Slashdot Mirror
UbuntuBSD Is Looking To Become An Official Ubuntu Flavor (softpedia.com)
prisoninmate quotes a report from Softpedia: UbuntuBSD maintainer and lead developer Jon Boden is now looking for a way for his operating system to contribute to the Ubuntu community and, eventually, become an official Ubuntu flavor. Just two weeks ago, [Softpedia] introduced the ubuntuBSD project, whose main design goal is to bring users an operating system powered by the FreeBSD kernel while offering them the familiarity of the Ubuntu Linux OS. Right now, ubuntuBSD is in heavy development, with a fourth Beta build out the door, and it looks like the developer already seeks official status and wants to contribute all of his work to the main Ubuntu channels. [Canonical has yet to respond.]
I got into a debate with my former Linux users group on this when a fork of Debian hit a half decade ago with FreeBSD.
Everything from gnome to pulse audio to SystemD is integrated in Linux. People act as if you can swap the kernel out and still run or even compile anything. I am shocked anything works at all with gnome on non Linux platforms as things are so proprietary and tight. Yes it's gnu, but what I mean by proprietary is Linux and not Unix standard way it does things since 2006
FreeBSD is a server oriented OS as far as I am concerned
http://saveie6.com/
It's a natural side effect of herding cats.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
JUST TAKE THE KERNEL PARTS YOU WANT AND LEAVE *BSD ALONE. WE DON'T WANT YOUR CORRUPTION.
That's a great suggestion. You should give it to the people who are already doing exactly what you're shouting about. Now please go and play with your FreeBSD system and leave the people having a discussion about a different OS alone.
Open system considerations aside, most of us just want to use our computers to do things. Anybody gaming in Linux right now is already dealing with this, but with extra manual steps involved, and the world hasn't ended.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
Yeah let's go through that list shall we:
Windows IS a desktop OS, not a network OS.
Define Network OS. By many standard none of the common "server" OSes are Network OSes.
Notice it's not usable except by clicking desktop icons?
No I didn't notice at all. Especially Windows 2008 Server Core doesn't have a GUI at all, just a command interface. No desktop icons either. Just a very feature rich shell.
You can certainly argue that it's a poor desktop because not many applications are been installed by default , but the operating system is desktop through and through.
Saying something doesn't make it so. But I agree it's a poor desktop.
A server OS doesn't require rebooting every week or every month.
Neither does a Windows server so not sure what your point is.
Average uptime for my servers is probably about three years, because I physically moved them a few years ago.
So what reason causes you to take down a Windows server? They don't just magically shut themselves down. But then no one gives a shit about server uptime, the only thing that matters is application uptime and rebooting a server often is a sign that: a) it'll likely recover from some epic random failure without a hidden fault, and b) that you actually knew what you were doing and your infrastructure happily rode through it.
A server OS can handle hotswap hardware. I swap drives regularly
Congratulations. That's part of the SATA / SAS spec, any OS supporting SATA / SAS can do that. But before it was part of a SATA spec it was part of the features offered by many vendors. We had no problem swapping HDDs on Windows NT 4 machines. That you consider this some major achievement that isn't part of Windows just shows your bias.
and we've even hotswapped a CPU.
Hotplugging memory has also been a feature of Windows server for 13 years. Hotplugging CPU in Windows is a bit newer then Unix, but also was introduced 9 years ago.
I'm glad we can agree on how awesome Windows Server is. It clearly fits your use case very well.
Not true. Sure Powershell sucks but it is available.
Seriously? This isn't 1999. I have Windows Servers up for much longer than that.
The only thing most people need to hotswap in a server are disks and that is easily done in Windows
Windows has this.
You really are working off of pre-2000 Windows knowledge. Current Windows implementations are not at all based on DOS despite their similarity to earlier Windows systems. What bothers me the most is that I'm a Linux guy and you're making me defend Windows because you can't just say things that are not true.
Time makes more converts than reason
FreeBSD, which is more of a server OS
Servers like Sony's PS3 (Vita OS) and PS4 (Orbis OS), both of which are based on FreeBSD?
Most who install Ubuntu expect to have their devices ans [sic] peripherals running after install.
Citation Needed!
You know what? Linux isn't all rainbows and unicorns. A recent update to the Fedora kernel broke my dual monitor setup. Yes, the kernel. Reverting to an earlier kernel with no other changes restored my dual monitors. Gnome 3 Desktop has routine breakage. Yeah, don't tell me that Fedora isn't Ubuntu, I already know that.
Part of the difference might be that there are actual companies selling Linux. Companies with lawyers, who can approve NDAs, that allow kernel developers to get early access to new devices, so Linux tends to get support for new stuff earlier. *BSD's kernel developers may not always have that kind of luxury.
I've used FreeBSD since the beginning, and 386BSD before that. I've never had bleeding edge hardware and I've never had a problem with FreeBSD supporting my hardware.
P.S. - sorry, when I wrote "long live eval", I obviously meant "long live expr". For some reason I have a mental block against keeping the two tool names straight.