Re: Re: FreeBSD?
By: Atroxi to Chickenhead on Wed Aug 26 2020 16:15:00
> But other than that, I'm liking how FreeBSD handles things. It might sound o
verly cliche but all their talk about stuff being clean and easy to understand i
s true.
I use FreeBSD at work a little bit and also have it here at home on a couple of
SBCs. I don't know that I'd call it easy to understand as much as very well-docu
mented. (Though the evbarm/aarch64 side of things are sorely lacking in document
ation, but that's kind of to be expected.) Mind you, some of that documentation
can be mildly absurd; their wiki in particular used to be really bad about begin
ning with outdated (often by a decade or more) information at the top followed b
y successive sections newer and superceding the last. "As of early 2013 this no
longer works and you have to blah... Starting with 6.8rc3 in Jan 2015, you now m
ust blah blah... " and so on for ten paragraphs.
My biggest complaint has always been the unwieldiness of the ports system, and h
ow hard it is to find things you don't necessarily know the (package) name of, c
ompared to, say, using apt or yum on Linux. Evidently there are now frontends /
package managers that make this a little less painful. But I've been a Linux use
r/admin for close to 20 years, so maybe it's just a case of being very used to t
he Linux way...
One thing I find irritating (and I believe this is also applicable to, e.g. NetB
SD and OpenBSD) though is their philosophical refusal to allow one to view infor
mation about the CPU(s) from userspace. Good luck figuring out what frequency yo
ur cores are running at (or indeed, on some evbarm/aarch64 platforms that take c
ores offline to prevent overheating, even just figuring out how many cores are a
ctive), something that's trivial on Linux.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Starboards! [dot SPACE!] SSH and more
|
