Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 21st Jul 2007 21:11 UTC, submitted by kwag
PC-BSD The first beta of PC-BSD 1.4 has been released. "After months of hard work, the PC-BSD team is pleased to make available the 1.4 BETA release. This version includes many exciting new features and software, such as 3D desktop support via Beryl, KDE 3.5.7, FreeBSD 6.2, Xorg 7.2, new GUI tools & utilities, and much more." Get it from the download page.
Thread beginning with comment 257173
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: my problem with pc-bsd
by antik on Sun 22nd Jul 2007 07:05 UTC in reply to "my problem with pc-bsd"
antik
Member since:
2006-05-19

Is it just me who doesn't get it; I mean
when you only have support natively for flash-7
and have to use ANOTHER static version of firefox with some kind of linux emulation to get flash-9 working - isn't this situation just absurd? Never mind about opera.

Who said that Flash 7 is native- it's a Linux version? PC-BSD got Linux Compatibility Layer *ONLY* because of Adobe FLASH and GAMES. So your statement is ABSURD. And Linux Emulation doesn not mean you are using somekind of XEN or VMWARE on your computer- that would be really stupid thing to do- it means you got layer between Linux applications and FreeBSD kernel that translates Linux specific API to FreeBSD API. Sometimes in FreeBSD Linux emulation Linux apps are working faster than in native Linux itsef....

Until freebsd has ALL the stuff needed for a desktop, java, flash-9 and some kind of realplay support for cnn sites..it won't replace my linux desktop.
Java = FreeBSD native
Flash 9 = Linux binary- crashes a lot, using infamous ALSA s**t, etc.
Realplayer = FreeBSD native

The fact that freebsd lags behind linux in good software is a real problem.
What you mean by good software? Skype, Flash? I think that is Linux problem that there is problem porting some app to FreeBSD because of complete lack in POSIX compliance of Linux developers minds and some questionable Linux only features.

I am much more interested in DesktopBSD..at least they don't use such hacks

Err, now give me ONE example where DesktopBSD differs from PC-BSD? I still don't get it about what hacks you are talking about? They are both FreeBSD 6.2 currently, both use latest KDE, both does not modify any freebsd underlying code and both using ONLY FreeBSD repositories to install 3rd party applications from ports. Most PBIs are generated from ports also.

PC-BSD is not a FORK- it's a FreeBSD with pimped up configuration and additional tools not found in original FreeBSD installation.

Feel free to ask any question, I am a PC-BSD Quality Assurance Manager and can help you.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: my problem with pc-bsd
by OStourist on Sun 22nd Jul 2007 12:38 in reply to "RE: my problem with pc-bsd"
OStourist Member since:
2007-06-19

OK good software..at least 3 modern
jukboxes let's say rhytmbox, exaile and amarak
Video: mplayer , totem-xine and vlc + full set
of codecs(Fedora has this down pat)
P2P: emule, apollon, frostwire, bittorent
Web: Opera with flash-9 and java applets
same for firefox
Must be able to launch CDs and DVDs automatically
if desired like Fedora or windows..

I did try PC-BSD a year ago and found that while
the kernel seemed more stable and snappier
than linux it failed due to missing applications above.

Don't get me wrong..I would rather have BSD than linux as my kernel because linux is a hack in
many more ways than PC-BSD. But, like windows, it kinda works..
Anyway I will give the new PC-BSD a fair shake and
report back..do u know if PC-BSD runs well as
a vmware guest in linux?

Edited 2007-07-22 12:40

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: my problem with pc-bsd
by Doc Pain on Sun 22nd Jul 2007 13:35 in reply to "RE[2]: my problem with pc-bsd"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Please forgive me reformatting your text, but I think it's better to read without forced line breaks (aligning and linebreaking work automatically here).

"OK good software..at least 3 modern
jukboxes let's say rhytmbox, exaile and amarak"


All of them are available. Amarok comes with KDE, I think, but is available as PBI. Rythmbox and Exaile can be installed additionally (ports, packages).

"Video: mplayer , totem-xine and vlc + full set of codecs(Fedora has this down pat)"

Via PBI you get kmplayer, xine and VLC. The codecs can be installed via PBI too, if I remember correctly, but of course you can compile your own mplayer with any options you like (and are permitted to use by law).

# cd /usr/ports/multimedia/mplayer
# ee Makefile.local
... insert your options here, see documentation ...
# make install

"P2P: emule, apollon, frostwire, bittorent"

PBIs include KTorrent and Opera 9 has a torrent client included. The rest - with exception of frostwire - can be installed via ports / packages.

# pkg_add -r apollon

"Web: Opera with flash-9 and java applets same for firefox"

Fine! Opera 9 via PBI, Flash 9... not yet, but Flash 7. maybe you can use the Linux Flash 9 plugin via Linux ABI (alternative binary interface, "Linux emulation"). Java (JDK, JRE) is native on PC-BSD. Firefox too.

"Must be able to launch CDs and DVDs automatically if desired like Fedora or windows.."

I think KDE has this annoying habit. :-)

"I did try PC-BSD a year ago and found that while the kernel seemed more stable and snappier than linux it failed due to missing applications above."

You didn't know about http://www.pbidir.com/ did you? Most of your applications are there, and the rest can be installed via ports or packages. Just take a look.

# cd /usr/ports
# make search name=bittorrent

"Don't get me wrong..I would rather have BSD than linux as my kernel because linux is a hack in many more ways than PC-BSD. But, like windows, it kinda works.."

Personally, I would prefer a system that is good for a long period of time, rather than a systen that is "the best" (or claims to be) for a very short period of time. BSD offers stability, but Linux supports more hardware. Just think about what you're going to do. Always use the right tool. As a sidenote: I've seen lots of "Windows" that... kinda not works.... :-) same for Linux (allthough just a very very small percentage), when FreeBSD did the job perfectly. So I think it depends on you what your system will be able to do.

"Anyway I will give the new PC-BSD a fair shake and
report back..do u know if PC-BSD runs well as a vmware guest in linux? "


Uh... never tried this... but I think it is possible, but may lack in speed. Don't you have a spare hard disk floating around? Or a space PC? :-)

Reply Parent Score: 3