The NetBSD port for i386, amd64, mac68k, macppc, and many others can execute a great number of native Linux programs, using the Linux emulation layer. Generally, when you think about emulation you imagine something slow and inefficient because, often, emulations must reproduce hardware instructions and even architectures (usually from old machines) in software. In the case of the Linux emulation, this is radically different: it is only a thin software layer, mostly for system calls which are already very similar between the two systems. The application code itself is processed at the full speed of your CPU, so you don't get a degraded performance with the Linux emulation and the feeling is exactly the same as for native NetBSD applications.
This is one of the reasons why so many former Linux users have moved to FreeBSD or NetBSD after being driven away from Linux by systemd, PulseAudio, GNOME 3, and other problematic software like that. Most Linux programs worth using compile just fine on the *BSDs, but if there are legacy, closed-source Linux applications that must be used there is at least some chance that they may work on FreeBSD or NetBSD. This makes for a very easy transition path away from Linux, or more correctly, away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
It's not really systemd either. To some extent it could be tolerable, at least for those it doesn't cause too much trouble for. PulseAudio and GNOME 3 are more of a deterrent since they have a larger impact when you actually get down to the part where you use the computer.
away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
It's not really systemd either. To some extent it could be tolerable, at least for those it doesn't cause too much trouble for. PulseAudio and GNOME 3 are more of a deterrent since they have a larger impact when you actually get down to the part where you use the computer.
I haven't had any pulseaudio issues for years. Besides you can still install a linux system without pulseaudio or remove it. Pulseaudio is also available on netbsd.
AFAIK no linux distro forces anyone to use Gnome 3. It's not like switching d
"So many".... how many? Got any verifiable stats? You don't. I do. Judging by the amount of newcomers in FreeBSD forums, IRC and mailing list, nobody has moved AND stayed. A few interested people might've come in, but were driven back to Linux by the huge overhead in maintaining their systems and lack of hardware compatibility, once they learned their YEARS old broadwell laptops couldn't run FreeBSD, because FreeBSD doesn't support anything past haswell and even that is flaky.
This is one of the reasons why so many former Linux users have moved to FreeBSD or NetBSD after being driven away from Linux by systemd, PulseAudio, GNOME 3, and other problematic software like that. Most Linux programs worth using compile just fine on the *BSDs, but if there are legacy, closed-source Linux applications that must be used there is at least some chance that they may work on FreeBSD or NetBSD. This makes for a very easy transition path away from Linux, or more correctly, away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
Do you think that switching to a *BSD is easier than just installing a distribution without systemd?
I'm not even going to comment about the obvious gnome3 fallacy
I get the hate for systemd and pulseaudio, but Linux being "legacy"? Please. The fact is that the BSD's are fossils moving at glacial speeds, with the possible exception of DragonflyBSD. They have just about zero mind-share outside their sect-like cults, whose pathetic attempts to rewrite reality - "Linux is legacy! OSX is FreeBSD!" - does them no service, and generally speaking they are understaffed, have packaging system that are clumsy, antiquated and fragile.
I get your point if you were referring to NetBSD, but FreeBSD does have a bit of mindshare, even if dwarfed by Linux. It's the underpinnings of network OSs like Juniper, its NAS is widely used, it's used by pFsense, and its typically the most pioneering of the BSDs. As far as packaging system, PC-BSD/TrueOS has PBI, which takes care of library dependencies - something I'm not aware that.deb or.rpm do.
I do agree that calling Linux legacy is out of place, and that some things, like TrueOS, have stalle
I did say "just about" zero, not "zero", right? I didn't mean to imply that *BSD in general were useless, I was putting the parent post in perspective.
FreeBSD definitely have it's uses, even though I'm not sold on how they try to sell zfs as the be all, end all file system, and how any of it's shortcomings are just dismissed - with a bit of bile for those who dare to speak ill of it just to make sure. Further it still suffers from all the other problems I mentioned, being understaffed, and lagging behind in
FreeBSD uses jails: is that what NetBSD uses? Also, does NetBSD have a way of supporting Steam?
Also, wonder whether NetBSD borrows any concepts from Minix, such as the reincarnation server, since Minix uses NetBSD userland. Looks like NetBSD can explore microkernel approaches
It would also be nice if NetBSD incorporated Lumina, instead of KDE and others.
Competition from BSD? Let alone NetBSD? You're joking, right? There is no competition, there never will be. Hell, DOS has more chance to be used than BSD. In fact, all the computers preinstalled with FreeDOS prove me right.
BSD is doomed because of the license. It's preferred by large companies who then have large teams to develop it (and close it) as they want. The millions of open source devs prefer GPL and not to be ripped off by greedy corporations that don't contribute back.
License is not what keeps BSD where it is - it's inertia. Linux himself admitted that had something like FreeBSD or NetBSD existed during the time he was looking for an OS, he may have used that and not developed Linux.
If anything, the license is what's encouraged companies to adapt it in preference to the GPL licensed software. It's the reason companies like Juniper, Sony (w/ Busybox) have gone w/ BSD. It's why Android uses a BSDL licensed userland instead of GNU. It's why the consoles have gone w/
I need Cygwin to run all my useful commands, but there is NO Linux or BSD support for this critical application. How could this oversight be left uncorrected?
This official postcard, widely circulated by the Communist government in Russia following the Jewish Bolshevik takeover, is entitled "Leaders of the Proletarian Revolution." The postcard reveals the Jewishness of these original leaders of the Communist Party. All six shown, including Lenin and Trotsky, are Jews!
Hitler was half Jew, his cabinet was full of Jews, oops they didn't teach you that did they.
Over two and half decades I have used every *nix out there, both open and commercial. That is except for NetBSD. Perhaps it's time I give it a couple months attention. I have not had a serious nerd fix in awhile. Maybe I will find a good reason to put it to persistent use. Any NetBSD users out there that want to give me a heads up on the low down, I would be much obliged. If any such people wonder what I might use it for, consider anything and everything. I'm universal like that.
It's a BSD variant that will run on just about any oddball vintage hardware you have at your disposal..... 68K Macs, Atari TT's, VAX, Alpha, SPARC, UltraSPARC, sgi, DECstations, GE Microwaves, Sharp Can Openers, Compaq iPaq.
Emphasis is on portability but performance isn't bad.
I found it nice for playing on SPARC32. The Linux distros have dropped sparc32, with Debian Etch being the last one I know of - if there's another I'd love to know about it. The linux kernel still supports sparc32, if you can find a distro to run it in.
The NetBSD way of doing things took some adjusting, but its worth it to run modern software on some really old systems - like Sun2/3!
It is unfortunate that even netbsd cannot run on my 386 anymore and it's not oddball vintage.
Per article page: NetBSD/i386 IBM PCs and PC clones with i486-family processors and up
I can't understand why there isn't emulation for the 3 instructions that are missing. Once I read something about this approach would not safely work for dual 386s and such but THAT would be seriously oddball anyway.
True that. I installed version 6.0 several years ago on a Pentium (non-MMX) notebook with 24 MB RAM, and I was able to run LXDE and the Midori web browser (barely, but still). That was after attempting, and failing, to install FreeBSD and various lightweight Linux distributions. I will also say that having a 3.5" floppy disk drive as the only bootable device was a real drag.
... Some highlights of the 7.1 release are...
-Initial DRM/KMS support for NVIDIA graphics cards...
All of the code is under non-restrictive licenses, and may be used without paying royalties to anyone.
yea (Score:2, Funny)
but does it run linux?
Re: (Score:2)
BSD confirms it: .. or well. _I_ never use it nowadays at-least ;)
Netcraft is dead.
Re: (Score:2)
-Linux compatibility improvements, allowing, e.g., the use of Adobe Flash Player 24.
No, but they ported the good parts. If you're into BSD(m) you must enjoy the pain.
Yes, NetBSD can run some Linux binaries. (Score:5, Informative)
This renders your joke irrelevant, but NetBSD can run some Linux binaries.
Read about it here: https://wiki.netbsd.org/guide/linux/ [netbsd.org]
FreeBSD has similar functionality [freebsd.org].
This is one of the reasons why so many former Linux users have moved to FreeBSD or NetBSD after being driven away from Linux by systemd, PulseAudio, GNOME 3, and other problematic software like that. Most Linux programs worth using compile just fine on the *BSDs, but if there are legacy, closed-source Linux applications that must be used there is at least some chance that they may work on FreeBSD or NetBSD. This makes for a very easy transition path away from Linux, or more correctly, away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
Re: (Score:0)
away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
It's not really systemd either.
To some extent it could be tolerable, at least for those it doesn't cause too much trouble for.
PulseAudio and GNOME 3 are more of a deterrent since they have a larger impact when you actually get down to the part where you use the computer.
Re: (Score:0)
away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
It's not really systemd either.
To some extent it could be tolerable, at least for those it doesn't cause too much trouble for.
PulseAudio and GNOME 3 are more of a deterrent since they have a larger impact when you actually get down to the part where you use the computer.
I haven't had any pulseaudio issues for years. Besides you can still install a linux system without pulseaudio or remove it. Pulseaudio is also available on netbsd.
AFAIK no linux distro forces anyone to use Gnome 3. It's not like switching d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:0)
"So many".... how many? Got any verifiable stats? You don't. I do. Judging by the amount of newcomers in FreeBSD forums, IRC and mailing list, nobody has moved AND stayed. A few interested people might've come in, but were driven back to Linux by the huge overhead in maintaining their systems and lack of hardware compatibility, once they learned their YEARS old broadwell laptops couldn't run FreeBSD, because FreeBSD doesn't support anything past haswell and even that is flaky.
Re: (Score:0)
This is one of the reasons why so many former Linux users have moved to FreeBSD or NetBSD
Please define "so many" and show us the data.
Re: (Score:2)
This is one of the reasons why so many former Linux users have moved to FreeBSD or NetBSD after being driven away from Linux by systemd, PulseAudio, GNOME 3, and other problematic software like that. Most Linux programs worth using compile just fine on the *BSDs, but if there are legacy, closed-source Linux applications that must be used there is at least some chance that they may work on FreeBSD or NetBSD. This makes for a very easy transition path away from Linux, or more correctly, away from systemd (it isn't the Linux kernel itself that most people have problems with, of course).
Do you think that switching to a *BSD is easier than just installing a distribution without systemd?
I'm not even going to comment about the obvious gnome3 fallacy
Re: (Score:1)
I get the hate for systemd and pulseaudio, but Linux being "legacy"? Please. The fact is that the BSD's are fossils moving at glacial speeds, with the possible exception of DragonflyBSD. They have just about zero mind-share outside their sect-like cults, whose pathetic attempts to rewrite reality - "Linux is legacy! OSX is FreeBSD!" - does them no service, and generally speaking they are understaffed, have packaging system that are clumsy, antiquated and fragile.
I think it's sad, because realistic alternati
Legacy and brand new issues (Score:2)
I get your point if you were referring to NetBSD, but FreeBSD does have a bit of mindshare, even if dwarfed by Linux. It's the underpinnings of network OSs like Juniper, its NAS is widely used, it's used by pFsense, and its typically the most pioneering of the BSDs. As far as packaging system, PC-BSD/TrueOS has PBI, which takes care of library dependencies - something I'm not aware that .deb or .rpm do.
I do agree that calling Linux legacy is out of place, and that some things, like TrueOS, have stalle
Re: (Score:0)
I did say "just about" zero, not "zero", right? I didn't mean to imply that *BSD in general were useless, I was putting the parent post in perspective.
FreeBSD definitely have it's uses, even though I'm not sold on how they try to sell zfs as the be all, end all file system, and how any of it's shortcomings are just dismissed - with a bit of bile for those who dare to speak ill of it just to make sure. Further it still suffers from all the other problems I mentioned, being understaffed, and lagging behind in
Re: (Score:1)
FreeBSD uses jails: is that what NetBSD uses? Also, does NetBSD have a way of supporting Steam?
Also, wonder whether NetBSD borrows any concepts from Minix, such as the reincarnation server, since Minix uses NetBSD userland. Looks like NetBSD can explore microkernel approaches
It would also be nice if NetBSD incorporated Lumina, instead of KDE and others.
Re: (Score:0)
FreeBSD uses jails: is that what NetBSD uses?
Maybe the prison system...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm Linux user too, but I think it's great news. Linux needs competition to keep us on our toeas, so we don't get smug and lazy.
Re: (Score:0)
Competition from BSD? Let alone NetBSD? You're joking, right? There is no competition, there never will be. Hell, DOS has more chance to be used than BSD. In fact, all the computers preinstalled with FreeDOS prove me right.
BSD is doomed because of the license. It's preferred by large companies who then have large teams to develop it (and close it) as they want. The millions of open source devs prefer GPL and not to be ripped off by greedy corporations that don't contribute back.
Proof is in the pudding.
BSD movers & shakers (Score:3)
License is not what keeps BSD where it is - it's inertia. Linux himself admitted that had something like FreeBSD or NetBSD existed during the time he was looking for an OS, he may have used that and not developed Linux.
If anything, the license is what's encouraged companies to adapt it in preference to the GPL licensed software. It's the reason companies like Juniper, Sony (w/ Busybox) have gone w/ BSD. It's why Android uses a BSDL licensed userland instead of GNU. It's why the consoles have gone w/
Re: (Score:0)
I need Cygwin to run all my useful commands, but there is NO Linux or BSD support for this critical application. How could this oversight be left uncorrected?
Re: (Score:0)
Yes.
wm(4) (Score:1)
That's nothing to brag about. All of those ethernet cards are over 10 years old.
Re: (Score:1)
And they still work!
Jewish Killers Massacre 66 Million in Soviet Gulag (Score:-1)
The holocaust is BS [wikispooks.com]
This is the real holocaust:
Jewish Killers Massacre 66 Million in Soviet Gulag [texemarrs.com]
This official postcard, widely circulated by the Communist government in Russia following the Jewish Bolshevik takeover, is entitled "Leaders of the Proletarian Revolution." The postcard reveals the Jewishness of these original leaders of the Communist Party. All six shown, including Lenin and Trotsky, are Jews!
Hitler was half Jew, his cabinet was full of Jews, oops they didn't teach you that did they.
Remember ki
Re: Jewish Killers Massacre 66 Million in Soviet G (Score:-1)
Google's going to get you!
Re: (Score:-1)
Discount Grenade - .5BTC / ea (Score:-1)
grenadeuu4jecm3l.onion
~ discreet shipping ~ international ~
Re: (Score:0)
Lol. I want a discount grenade like I want a discount brain surgeon.
Bad idea brah.
Re: (Score:0)
BEWARE THE IDLES OF MARCH (Score:-1)
Phor iteth tolls foreth thee.
Ozzy
Perhaps it's time to give it a spin (Score:2)
Re: Perhaps it's time to give it a spin (Score:-1)
You could have just installed it and become familiar with it in less time than it took you to write that comment.
Re:Perhaps it's time to give it a spin (Score:5, Informative)
It's a BSD variant that will run on just about any oddball vintage hardware you have at your disposal..... 68K Macs, Atari TT's, VAX, Alpha, SPARC, UltraSPARC, sgi, DECstations, GE Microwaves, Sharp Can Openers, Compaq iPaq.
Emphasis is on portability but performance isn't bad.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: Perhaps it's time to give it a spin (Score:0)
It even runs on my smart dildo!
Re: (Score:0)
Not a great idea, you obviously don't need any good software or else you would stick with the manufacturer approved Dildows 10.
Re: (Score:0)
It is unfortunate that even netbsd cannot run on my 386 anymore and it's not oddball vintage.
Per article page: NetBSD/i386 IBM PCs and PC clones with i486-family processors and up
I can't understand why there isn't emulation for the 3 instructions that are missing. Once I read something about this approach would not safely work for dual 386s and such but THAT would be seriously oddball anyway.
Captcha: pioneers
Re: (Score:0)
True that. I installed version 6.0 several years ago on a Pentium (non-MMX) notebook with 24 MB RAM, and I was able to run LXDE and the Midori web browser (barely, but still). That was after attempting, and failing, to install FreeBSD and various lightweight Linux distributions. I will also say that having a 3.5" floppy disk drive as the only bootable device was a real drag.
Never tried it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I looked OpenBSD was not a great platform to play host to a vm.
Re: (Score:2)
Improvements? (Score:2)
...allowing, e.g., the use of Adobe Flash Player 24.
Lol.
DRM Support (Score:2)
... Some highlights of the 7.1 release are...
-Initial DRM/KMS support for NVIDIA graphics cards...
All of the code is under non-restrictive licenses, and may be used without paying royalties to anyone.
That NVIDIA bit doesn't sound non-restrictive.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
it stands for Direct Rendering Manager in this case, not Digital Restrictions Management.
Flash? (Score:0)
So the entire world is moving AWAY from flash, but BSD is IMPROVING itself to run Flash? WOW!
vioscsi is virtio-scsi (Score:0)
Not used exclusively by Google Compute vds.