150 MB Minimal FreeBSD Installation | Hacker News Reader

150 MB Minimal FreeBSD Installation

vermaden.wordpress.com

146 pointsvermaden28 comments

Vaguely related, FreeBSD has a tool to generate custom small footprint variants, called nanobsd - https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=nanobsd&sektion=8&...

Thanks for mentioning this, I am just beginning my FreeBSD journey and wanted to setup a small pre-boot env with mfsBSD[1], didn't know FreeBSD has a tool already to do something like that.

[1]: https://github.com/mmatuska/mfsbsd

I don't know why but having a minimal system that only contains what is needed really scratches an itch for me.

Do the same for X! Well.. a layered addition maybe. I've always felt it's bringing swags of stuff which never gets used. A non accelerated fb or vesa binding would do for a lot of things.

I liked this piece a lot. Nice write up of how you explored the space.

Thank You :)

    > Do the same for X!

I kinda did ... but for RAM usage and not disk space.

Details here:

- https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2026/01/18/200-mb-ram-freebsd...

> What I really loved is that XLibre X11 packages DOES NOT CONFLICT with Xorg packages. You just install xlibre instead of xorg and everything works … even better then with Xorg

How do you control which one is used? I was expecting xlibreinit or something, but the rest of the post appears to just run xinit like normal with nothing that I noticed that would select an X implementation

What I expected - that if I would want to install Openbox - then Xorg will be forced.

I typed:

    # pkg install xlibre

... and X11 XLibre implementation installed and Openbox installed properly and 'xorg' packages was not forced.

The binaries of XLibre still have the same old 'Xorg' names like 'Xorg' is the server binary name (not 'XLibre') and xinit(1) is still xinit(1) ...

But if you already have 'xorg' package installed and you would like to install 'xlibre' package then there would be conflicts as they install file into the same places - and often with the same names.

Hope that helps.

Oh, I see. I would have described that as that the packages did conflict - that one replaces the other - but that other packages accept either implementation. Either way you phrase it, thanks for clarifying

In there an “accessible” BSD on the level of live CD Linux distros, like Debian? Hey you can play around but also install it if you want right here right now with a DE

I'd be interested to know too. I haven't seen one, but that's probably because the majority of the BSD demographic is for servers and such, which are mostly all headless.

Ghost BSD?

I switched from Devuan (Debian without SystemD) to GhostBSD a few weeks ago. Until now it seems a very pleasant travel, even bringing back nice memories of Unix in the 1990 while using all the modern tools.

I suspect English is not your first language based on your profile and I'd like to give a tip: "until now" implies that what follows is no longer true, due to a recent event that changed it. "So far" is probably closer to what you wanted, which expresses that it's still true, but based on limited time / experience.

Yes you are right, I am very satisfied with GhostBSD. Thanks for the remark!

GhostBSD is FreeBSD with GUI installer and MATE by default - it also comes with XFCE flavor.

Highly recommended.

Thanks exactly what I was looking for

I haven't checked out GhostBSD's site in a while, and saw they had a version with a DE called "Gershwin" I've never heard of before. It looks really cool for those Apple folk among us https://github.com/gershwin-desktop/gershwin-desktop

Oh wow I love that look! Might have to check this out as well.

I tried them all. Surprisingly macOS + homebrew feels more like FreeBSD with a layer of something else over the top that runs Photoshop. I am happy with that mid-ground.

I ran FreeBSD on actual hardware doing mail/web from about 1997-2014 then quit trying.

nomadbsd https://nomadbsd.org/

> Also keep in mind that You have entire static FreeBSD Rescue System available under /rescue dir.

If you have ZFS with boot environments, how valuable is that?

I always like to have options - with /rescue you have statically linked bectl(8) and zpool(8) and zfs(8) commands - which help to manage ZFS and ZFS Boot Environments.

You can access /rescue without rebooting, for one thing.

Wish Debian or RHEL could do this the way Alpine does…

Debian Netinst joined the chat.

If you wanna a reliable, stable, dramas free and small Linux system (I know FreeBSD isn't Linux), Debian Netinst is the way.

I run it on my homelab for DNS, K8S, love it!

debian netinst is when you want a small boot environment, it can then be as small or large as you want it to, but that is also true for booting debian live with gnome, you could install with ”debootstrap”.

a more analogous debian tool would be debian live-build: https://manpages.debian.org/testing/live-build/live-build.7....

Wait until you run `pkg upgrade` and it takes several times the 150MiB...

Please read entire article (or at least skim read it) because I also cover that part :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com