Give me 1 (one) valid reason why you would ever use linux over freebsd

give me 1 (one) valid reason why you would ever use linux over freebsd

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ucyRR9wy8e8
man.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD-current/man2/pledge.2?query=pledge
undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20160107075227
chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/ /master/docs/linux_sandboxing.md
youtu.be/l6XQUciI-Sc?t=6m6s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Hardware support

to be a normal class citizen instead of a rebellious teenager

FreeBSD doesn't support my SBC

this is reserved for windows
even windows server

BTRFS

ZFS > Btrfs

Portsnap Vulnerability and Shit defaults.

>Use OpenBSD then
No drivers

ZFS works in Linux

gentoo

To make your system available to the NSA via the backdoors they have on all the Linux distros. Do you have something to hide or something?

GPL
I hate GNU utils, and I hate Linux, but I'm not using a cuck license operating system

working iommu support

Irrelevant.

The main reason is because my clients with lots of money can opt to pay extra for Red Hat licenses, which comes with actual enterprise-level support and piece of mind. Or they can pay one of Red Hat's partners or resellers, which comes with their own perks.

FreeBSD, on the other hand, is a hobby operating system cobbled together by amateurs.

any free license is cuck
but gpl is worse because it's not even actually free
it's both cuck and non free


install OS X

I can give you several.

security
speed
hardware support
games

Fuck off you goddamned retard

freeBSD is more secure, over the years it had been proven
It is also faster.

can you elaborate on security?

OS X's base operating system is licensed under a "cuck" license as you so retardedly put it

You fell for a meme. Good job you cuck.
btrfs>zfs

and it's also licensed under a free license (mostly BSD and apple's one)
but the other part isn't cuck, thus it's free and non-cuck at the same time

/quads

Because having tried both, I have come to the conclusion that linux is an awesome desktop os, while bsd is the most utterly worthless piece of garbage to ever insult the general concept of usability.

Holy shit you are retarded.

user said BTRFS is the reason he uses Linux - to which you claimed ZFS is better (how's that relevant at all?). Then I said if he had to use ZFS, Linux already has it.

0/10 typical BSDbabby

SELinux
Also, PaX GRSec Apparmor

Linux beats the shit out of FreeBSD when it comes to security features.
>It is also faster.
Not overall, not by a long shot.

>freeBSD is more secure, over the years it had >been proven
>It is also faster.
I was once like you. Then I got my head out of my ass. If you want security install OpenBSD or Gentoo Hardened.

The GPL is actually free, it's just ensures the code is free in contrast to maximizing developer freedom. They are two different types of freedom, trying to compare the two is foolish, and trying to say one is inherently "less free" reveals either your lack of nuance or you trying to push your own biases on other people.

>trusting a tripfag on anything

He's right tho

>calling me retarded when you just proved you've got a negative IQ
My fucking sides. He said Btrfs was the reason he's using Linux, since FreeBSD doesn't have it. I said FreeBSD has a better filesystem which means that his reason to use Linux is invalid, you complete fucking moron.
>to which you claimed ZFS is better (how's that relevant at all?)
Because that was his fucking reason for using Linux in a thread asking why he's fucking using Linux? My god user, a fucking rock is smarter than you are.

I hate Microsoft and I really don't like Unix. So Linux for me!

I'm not a masochist.

>BTRFS is the reason he uses Linux
Okay..

>Claim ZFS to be better
Works on Linux but user uses BTRFS anyway because he calims BTRFS is better

Fucking god damned retard did you miss your special classes last month?

Yup I think BTRFS is better, that's why I use it.
I also like what HAMMER2 is doing, which is still unstable. I can't wait for OpenBSD to finally support it.

And I'm saying that given ZFS is better his reason is invalid. Christ you're the biggest moron in the history of the Internet.

ZFS WORKS ON LINUX ALREADY YOU DUMB SHIT, NO REASON FOR HIM TO USE FREEBSD WTF JESUS

>OpenBSD
>secure

OpenBSD security "wins" are only because their definition of secure is "no exploits in the base operating system". Who the fuck uses OpenBSD's default install, default settings, and no other programs? Nobody who ever actually does anything useful.

A small attack surface, and they still manage to fuck it up occasionally.

I seriously don't care that you think ZFS is better.
I use btrfs and I like gentoo, so thats what I stick with. What's so hard to understand.

youtube.com/watch?v=ucyRR9wy8e8

ZFS WORKING ON LINUX IS 100% IRRELEVANT YOU FUCKING MONGOLOID

Nothing, that's fine and all, doesn't change the fact that the guy I'm arguing with is a goddamned moron.

Here you are. Principle of least privilege.
man.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD-current/man2/pledge.2?query=pledge

...

>Why are you not using FreeBSD
>"BTRFS"
>ZFS is better
>"ZFS works with Linux"
What next?

Just please do the world and kill yourself, there are enough retards in the world and you're dumber than all of them. I'm not saying ZFS is a reason to use FreeBSD. If I was, you'd be perfectly correct to say that Linux supports ZFS. I'm saying that since his reason for using Linux instead of FreeBSD is Btrfs and that ZFS, a better filesystem, is already on FreeBSD, Btrfs is an invalid reason to use Linux. It's not that difficult of a concept to grasp user, I could explain this shit to a 12 year old and he'd be able to follow along better than you have.

Then I must restate that I use BTRFS because it is the better filesystem, which FreeBSD does not have, therefore I won't FreeBSD as a main OS because it lacks BTRFS support. So saying ZFS is better and my argument is invalid is in itself invalid.

Cool, an OpenBSD-specific system call, which will surely make its way into outside software any day now. Any...day...now....

It's not better though. At least you're not going full retard anymore though.

Chromium with pledge.
undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20160107075227
You can't bait me

Name a single feature that ZFS has that BTRFS doesn't.

>M-Muh FreeBSD compatibility

Name a single feature Btrfs has that ZFS doesn't.

Speed.

The burden of proof is on you. You are saying the my reason for using linux instead of freebsd is invalid. I'm saying I think that BTRFS is better. Don't get me wrong, ZFS is nice and all, but I prefer the way BTRFS is structured.

I like your style senpai

Sure thing bud

>burden of proof
You're the one that claimed Btrfs was a valid reason to use Linux over FreeBSD. Burden of proof is on you to prove why. Suck a dick.

Via a third party patch that was never upstreamed. Grep the ports tree for uses of pledge. There were 14 instances of it across the entire ports tree in 5.9, I doubt there are even a dozen more as of 6.0. And how do we know that these uses of pledge are even effective or don't break the software in some unexpected way?

Sorry, but patching your entire ports tree to take advantage of an obscure security feature doesn't scale to even a majority of the software that your average user or server needs, especially when you're a project as small as OpenBSD.

Much more sane configuration, snapshots, subvolumes can be mounted anywhere, btrfs shows how much space is consumed by an entire pool, attributes on a per file bases eg. different compression types used at once (lzo, zlib)

enjoy you're cpu microcode backdoors

The fact that OpenBSD is a small project is irreverent in the long term. The reason it's not upsteamed is because pledge is only on OpenBSD in the first place. If it was on other platforms, then it would be. Also pledge is designed in a way that if a program behaves unexpectedly, it's killed.

Just remember that any BSD argument is actually a loaded question in your favor and you can never lose an argument with them.

They are masochists they live for it.

Shitty looking mascot.

I need no other reason.

>Also the fact that my use case isn't one in which the benefit of BSD over Linux is anything more than negligible

I run my system without microcode addons. Also by your definition, since processors have microcodes already inside them, that would mean that it effects FreeBSD too.

>Via a third party patch that was never upstreamed.
stop moving the goalpost, faggot

do you know why it wasn't upstreamed? because there's no fucking pledge for other operating systems

Exactly my thoughts. Jesus some people don't get how software is handled.

You have absolutely no clue whatsoever what you're talking about. You can't "run without microcodes" you fucking retarded sack of shit. Your ShitNix relies upon vendor encryption to update, FreeBSD securely uses its own form of PRNG in Yarrow. Get fucked by backdoors, faggot.

> (OP)
>Hardware support
Quads speak truth, OP.

>pic related, this thread is now a hate crime.

What the fuck? Are you so new to programming that you don't know that software has operating-system-specific code in it all the fucking time, usually hidden behind defines or in separate files?

The reason it wasn't upstreamed is that nobody gives a shit about OpenBSD. And if the people maintaining the software that I use every day don't give a shit about OpenBSD, then I don't give a shit about OpenBSD.

Absolutely incorrect. You infarct can run without microcode addons, processors need microcode to run, which is already included in the chip you dumb shit. All processors have microcode. What your talking about is software microcode. Guess what, the chip your using has microcode. Guess what? IT DIDN'T COME FROM FREEBSD.

No you dumb shit, It wasn't upstreamed because NO OTHER OS SUPPORTS PLEDGE AT THIS TIME. HOW MANY TIMES TO WE HAVE TO REPEAT IT. Goddamn you are a dense motherfucker.
>call himself a programmer
> doesn't understand basic development
Wow user, your are fucking stupid.

I do hope pledge takes off on the BSDs at least it's such a good idea. It would be neat to see it get picked up by Apple as well.

This very much. I like the idea of it. It can only do good things if it's designed properly.

give me 1 good reason to use freebsd over linux

indeed.com

>linux
50,000+ results of varying expertise giving anyone willing a great career start or mainstay that pay $60 - 150 K

>BSD
500 results and all are "Linux / Unix administrator" that mention the technicality of having bsd experience being translatable to the thing that the company uses which is still linux

the future is now from the collective 2000 era fud in which "linux spergs" had their "made up dream job" and you can make a six figure salary with it. but the truth is you were just a hipster the whole time and now that linux has made it you go and pretend to use something else and stay stupid because deep down you know you cannot really ever do any thing besides pretending to be better than everyone else. Maybe in 20 years there will be a BSD job market but by that time you'll be pretending to use haiku and the pattern will repeat itself

Okay this is getting retarded. Do you know the meaning of "operating-system-specific"?

There are tons of API's that are specific to Windows, OSX, LInux and even FreeBSD and if you release multiplatform software, you have to account for all of them, because they're all slightly different.

Christ you people are stupid. If this is bait, congraulations you got me hook line and sinker.

Enjoy you're CPU bugs retards

I'll have my CPU microcode updates delivered and in a secure fashion unlike ShitNix

Yes sure, but you also have too keep in mind that pledge is still very new. Of course they don't have it in upstream.

chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/ /master/docs/linux_sandboxing.md

Seccomp is in chromium. It was release in linux kernel 11 years ago. pledge was released in 5.9.

You are a retarded piece of shit. Microcode DOESN'T get flashed to the CPU. It stays on the system. I don't get microcode updates through linux because I DIDN'T TELL IT TO. Wow fuck me. I hope you are baiting because I can't believe dumb shits like you exist. You're worse than normies.

>I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys
>Over the years, I've become convinced that the BSD license is great for code you don't care about

:^3

0/10, try harder

Creator of the most widely used open source kernel in existence.

His opinion > your opinion.

I couldn't possibly give less of a shit what Linus has to say.

Gaming

MADMAN

>Thinks Linus' opinions are be all end all.
Wow

It werks

GPL and games.

OP, please don't bait the Linux children. They need to get back to troubleshooting Systemd - their second initd in under a decade.

come on, programs written with win32 in mind HAVE to work on other operating systems, right?!?!

I like Linux.

In the world of Open Source operating systems, yeah it kinda is.

youtu.be/l6XQUciI-Sc?t=6m6s

I don't use systemDicks. OpenRC is the most sane option.

>root for sysinfo
Dumb BSDbabby

You didn't counter anything in my post retard.

Enjoy you're CPU bugs.

You're an idiot.

Why does a license matter to you? It's not like you're developing for the operating system, you're only using it. License fanatics like you are illogical, who gives a shit about what license a piece of software uses? As long as it works, then that's good enough.

>nobody gives a shit about OpenBSD
well yeah certainly not apple as they use an outdated OpenSSH and PF... but Apple watch has mario!

linux is spread too thin and moving to fast. you need groups like Debian to put all the pieces together and make it work reliably. whereas OpenBSD is pretty much a solid whole every 6 months and it only takes a few people to snapshot it (theo is mortal).

freebsd never works right. that's why

Since you asked, albeit sarcastically...

What services are you needing outside the base operating system? Theoretically your statement is true, but in reality all your services are there... httpd, named, smtpd, ntpd, sshd,

What "other programs" are getting hit like the moon with aestroids of vulnerabilities? You obviously never read a security anounce list and are not familar with the worthwhile targets of criminals and researchers that are actually getting CVEs. maybe browsers, mail clients, and a few other things are things that you instal that there might be issues with. what libraries and services does OpenBSD not ship with that are so desperately needed? anyone running some esoteric shit should know what they're doing and have a bit of spare time to, wait for it... administer their own fucking services.

alll these other "programs" you are conjuring up do not exist. bad actors have finite resources and most of the things they go after have long been addressed in OpenBSD.

OpenBSD has so much value and people like you will never understand... no other operating system offers more, nor does it easier, better, or securely. on the contrary linux distro services are constantly shipped broken.

its no ones fault that your wordpress server got hacked because you don't know what you're doing, and it certainly doesn't make OpenBSD shit.

Oh look. A Tripfag. Why don't you grow up already. Nobody really cares about your username. On the net, it doesn't even matter. You are just a sad little GREMLIN on a sad little computer singing sad songs because people know that you are a sad, sad GREMLIN. So get out of here. You just don't get it. Way to go, GREMLIN.

Not only is it a tripfag, it's the worst tripfag on the board. Be thankful he tripfags though, that way you can filter him.

bring me that quads!

AUR

Agreed. This guy is the worst tripfag I've ever seen, all he does is shitpost, be as contrarian as possible and samefags.

Linux doesn't have one either.

What exactly makes these things cuck? Obviously its all memeing, but what's the negatuve perspective of using either? Anyone wanna help a linuxbabby out and explain the whole licensing stuff? I currently use OpenSUSE, and have been interested in BSD, but desu I don't even know what makes them different aside from the structure

Freetards don't like the fact that BSD licenses use in closed source software

because of the
>muh botnet
possibilities right?

This is why FreeBSD will not reach even 1% either. It have some chance 15 years ago on the servers, but they messed that up too. It's sink with Solaris.

BSD license is more permissive than GPL. GPL forces you to open source your software and use it only in very specific ways, which is why more developers have stopped using it. GPL is mainly a relic of the past, the only reason it's still relevant today is because a lot of old software that's still needed today such as GCC is still widely used. BSD upholds the true spirit of 'open source' better by giving you more control over what you can actually do with the software, compared to GPL. Richard Stallman doesn't like competition, so he tried multiple times to talk down the BSD license and say that it's bad for the open source community, due to it being 'too free'; ironically.

Because they think everyone should be forced to contribute modifications back to the original project.

Give me a few examples of what "valid reasons" are, and I might give you some.

Is there somewhere I could read more in depth about all of this?

>use it only in very specific way
Releasing code is specific. Very specific.

>Richard Stallman doesn't like competition
Still promote the shit you use.

nope, he's right. when you bought your mobo and cpu it already came with malware.

1. either you install patches or not, those will be there.

2. you're implying that microcode updates are safe if safely signed. well, joke on you stoopid, the update is already rigged when it comes out.

b-but what if openxcom could be exploited?!?