Slashdot Mirror
PC-BSD 7 Released, With KDE 4.1.1
Gonzalo Martinez-Sanjuan Sanchez writes "The PC-BSD team is pleased to announce PC-BSD version 7.0! (Release Name: Fibonacci Edition.) This release marks a milestone for PC-BSD, by moving to the latest FreeBSD 7-Stable and also incorporating the KDE 4.1.1 desktop. Users will immediately notice the improved visual interface that KDE 4.1.1 offers, as well as a large improvement in hardware support and speed from the update to FreeBSD 7-Stable."
where's the Bonaccio edition?
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
Does it run a unix-like, desktop-oriented operating system based on FreeBSD?
Nope, definitely doesn't have the same ring to it.
Looks like 32-bits only. How quaint.
And nobody will care, because the thing is named "PC-BSD". What is this, 1985?
Does it run Linux?
Yeah, just install /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base-fc6.
Right, they should have named it "Hurtling Llama" or "Stoned Hyena".
7 comments, and no "BSD is dying"-troll yet? Slashdot confirms it, "BSD is dying-troll" is dying.
So the minor versions go 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13...?
("One... two... FIVE!" "Three, sir!" "Three!")
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
Sure, just install the linux-base for binary emulation. Occasional user of elfbrand may be required.
I wish.
I love BSD, but I need machine virtualization such as that offered by Virtualbox. As soon as it's ported I'll probably start running a BSD variant as my primary desktop OS again.
Wake me when you can run VMware or VirtualBox under BSD. Until then, it's useless to me.
Occasional user of elfbrand may be required.
It's brandelf
Is qemu not good enough?
Method of processing duck feet
KDE 4.1.1 may not be as mature as >3.5.9, but it's certainly usable. Apart from Dolphin being something of a joke (horribly slow, but for all I know that might be a local or Debian problem; I don't even use it), I haven't had any trouble with KDE for a month or so. It's not a bad desktop.
Its nice to see a PC-BSD release based on FreeBSD-7.0.
Personally, I rather like the PBI concept. I got a little frustrated when setting up Firefox v3 on Ubuntu*, due to having to upgrade loads of libraries just to use it, which in turn caused many packages to become unusable unless they were also upgraded. I don't want to do a full OS upgraded just to use a web browser.
With PBI packages, the installation is sandboxed in its own directory, along with the needed libraries. This does take up more space, but in the long run it makes for quite a stable system.
*I like and use Ubuntu. I am not saying PCBSD is better or worse then Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution.
Very, very often I scratch my head and wonder why there's such an obsession with the Linux kernel when it comes to desktops based around GNOME/KDE. From a desktop end-user point of view (and I'm an end-user), there's little difference between the two. The various types of BSD have great wifi card support, and most printers are supported by CUPS nowadays independently of the kernel. That's just about all I need, to be honest. Everything else I need is provided by software, such as Firefox.
What I like most about BSD is simply that it isn't Linux. It hasn't got the baggage that Linux has. I can mention it in polite conversation without being thought of as a fanatic. There are very, very few BSD fanboys -- people using it tend to be older, and more mature. It doesn't get on Digg, and if it does there will be like 10 comments from people passing the time, rather than debating how Windoze sux!!!!1!
This is a great thing. Perhaps it's just like Linux used to be 10 years ago.
<shamelessplug>
I recently wrote a short comparison of KDE 3.5 vs 4.1. It's targeted primarily at Kubuntu users (who will be forced to upgrade to 4.1 with the release of Intrepid Ibex), but others at /. may find it useful.
I've only been using 4.1 for about a week, though, so it's really just my initial impressions.
</shamelessplug>
Get with the times :)
Install /usr/ports/emulators/linux_base-f8
This is a silly question, but have you tried the linux binary compatibility layer? I haven't, but I've been meaning to try since it appears that a native port is a ways off.
Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.
That is not the linux kernel but rather just some userland crap running on the linuxolator. This is not even close to the same thing.
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
The linuxolator has trouble running modern virtualization environments. Not all the system calls are available to do so. For instance, vmware wont' run after like version 3. VirtualBox is a real pain to port and most other products don't work right.
MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
You are correct, sir. Its not a command that I use very often and so I forgot.
Rant over.
I think the point wasn't so much that KDE4 is lacking, although my recent spin of ibex showed a few limitations compared to hardy (some kde some kubuntu), but that BSD has a reputation for a throughly inspected, very stable environment and KDE4 hasnt been out long enough for it to be either.
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
BSD's reputation is based partly on the fact that not many people use it. It's mostly hearsay. The FreeBSD 5.x series is a good example of a not very stable or thoroughly inspected environment, as is NetBSD on some so-called "supported" platforms (I'm talking about Mac-PPC here).
The FreeBSD 5.x series is a good example of a not very stable or thoroughly inspected environment, as is NetBSD on some so-called "supported" platforms (I'm talking about Mac-PPC here).
while I agree that FreeBSD 5.x was effectively a beta release at best, I disagree with your opinion on NetBSD. Speaking as someone who runs NetBSD and Linux on a PowerPC Mac (G4 Powerbook), I can assure you that while installing NetBSD was painful, it runs faster than Linux as well as being just as stable. I also run NetBSD on sgi-mips, sparc, vax and alpha. The only one that has stability problems is my Alpha when I tried to use an IDE hard drive (SCSI works fine). In comparison, I've never managed to successfully install Linux on the SGI or Vax, although on Sparc and Alpha it installs and runs fine.
My experience is different. Installation wasn't that difficult, with the exception of OpenFirmware (OldWorld), but that's Apple's fault. Drivers were left out and needed a kernel recompile, were marked experimental and you notice they really are. Poor driver support in general, and drivers under development didn't even compile. Same for much of the third party software in pkgsrc. No, it didn't crash often, until I tried to make it usable. But this is ancient hardware, and NetBSD didn't support it in any way properly.