Linked by the_randymon on Fri 25th Jan 2013 09:21 UTC
Linux After about a year of work, the ArchLinux distribution now offers a variant running on the FreeBSD kernel. Says the developer, "Why would I do this? If like me, you enjoy FreeBSD and love it, but also like the philosophy behind Arch Linux, which is a fast, lightweight, optimized distro, I figured why not combine the both. Even though you could just do it on FreeBSD using the ports, not everyone wants to compile." This now puts Arch in the same category as Debian with Debian GNU/KFreeBSD, which offers a Debian userland on top of a FreeBSD kernel.
Thread beginning with comment 550445
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by MOS6510
by lucas_maximus on Fri 25th Jan 2013 12:15 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

When I used to use BSD systems as a desktop, is because I didn't want to use Linux after a lot of it at the time was not particularly well documented compared to other systems like OpenBSD.

I've always preferred the OpenBSD ... if we say it supported it works, if we say it doesn't it doesn't or is likely to cause headaches.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 25th Jan 2013 12:28 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I've used FreeBSD for a while on the desktop, but I already had a few years Linux experience (which we had running on servers at work) and too many things were the same, slightly different or very different.

In the end I found it too confusing to be using both so I sadly had to let go of FreeBSD.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by Laurence on Fri 25th Jan 2013 12:42 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Personally I find switching between Windows and *nix more confusing than switching between Arch, Debian, SLES, Solaris and FreeBSD every day.

At least with the different *nix's, they're all largely POSIX and any terminal mistakes takes just a couple of seconds to spot (eg using ps ax in Solaris, forgetting I need to use the hyphened switches instead).

Switching between Windows and *nix, I'm confronted with not only a different type of terminal shell entirely (the number of times I type ls into cmd.exe is just embarrassing), but a completely different file system hierarchy and even a unique different.

Quite honestly, it almost always takes me 5 or 10 minutes of guess work before I've readjusted to Windows.

Edited 2013-01-25 12:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3