Whats the ubuntu of the BSDs
i.e. what just werkz
Whats the ubuntu of the BSDs
Hunter Thomas
Dylan Jones
macOS
Jose Brown
FreeBSD. It just werks. Shame about the developers. OpenBSD is pretty good to if you have supported hardware. NetBSD is the most portable but usually ports of it to obscure hardware are half done. You'll get a basic terminal and not much else. Have fun finishing it.
None of the desktop distros are really worth it. They're just FreeBSD packaged together with a DE port. The BSDs aren't like Linux distros. They're an entire OS+spec by default. Just grab what you need from ports after you get it booted.
FreeBSD is what you want if you want
>wine support
>Linux emulation support
>Virtual machine hardware passthru
Elijah Price
fpbp
Jacob Peterson
fpbp /thread
Owen Campbell
Penis
Benjamin Hall
It would be nice if NetBSD shipped more than CTWM, but at least it does the job extremely well
Kevin Adams
Nooooooo, why would you stab Tux D:
Leo Rodriguez
BSD is worthless until it has proper VFIO support.
Evan Bailey
FreeBSD if you don't know what you're doing
OpenBSD if you do know what you're doing
NetBSD if you're a turbo autist
Check out ghostbsd, hello systems, and nomadbsd if you want a freebsd distro with a desktop out of the box. I think pcbsd is dead now
Jose Bailey
no love for DragonFly?
David Miller
dick measuring contest for the most obscure os
Jace Thomas
there's no contest
Josiah Howard
Isn't VFIO mostly used to play video games? That's not what people use BSD for.
Oliver Wright
weren’t freebsd going so far as to disable security patches to maintain backwards compatibility with hopelessly outdated trash browsers that doesn’t support tls 1.2?
Samuel Ramirez
No, maybe you're thinking of them maintaining support for old SSH clients. I don't think they rejected any security patches though, unless you mean the patches that disabled the old SSH protocols.
Aaron Bell
I’m talking about this
vez.mrsk.me
web.archive.org
see last paragraph in the archived link
Leo Green
>I’m talking about this
that makes no sense.
those are about ssl, not ssh.
Landon Hill
I’m just going to assume you’re merely pretending
Joseph Jones
do tell.
SSH does not use SSL/TLS.
Easton Williams
Neither of your links demonstrate that FreeBSD "disables security patches". Instead, they show that FreeBSD actively patches OpenSSL and publishes security advisories about OpenSSL bugs when they are found.
The last paragraph that you direct attention to does not show FreeBSD "disabling security patches", and does not involve "outdated trash browsers". FreeBSD applied all of the patches that fix bugs, and did not apply the one that disabled an old protocol (SSLv2). They did this because it's wrong to remove functionality in a security patch release.
By the time of this patch, FreeBSD 9 was nearing the end of its support, and FreeBSD 10 had been available for more than two years. Anyone who wanted to stay on top of the latest versions had plenty of opportunity to do so. At this time, the latest release version of FreeBSD had in fact disabled SSLv2 support. I agree with their decision to not break existing programs through the security patch channel. Admins should feel comfortable applying their OS security patches knowing that it won't break their production server.