Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Meet UbuntuBSD, UNIX For Human Beings

Posted by timothy on from the but-is-it-certified dept.

prisoninmate writes: What's ubuntuBSD? Well, it's not that hard to figure out yourself, but just in case you're not sure, we can tell you that ubuntuBSD promises to bring the power of the FreeBSD kernel to Ubuntu Linux. The best part of using the FreeBSD kernel is that you'll end up using the famous Z File System, or ZFS. Xfce is also included along with the popular Firefox, LibreOffice, and Ubuntu Software Center apps. ubuntuBSD is inspired by the Debian GNU/kFreeBSD project, it is hosted on SourceForge, and has been created by Jon Boden.

9 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Why would anyone want this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've tried to run FreeBSD in the past. Hardware was poorly supported with frequent system crashes. Software was poorly supported; many packages and ports simply wouldn't install or build. The ports collection, often touted as a great benefit of BSD, often failed to properly build software. Because ports are built as root so they can be installed, I once had a port try to build and install a rootkit in the process. There are far fewer BSD users, so bugs are infrequently reported and the lack of developers means that bugs often go unfixed. Ubuntu isn't perfect, but why would anyone want to bring this experience to Linux?

    1. Re:Why would anyone want this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's funny. I'm an OpenBSD user and I'm saying this seriously -- you've just summarized my experience with Linux. I tried using a Linux distro and after lots of pain came back to OpenBSD which has been so much easier to use (once you get past the bare bones installation. I'll admit).

    2. Re:Why would anyone want this? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hardware was poorly supported with frequent system crashes.

      This is the trick I've figured out with FreeBSD: They don't support crap hardware. The best hardware support comes from companies that pay developers to make FreeBSD drivers. (See RealTek vs Intel ethernet drivers). If you look at who the core users of FreeBSD are and look at who sponsors development it's mostly servers.

      For most of my desktops I've returned to server hardware anyway. Whitebox builds were fun when I was poor and my time was free. But after the N'th time of dicking around with figuring out why my Motherboard and RAM won't play nice or the monster heat sink I added scrubbed off traces I'd rather just buy a machine that's supported.

      Buy good hardware. Get good results.

      so bugs are infrequently reported and the lack of developers means that bugs often go unfixed.

      I've had the opposite experience. Bugs are so infrequent that if it's not a PEBKAC error then the FreeBSD guys can usually drill down to the bottom of it quick. If it's a problem someone else has experienced then the fix is most likely out there already anyway. Google will return results with the error I'm having instead of threads of noise from the Ubuntu forums.

      often failed to properly build software

      [Pics or it didn't happen].

      Even if you somehow screwed the system up so bad that ports wouldn't build, there's always pkg.

      I once had a port try to build and install a rootkit in the process.

      [Citation Needed]

  2. What's wrong with PC-BSD? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It has everything 'pretty' that Ubuntu could have, minus the weirdness of a kFreeBSD/GNU userland. It sets everything up from install. You can even select what window manager you want to use during install.

    Personally bare FreeBSD itself is just fine if the command line doesn't scare you. It takes less time to install FreeBSD and the 5-10 packages needed to get to a 'normal' desktop than it does to install any version Windows. I'm just kicking myself for not making the switch earlier.

    Additionally. Describing projects as "For Humans" must stop. FreeBSD is already for humans. I could teach a middle schooler to install it and get to Facebook. It's honestly not that hard.

  3. What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've heard this talked about before, on bsdnow.tv - about people wanting the stability and reliability of the FreeBSD kernel, but with a GNU userland. We use Ubuntu Server at my work extensively, and I use FreeBSD at home, and to be honest, I really don't think it's hard to pick up one if you know the other. Moreover, Linux does have a kernel module now for ZFS, so what's the point? You're almost certainly better off using stock Ubuntu, if you're a Linux guy - it's got actual dollars going into maintaining it. If you're into FreeBSD, you're also better off going with stock FreeBSD.

    I don't even know why people use PC-BSD, to be honest, and I've tried it several times. FreeBSD with an XFCE desktop is easy and as quick as sin to set up, and I'm not just a FreeBSD fanboy. People should just go ahead and check it out. Even GhostBSD and DesktopBSD don't get that much traction these days - it's because FreeBSD is pretty straightforward, if you're willing to put an evening or two into finding your way around.

  4. Z File System? by xbytor · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's just ZFS. It used to stand for "Zettabyte File System" but that was dropped years ago.

  5. Then you're doing something wrong. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Informative

    Are you sure it was FreeBSD, not Net or Open? If so you were either on some oddball hardware where support was just coming into existence, or you were doing something wrong.

    BSD forked three ways and the three branches are specialized for three purposes:
      - FreeBSD is about running on as many kinds of hardware and peripherals as possible. If it runs under BSD it runs under FreeBSD. Once the driving code is solid it might get imported into other branches, or ported to other things (like Linux). Meanwhile, maybe the code for your device is still new and still flaky.
      - NetBSD is about being a reference platform for developing, and pushing the envelope on, networking technology (at the expense of only bothering to be guaranteed to run on a limited number of platforms and configurations).
      - OpenBSD is about being reliable and secure - at the expense of being limited to devices and code that are open enough to be audited, and being developed and maintained outside the US and its "encryption is a weapon" export controls.

    (Or at least that's how I understand it. I'm not following it closely right now because I'm not running it - though I'm considering switching from Linux to Open and may soon be giving it more attention.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Then you're doing something wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not even close. NetBSD's focus has always been on portability and running on as many platforms as possible. FreeBSD is a general purpose operating system. DragonflyBSD is a fork of FreeBSD, originally for the purpose of improving performance for symmetric multiprocessing and threading. OpenBSD is focused on security and reliability.

  6. Re:Hosted On SourceForce? by DrXym · · Score: 5, Informative
    There's nothing wrong with Sourceforge except for the fact that they hijacked "abandoned" open source projects in order to bundle crapware into the installer, tried to persuade popular projects to bundle crapware, placed fake download links on project download pages, created fear distrust in their community, and failed to keep up with rival hosting services.

    So nothing wrong at all. Even if they're trying to make amends or correct these things, it's too late. The trust is gone. Most active projects have decamped to the likes of Github.