Arch BSD: Arch Linux Atop The FreeBSD Kernel

[ncopa]

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

Amzo: You might want have a look at Alpine Linux and apk-tools.

You are welcome in our #alpine-devel channel on freenode for a chat.

[Cthulhux]

Or even better, tell them that apk-tools exists.

How is that related to FreeBSD?

[BSD SUCKS DICKS]

How is that related to FreeBSD?

It eliminates the "need" for using FreeBSD. What they are telling Azmo is that rather then wasting time on trying to improve FreeBSD, he should just ditch it and use Alpine Linux.

You should also ditch FreeBSD and use Linux for fuck sake.

FreeBSD sucks and so does all other BSDs and non-Linux crap

[kraftman]

What?

As a BSD user you should know about this. I bet freebsd jerks made everything to make their users forgot about their embarrassing past. Just imagine Linux threads were for some time an only option in freebsd.

What "Linux principles"?

Like database optimizations. Dragonfly is way faster than freebsd, because it follows Linux principles like:

"Light Weight Kernel Threads (LWKT) implementation and a virtual kernel similar to User Mode Linux."

http://lwn.net/Articles/384200/

[BSD SUCKS DICKS]

As a BSD user you should know about this.

BSD Users are always in denied. Thats why they manage not to use Linux and instead use BSD even though linux is far more easier and pleasant to use. BitLight in particular is a prime example of this.

I bet freebsd jerks made everything to make their users forgot about their embarrassing past. Just imagine Linux threads were for some time an only option in freebsd.

The FreeBSD project governing system is like how the country oceania from orwell's 1984 governs it's people. Free speech is heavily sensored in there and people and historic events become unpersons or unevens (In FreeBSD and OpenBSD).

[Cthulhux]

Thats why they manage not to use Linux and instead use BSD even though linux is far more easier and pleasant to use.

Use Windows then. You don't even need an X-Server for it. Good luck.

[LightBit]

As a BSD user you should know about this. I bet freebsd jerks made everything to make their users forgot about their embarrassing past. Just imagine Linux threads were for some time an only option in freebsd.

You mean LinuxThreads library? Well that is because Linux now uses NTPL, which uses Linux specific system calls. So they had to do their own, which is probably not slower than LinuxThreads.
I'm not freebsd user and never was, I'm occasional OpenBSD user.

Like database optimizations. Dragonfly is way faster than freebsd, because it follows Linux principles like:

"Light Weight Kernel Threads (LWKT) implementation and a virtual kernel similar to User Mode Linux."

http://lwn.net/Articles/384200/

So Light Weight Kernel Threads are very similar to Linux kernel threads? I couldn't found any reference.
Virtual kernel feature is similar to User Mode Linux, but it's not performance feature:

Dragonfly is also much faster, because it's using Linux principles.

[BSD SUCKS DICKS]

attention everyone, azmo (the only developer of ArchBSD) is a useless fucking prick would just wants to show off to the world how shitty his piece of shit OS is cause it's based on the shittest OS of all (BSD)

the world needs less projects like this

[ncopa]

How is that related to FreeBSD?

My bad. I thought I posted to the Starch Linux thread. Sorry.

PS. is there some way to filter out messages in this thread that uses font size over a given limit?

[ryao]

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.

Do you have a reference for your Linux threads comment? If you know how a kernel works, you should know how absurd that statement is.

Compilers do not matter very much as far as performance goes. Better aglorithms and code that plays well with cache will always matter more than anything a compiler could do.

Dtrace and ZFS could be called a "tech preview" in FreeBSD 7.x and FreeBSD 8.0-8.2. It is fairly mature in FreeBSD 8.3 and later. At this point, ZFS and Dtrace are no more of a "tech preview" than DragonflyBSD is.

Lastly, DragonflyBSD has influences from AmigaOS, not Linux.

DragonflyBSD has its merits, but it is different, not better.