Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
GNU is Not Unix BSD Linux

Arch GNU/Linux Ported To Run On the FreeBSD Kernel 79

An anonymous reader writes "The Arch Linux distribution has been modified to run off the FreeBSD 9.0 kernel as an alternative to using Linux. The developer of Arch BSD explained his reasoning as enjoying FreeBSD while also liking the Arch Linux philosophy of a 'fast, lightweight, optimized distro,' so he sought to combine the two operating systems to have FreeBSD at its core while being encircled by Arch. The Arch BSD initiative is similar to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Arch GNU/Linux Ported To Run On the FreeBSD Kernel

Comments Filter:
  • WTF GNU (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @11:55AM (#42669903)

    The name of the distro is "Arch Linux," not GNU/Linux. You can rename a GPL package whatever you want when you distribute it.

  • by Trepidity ( 597 ) <> on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @11:56AM (#42669915)

    I probably wouldn't actually use a Linux-distro-now-with-BSD-kernel for regular usage, but the porting efforts tend to do a good job uncovering not-quite-portable parts of supposedly portable code, which makes everything more robust. So I like that they exist, because the fact that they work at all gives me some more confidence that portable code is working like it's supposed to.

  • by vlm ( 69642 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @12:07PM (#42670051)

    I would imagine various privilege escalation attacks are microscopically more complicated, at least for skript kiddies and automated systems, on a mixed system. Security via obscurity should never be your only line of defense, but it is "a" line of defense.

  • by devman ( 1163205 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @12:19PM (#42670203)
    I'm liking the idea of using ZFS on an Arch BSD system, also I agree, pacman is awesome.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @12:35PM (#42670399)

    Wasted effort that would have been better spent on something useful.

    That time is not yours to spend.

    Some people spend their time playing golf, others spend it arguing on the interwebs. None of them are useful but it is also unlikely that those who do so will be willing to do something else unless you pay them to.
    This dude spent his time doing something way more useful than most other people but you call it wasted time.
    As long as people participates in sports, watch TV or go to the cinema I find it a bit odd to call this a waste of time.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @01:06PM (#42670755)

    Headline makes it sound like Linux has been ported to BSD. Ten years ago I would have said "That doesn't make any sense," but then User Mode Linux came along (where other operating systems, rather than just hardware, become the port platform target). If you RTFA, though, this does not involve User Mode Linux. It doesn't involve any Linux at all, so it should be left out of the name; it should be called Arch GNU/BSD.

    To put it another way, when you run a certain multimedia player on your NOT-AN-XBOX hardware, you might call that app XBMC. You don't (ever) call it X Box Multimedia Consoleorwhateverthelastwordis, because there's no XBox involved.

    Another analogy (because this is Slashdot where we love such things). I once heard a funny story about an English man who had dark skin, being called an "African-American" by some PC-non-thinker. The dunce would call him African-American, and the English dude would say, "No, I'm not American. I wasn't born in American, I don't live in America, I've never been there. Don't call me American," and the PC guy would think "but you're black, except I'm not allowed to label a person 'black' because the pc police say I have to blindly search-and-replace 'black' with 'African American' so..." and then he'd repeat the mistake.

    That is what you're doing when you call this project "Linux." You sound just as dumb as the "You're African-American" dolt. It's not Linux, just as the black Englishman is not an African-American.

  • by thoth ( 7907 ) on Wednesday January 23, 2013 @01:42PM (#42671245) Journal

    I just don't see the value proposition in spending time on this versus spending the time perfecting Arch Linux. I'm not an Arch user, though I'm interested in it. Right now I tend to mainly use Debian, Mint, and FreeBSD. What I'm sure of is that there are bugs and usability issues in Arch that this effort could have been used to address.

    I didn't read the article (yet... yeah I know) but I can already come up with an answer - maybe this guy's expertise/interest is in low level kernel details that would crop up swapping kernels, instead of in bugs/usability issues which sound UI or user-mode related to me. It's like asking a compiler internals person to fix GNOME 3. Come on, not every developer and their particular skillset is 100% interchangeable with the area that you think needs attention.

Stinginess with privileges is kindness in disguise. -- Guide to VAX/VMS Security, Sep. 1984