Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

[staalmannen]

Stachlinux, now that's interesting.

Yeah I am excited too

One essential package that needs to work first before I migrate is "schroot". That way I could use a static "core" os and then seamlessly run a dynamic Arch in schroot (including X11 stuff) for big and complex stuff that would be horrible to try to build statically.

Ps. Oh by the way - if I ever had a say about a mascot I would vote for a Mr. Potato variant of Tux, but perhaps I am the only one that would appreciate such a pun Ds.

[Cthulhux]

So, Amzo, what is the benefit of pacman towards pkgng?

[Amzo]

So, Amzo, what is the benefit of pacman towards pkgng?

pkgng wasn't around when I started the project and FreeBSD 9.1 lacks pkgng packages .

[Cthulhux]

Of course, as it is still a beta.

That's why I am wondering if there is any benefit of Arch BSD.

[kraftman]

I know most people on this Forum are anti-BSD, but this was a personal project for me, to change some of the things I disliked about FreeBSD.

Nah, no more than BSD anti-Linux crowd. Why didn't you choose much modern DragonflyBSD kernel instead?

[ryao]

Actually, first of all, the project is using BSD userland, there was someone who attempted the same but with a GNU userland which has long died.

The reason I started this project, which some may not agree with, was the lack of binary packages that were outdated in FreeBSD repos and to change the initsystem to something more modern.

Basically, the project was to user a new package manager (pacman) and to use a new initsystem ( OpenRC ) and things have been going well.

A few other important changes are:

PKGBUILD and makepkg work with FreeBSD ports in a jail, this saves effort of compiling outside the port tree and having to setup a lot of system variables to keep them prefixed in /usr/local to keep to BSD standards

The benefit to this is ease, and you can also override variables in PKGBUILD such as LDFLAGS, CFLAGS, CONFIGURE etc to set any options you otherwise would when building outside the port tree.

I know most people on this Forum are anti-BSD, but this was a personal project for me, to change some of the things I disliked about FreeBSD.

OpenRC is a RC system, not an init system. Unless you have adopted sysvinit, you are likely using the FreeBSD init system with OpenRC on top.

Nah, no more than BSD anti-Linux crowd. Why didn't you choose much modern DragonflyBSD kernel instead?

DragonflyBSD takes a different approach to kernel design than FreeBSD, but it is by no means more modern. FreeBSD has both DTrace and ZFS. DragonflyBSD has neither.

[scjet]

Actually, first of all, the project is using BSD userland, there was someone who attempted the same but with a GNU userland which has long died.

The reason I started this project, which some may not agree with, was the lack of binary packages that were outdated in FreeBSD repos and to change the initsystem to something more modern.

Basically, the project was to user a new package manager (pacman) and to use a new initsystem ( OpenRC ) and things have been going well.

A few other important changes are:

PKGBUILD and makepkg work with FreeBSD ports in a jail, this saves effort of compiling outside the port tree and having to setup a lot of system variables to keep them prefixed in /usr/local to keep to BSD standards

The benefit to this is ease, and you can also override variables in PKGBUILD such as LDFLAGS, CFLAGS, CONFIGURE etc to set any options you otherwise would when building outside the port tree.


I know most people on this Forum are anti-BSD, but this was a personal project for me, to change some of the things I disliked about FreeBSD.

Cool, thanks for explanation, this is really GREAT news, and I sincerely wish ArchBSD the best in all of its future endeavours.
The best of the Linux distro's (namely, at the least, one of the very best) being Arch, which I luv, with the *BSD/Unix, my first luv. (that is, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD -and in that order).

It's a marriage that may help bear very fruitful results, one of them being, that ALL hardware manufacturers hopefully, and finally, start turning around and working even MORESO with BSD/Linux, at all levels, drivers', firmware,..., -did you HEAR that AMD/ATI Catalyst ?

[kraftman]

DragonflyBSD takes a different approach to kernel design than FreeBSD, but it is by no means more modern. FreeBSD has both DTrace and ZFS. DragonflyBSD has neither.

Dragonfly is what BSD system should be. FreeBSD was using Linux threads in the past, but switched to much worse and slower solution. It was using GCC and now it's using slow llvm. I would consider Dtrace and zfs as tech preview, so they're meaningless. Dragonfly has modern file system unlike FreeBSD which has legacy and crappy UFS. Dragonfly is also much faster, because it's using Linux principles.

[kraftman]

It's a marriage that may help bear very fruitful results, one of them being, that ALL hardware manufacturers hopefully, and finally, start turning around and working even MORESO with BSD/Linux, at all levels, drivers', firmware,..., -did you HEAR that AMD/ATI Catalyst ?

Keep dreaming. BSD is meaningless, because it's dead.

[Cthulhux]

So much about the questions why the Linux fan trolls had not posted here yet.