Comment by brobdingnagians | Hacker News Reader

Comment by brobdingnagians | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

brobdingnagians

OpenBSD is very elegant and secure; upgrading is as simple as 'sysupgrade'. The developers use it for desktop/laptop usage, so setting up X is supported in the installer. They have a lot of their own lean, minimalistic applications that focus on security and code correctness. Things like httpd, relayd, OpenSSH, their own secure X11 (Xenocara), pf firewall, and lots more. I love setting up servers with OpenBSD because for most things those work very well for my needs. They work well together and do what they do well. I use it for my desktop, application servers, load balancers, and so on.

FreeBSD has noticeably higher performance, more packages, and is great for things like databases, virtualization, or application servers that are behind a load balancer or firewall. It has a lot of the OpenBSD applications ported to it though, so you can run pf or relayd on FreeBSD just fine. It's a bit more convenient to run FreeBSD for some things because of extensive packages (FreeBSD has things like C++ actor framework in packages, doesn't currently compile on OpenBSD). The jetbrains IDEs are better supported on FreeBSD than on OpenBSD too. (I've made some personal modifications to get things working on OpenBSD). Integrated ZFS is really nice for databases and storage servers as well.

I don't have much experience with NetBSD, but it is portable to all kinds of things (e.g. toasters), and they have done some neat things with rump kernels.

Dragonfly BSD has some cool experimental stuff with SMT and hammer filesystem, but I haven't played around with it much.

EDIT: A few nice things in comparing BSD to Linux. ZFS on FreeBSD is nicely integrated w/ the kernel. In general, I think solutions in BSD take longer to come around than Linux, but when they do they are well designed and thought through. Things just seem to fit better. From what I've observed, the community thinks things through and often recommend that someone use Linux if it would work better for the use case. That is a fantastic level of maturity; like when the hardware store guy recommends the competitor store down the street, because they will have what I need.

Is it possible to use a BSD as a daily driver on your primary computer? Compared to a usual linux disto (eg, Pop! OS, my current driver), what's the drawbacks?

I daily drive OpenBSD on a Thinkpad x220 for side gigs/personal use. The drawbacks:

* Hardware support is great for me because I use a Thinkpad: most OBSD devs use Thinkpads as their laptops. I tried on a work-issued Dell and the driver support wasn't there + some odd kernel panics happened. Target "current generation - 1" and you'll likely have less to worry about.

* Expect performance to take a hit – every so often Chrome exhibits graphical tearing, slows down, etc. The pages I frequent don't tend to cause this issue, but if your browsing is JS to the max you might have some headaches.

* You'll find tons of packages, but should expect support to be lagging behind Linux. Just a function of adoption, really. Additionally, OBSD compiles some packages with security functionality that isn't present in other OSes, so expect a SIGABRT or two that you might otherwise not see.

Really though, it depends on your needs. It fits mine perfectly.

Are you able to watch Netflix with Chrome (I assume its actually Chromium?) on OpenBSD? Last time I checked Widevine wasn't supported on OpenBSD.

>every so often Chrome exhibits graphical tearing, slows down

Force HW acceleration in Chromium (about:flags) and tweak a bit the /etc/login.conf (cap_mkdb /etc/login.conf as root after editing).

Yes, but maybe not 100%, depending. I have been using FreeBSD as my primary driver since 2006, and have been without a Windows box or partition since Win 10 was hatched. But, while I can accomplish 99% of what I want to do in BSD, I use Linux for the rest.

I’ll resist the fanboi post and just say the usual things you hear about BSD vs. Linux (good and bad) are true. Personally I appreciate the rock solid consistency (configuration, file system, runtime) I’ve gained from FreeBSD, but it’s not a commercially supported OS and there are times I’ve had to fall back to Linux (GOG games are one example).

I'm an academic (bioinformatics), and my use case is largely browsing, reading pdfs, drafting scientific reports in markdown (trying to move to emacs and org-mode) & docx, and writing code in python & R. I do rely on many bioinformatics packages, though most are available through conda. Probably 80% of my computer time is spent in Firefox or the command line. I've been linux only for over 10 years now, mostly on Ubuntu or Pop! OS. I'll be moving to a new postdoc position in a few months, and is a opportunity to do a clean install on my creaky Intel Core i3 laptop. I've been leaning towards Arch/Manjaro/Arcolinux, but BSDs have recently popped up in my periphery.

Would you suggest FreeBSD for my use case? Or another BSD? Or something else altogether?

I have very little experience with the other BSD flavors, but FreeBSD will be different than Linux, for sure. I used to use Slackware and I would say FreeBSD is fairly comparable from a “clean slate” perspective (although now it’s gotten much more full featured). On the surface you will get the usual support for Firefox, your choice of windows manager (I use xfce) and so on, but expect to do some tweaking. Using xfce as an example, the basic install is very different and fundamental than what you might find on something like Linux Mint, but if you see something you like, once you know you can do it, it’s typically not too time consuming to figure out how. More of this will be on your shoulders though. Sometimes you’ll find small things like right clicking on an archive to trigger an unpack won’t work out of the box, you’ll need to add that yourself. But once you get things dialed in, they stay.

After some reflection, I think the number one reason I’ve stayed with FreeBSD all this time is it’s so dang stable and it just works. Historically speaking, I can’t think of anything radical ever happening since I’ve been using it. When it comes time to upgrade it’s been fairly painless which boils down to making a backup and running a couple commands (crossing your fingers is optional, but I think it helps).

TrueOS may be tempting but my experience with it was not very good. In fairness maybe it’s better now. I just use the vanilla release and chug along and won’t deviate again. No point.

But for you – not sure. I write code for my bread and butter and am steeped in technology – I most certainly have blinders regarding the complexity involved, but again, if you’ve been using Linux for 10 years this may not be an issue for you.

*Edited for ramble.

>TrueOS may be tempting but my experience with it was not very good. In fairness maybe it’s better now.

TrueOS development has been discontinued as of May (?) 2020.

Xfce is more than sufficient for my needs - I've been experimenting with TWMs, i3 most recently.

As a long term linux user, I'm well accustomed to spending exponentially more time working on the system rather than actually using it. As biologists, our computational skills tend to be middling, so dogfooding linux as my daily driver was a means to learn. If a BSD daily driver takes my learning up a notch, worth it. The top level comments reference to "elegance" and "well designed" is what struck me - these are not things I'd associate with any of the linux distros I've used.

Do you need CUDA? If so, forget it. Because it is not there on any BSD. OTOH creaky i3 suggests you don't.

edit: I think one of the most important and convenient things is to get a NAS or build a small fileserver. That way you can decouple most of your personal stuff from the systems you are using via NFS/SMB/CIFS and give a damn about interoperability of filesystems, thereby gaining the ability to try out what works best for you without much hassle.

I do use CUDA, though not on my laptop. My usual workflow has been to fiddle around with the code on a minimal dataset which takes up most of my time. Once I'm happy with the logic and how things work, the heavy crunching (if required) is offloaded to CUDA workstations/servers.

The thing that gives me the most pause is how fractured the academic bioinformatics software scene is, and how poorly they're maintained once published. I've often run across requirements for GCC beyond what's included in the current Ubuntu LTS, for example. In my old lab I kept a CUDA workstation running the latest Manjaro for these eventualities, among others.

For the use cases I care about, the drawbacks (for OpenBSD) are:

* no filesystem support for ext4 or btrfs

* no working adb package (at least not for USB)

* printing is hard to setup

* no rustup (you must use current to not fall behind the Rust community)

* no native Discord app, which means screenshare doesn't work (neither sending nor receiving). I can still do text and voice chat with Firefox.

That said, I have been using it as my daily driver for over a month now. Last time I tried it as a daily driver back in 2016 I had to switch back to Linux.

When does that effing toaster meme finally die? Why do you repeat it? It may have been true in the early days of Linux, but nowadays it's just a fairy tale. Compare the architectures Linux runs on, vs. NetBSD. And then STOP!

edit: I like NetBSD, but that meme is just non-sense.

NetBSD still runs on the Amiga and the Atari.

So does Linux, if you absolutely have to. Meanwhile it gained the ability to run on architectures no BSD ever heard of.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com