.

Informative thread but I think we should scale down the images. It's for those who are on smaller displays and have bandwidth problems.

I tried GhostBSD but it just failed to boot correctly and that was before I found and tried FreeBSD. I may try NetBSD on my netbook when I get round to buying it. I'm currently trying to get FreeBSD working on a 95' system, nice high quality post mate.

OpenBSD is really awesome. Too bad I rely on my closed source Nvidia drivers.

Yes, but not the latest like I want. OpenBSD is always my option on hardware without a proper graphics card.

Isn't FreeBSD the same as PC-BSD just with a gui ?

(23-12-2012, 04:07 PM)Lith Wrote: Isn't FreeBSD the same as PC-BSD just with a gui ?

I haven't looked into it, I'm not sure if PC-BSD uses all the packages and ports available to FreeBSD. I think it auto configures specific things and whatnot you'd have to do manually in FreeBSD. Can't speak from experience so don't take it to heart.

Well i've just been 'scouting' the interwebz and they are saying 'PC-BSD is FREEBSD just with a GUI which is aimed at desktops and to be more friendly, i might actually give this a go on one of my laptops/

I read on Phoronix, but cannot find the article anymore, but I thought I saw that this developer ported Ubuntu Touch to BSD for tablets. I am not sure tho as whether or not that is correct, as I said I can't find the article.

Has anyone tried Debian/kFreeBSD?
Seems kinda cool.

(28-08-2013, 04:41 PM)Mafia Wrote: Has anyone tried Debian/kFreeBSD?
Seems kinda cool.

I have not, I would rather just use ArchBSD. But it seems like Debian/kFreeBSD has a wider user base, so I might give it a shot.

The Debian-Developers say that Debian/kFreeBSD is not a BSD Distribution, it should be a GNU-Distribution.

But ArchBSD is on my list for Systems to try in the next time.

Quote:The Debian-Developers say that Debian/kFreeBSD is not a BSD Distribution, it should be a GNU-Distribution.

FreeBSD-kernel, GNU/Linux-userland .. so even if calling it a distribution of BSD is wrong, calling it a GNU distribution is even worse in my eyes.

shtols Wrote:calling it a GNU distribution is even worse in my eyes.

But if they say it is a GNU-Distribution… They're know best what they do

IMHO you are right, but why they should call it GNU-Distribution, if it is not?

Quote:But if they say it is a GNU-Distribution… They're know best what they do

The developers don't always know it the best, especially when it comes to such 'politicized' topics.

Quote:It's not one or the other. It's a hybrid distribution.

Ack.

Here is a new one I just heard about called MirOS. Which does not have Mir as its display manager, its name had to do with Mirports (now depreciated) and is a fork of Openbsd.

Here is a link to their about page, and down the way a little bit it talks about the changes they made from Openbsd.

https://www.mirbsd.org/about.htm