Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 31st Dec 2006 17:26 UTC, submitted by Charles A Landemaine
PC-BSD Just in time for the new year, the PC-BSD team is pleased to announce the immediate availability of PC-BSD version 1.3 for public download. You may download this release and view the change log. The team is also launching a web design contest for the new web site of 2007.
Thread beginning with comment 197716
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
korpenkraxar
Member since:
2005-09-10

I'm with you. PC-BSD looks promising, but one of the most refreshing aspects of GNU/Linux distro usage compared to MS Windows or Apple is the powerful package management. I will never again use a system which does not have a fully integrated package system, but forces me to scout around on the web to find the latest versions of apps. Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like "apt-get upgrade", or a database search like "apt-cache search XYZ"? If not, I'll pass, for now.

Reply Parent Score: 1

re_re Member since:
2005-07-06

yes it can

Reply Parent Score: 3

korpenkraxar Member since:
2005-09-10

Goodie! I could not find any info on that on their web. Guess I should check it out myself then.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

"Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like "apt-get upgrade", or a database search like "apt-cache search XYZ"? If not, I'll pass, for now."

As mentioned before, the PBI system is for application programs, not for the system itself. As mentioned before as well, you can use the FreeBSD ports collection along with the PBI system.

To upgrade the system, you would do something like this:

# cd /usr/src
# make update
# make buildworld buildkernel
# make installkernel
...

(You can add KERNCONF=MYKERNELNAME to buildkernel / installkernel for a user defined kernel configuration. More information can be taken from the excellent FreeBSD handbook.)

And for the apps, as long as you want to take them from the ports collection, something like this:

# cd /usr/ports
# make update
# pkgdb -aF
# portupgrade -arpRO

This will update all your installed applications.

As it was also mentioned before, it's not a good idea to mix things in PC-BSD. You know, you actually can do it, but the use of the PBI system is recommendet. PBI works fine for average users such as Steven Q. Sixpack and Jane Average. For those of us who like to tweak and patch, the ports collection surely is more fun. :-)

And remember: You can still use the older pkg_* commands, such as:

# pkg_add -r xmms
# pkgdb -aF

With PC-BSD, you have 4 (!) choices about how to install software: PBI, portinstall/portupgrade, (classical) make, pkg_add. But if you concentrate on the PBI system, you'll always be fine.

Back on (main) topic: I've downloaded and tested PC-BSD 1.3. First of all, I don't like KDE very much. :-) Then, the german i18n is not very good (as it always was). Hardware detection works well, mount operations also do. The PC-BSD developers have done a good job. I will surely cdrecord some CD packs and make presents out of them for the many poor people with "Windows" problems I know. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 3

vegai Member since:
2005-12-25

"With PC-BSD, you have 4 (!) choices about how to install software: PBI, portinstall/portupgrade, (classical) make, pkg_add. But if you concentrate on the PBI system, you'll always be fine. "

If PC-BSD tries to be a sort of "for-dummies" system, having 4 choices as such is a bug, not a feature.

Though perhaps it can be ignored if just using PBI indeed works. But never never tell a non-BSD user that in order to update the system, you need to run three make commands, and then to upgrade the rest, you need a few more commands. Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command.

Edited 2007-01-01 08:42

Reply Parent Score: 1

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

With PC-BSD, you have 4 (!) choices about how to install software: PBI, portinstall/portupgrade, (classical) make, pkg_add. But if you concentrate on the PBI system, you'll always be fine.

There are only two methods to install applications in FreeBSD:
- via the ports tree
- via binary packages (pkg_add)

There are a bunch of tools in the ports tree that try to make installing things via the ports tree easier (portmanager, portmaster, portupgrade, etc). However, these all work via the two methods listed above.

With PC-BSD, you get a third option, using their .pbi packages.

Do not confuse portupgrade with a "new" way of installing apps. It's just a wrapper app that uses the ports tree for you. If you try to do so, then you will start to believe that there's more than 2 ways to install apps in Debian (via apt/dpkg, compile from source) -- you can't count dpkg, apt-get, aptitude, synaptic, adept, kpackage, etc as different methods of installing apps -- they are just multiple facets of the same thing: installing a .deb.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Joe User Member since:
2005-06-29

My experience with any BSD as a desktop is that it is several years behind Linux because of the commercial support that Linux enjoys.

PC-BSD offers commercial support like Red Hat or Novel.

Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like "apt-get upgrade", or a database search like "apt-cache search XYZ"? If not, I'll pass, for now.

PC-BSD has 3 ways to install software, the equivalent to apt-get is pkg_add, it manages dependencies the same way. The PBI has an update feature. And ports manages dependencies as well.

Interesting as it may seem, that statement does not have any descriptive, useful or concrete information in it at all.

From what I understand, they mean that you can install software like on Windows.

And I prefer typing "apt-get install XYZ" over finding, downloading and default-clicking XYZ manually any day.

You can do that with pkg_add if you really find it easier.

It seems though that there is more under the surface, but it is not well documented on their homepage.

I read on their site that PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD, so you should know that it has all equivalents to apt-get.

that seems like a clunky and disk-wasting solution to me

There's little difference. I prefer using a little bit more space, (maybe several tens of megs?) and have better functionality. I could say I don't like using a desktop environment because it uses RAM. We are in 2007, resources aren't as expensive as in the 80's.

Reply Parent Score: 5

garymax Member since:
2006-01-23

Original quote: "My experience with any BSD as a desktop is that it is several years behind Linux because of the commercial support that Linux enjoys."

Original reply: "PC-BSD offers commercial support like Red Hat or Novel."

I think the reply missed the point of the original statement.

Though PC-BSD may have commercial support the BSDs in general lag behind Linux in several critical areas--one being hardware drivers--due to the fact that more companies have supported Linux with drivers and such more so than the BSDs. This is the "commercial support" that was being referred to.

This has held the BSDs back for some time now.

And unless the BSDs can generate a killer app or killer system tool, or can somehow strike deals with major companies for drivers and firmware, I do not see how the BSDs will ever be more than an "also ran" or marginally-used system that always lags behind Linux.

Linux has more mind and market share than the BSDs do and I do not see anything changing in 2007 or beyond.

Happy New Year to all...

Edited 2007-01-01 05:23

Reply Parent Score: 2