BtrFS, but BtrFS has become a virtual quagmire of issues and problems with each kernel release. In short, BtrFS is highly unstable, dangerous to use, and very unreliable at times, however it has some of the most advanced features near that of ZFS.
IMO, this is where the GPL license creates a stumbling block. If the GPL would allow for CDDL, we could get ZFS and chances are many people would probably switch over to it for their servers and workstations provided they have the hardware to support it, but this won't happen and can't.
Now, I'd be all for Patrick saying "F*ck this bullsh*t license mumbo-jumbo! This is my Linux distribution and if I want to add ZFS, I'm adding it!" To which, honestly, would anyone really argue with the oldest most recognized Linux distribution? More than likely no, but would it really be legal? Probably not with the way the licenses are, and someone somewhere eventually would say something, but the chances are it would stir up enough controversy to get GPL to change, but who's to say.
And yes, please do NOT knock the BSDs. OpenBSD is the most secure OS in the world. It makes Hardened Linux look like garbage by comparison. NetBSD and PC/Free-BSD are growing steadily in support factors and providing better and better software each release. It's taking time, but BSD is doing things the right way. Not haphazardly and recklessly.
And yes, please do NOT knock the BSDs. OpenBSD is the most secure OS in the world.
OpenBSD is indeed amazing; I also *really* enjoy that OS. OpenBSD takes bullet proof to a whole new level. I guess the point I was making earlier is that I am trying lately to not get myself worked up about things like OS selection. Life is too short to get bent out of shape over software turf wars. Just my .
Type in netbsd, openbsd, and slackware. One at a time.
Then type in the Big Three:
debian, redhat and ubuntu. Again, one at a time.
And if you think that's bad just wait until they get around to testing all the newly-imposed, half-baked Linux technologies which have just made their way into the Big Three. If anything ever demonstrated why Pat Volkerding is going about Linux the right way this is it. And if anything ever demonstrated the Big Three have a security nightmare ahead of them then this, once again, most definitely is it.
Quote:
I guess the point I was making earlier is that I am trying lately to not get myself worked up about things like OS selection. Life is too short to get bent out of shape over software turf wars.
Heh, not only in security sense and portability. To my surprise I find it also as the most responsive *BSD system on my desktop playground and pkgsrc is just sweet :-)
Now, I'd be all for Patrick saying "F*ck this bullsh*t license mumbo-jumbo! This is my Linux distribution and if I want to add ZFS, I'm adding it!" To which, honestly, would anyone really argue with the oldest most recognized Linux distribution? More than likely no, but would it really be legal? Probably not with the way the licenses are, and someone somewhere eventually would say something, but the chances are it would stir up enough controversy to get GPL to change, but who's to say.
As I'd agree with some of your points an idea about incorporation of ZFS in any Linux distro (Slackware included) by a decision to just disregard its license is a bit naive. It would also require a lot of work of kernel devs even Pat alone simply cann't match with all due respect to him.
but the chances are it would stir up enough controversy to get GPL to change, but who's to say.
Will never happen. To change the license of the kernel Linus Torvalds would have to ask any contributor of the kernel for permission, which is impossible.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
No, tell us how you REALLY feel? 
.
