| DistroWatch Weekly
|Linux Foundation Training
|Reader Comments • Jump to last comment
1 • PC-BSD ---> TrueOS ? (by JD on 2016-08-29 04:08:49 GMT from North America) |
I always thought PC-BSD was a fricken awesome name. I don't get or like "TrueOS". Maybe it will take some getting used to. But again PC-BSD was a awesome name. It meant BSD you can run on your PC Desktop. Anyway not trying to be a negative nelly or anything just my thoughts. I know it was not a easy decision. maybe iXSystems told Kris he had to change it idk.
2 • @1 PC-BSD ---> TrueOS ? (by Paraquat on 2016-08-29 05:56:38 GMT from Asia)
"I always thought PC-BSD was a fricken awesome name."
I couldn't agree more. If nothing else, it was at least very descriptive - the name made it immediately obvious that this was a BSD-based operating system, as opposed to a Linux distro or even a proprietary OS. From this point forward, newbies in search of a BSD flavor are going to have to figure out for themselves what TrueOS is. I suppose we should be grateful they still include "OS" in the name, and didn't choose "The-One-True-Path" or something like that.
3 • korora 24 (by enrico on 2016-08-29 07:20:41 GMT from Europe)
i like korora, as i like fedora, that is my first linux distro, but i point out some details:
software management, apart from workstation, which is gnome, is a bit intimidating in fedora distro and derivatives, only yum extender can perform such task, and it has few glitches, but it's ok if you can go with the console,.
the first time you made upgrades, fedora ask you to confirm importing keys, in both cases, via console or via package manager, i think it's a security feature, and not a bug or a glitch.
i like korora because is an effort to make fedora simpler to install and live with, but if you have more time to set up and configure, and you know how to do the most important settings,, then fedora itself is better
4 • PC-BSD -> TrueOS (by SuperOscar on 2016-08-29 08:28:30 GMT from Europe)
Looks like the announcement of the name change PC-BSD -> TrueOS hasn’t quite reached their web admins yet. PC-BSD website http://www.pcbsd.org/ is still there and there’s not a word of anything changing. The new URL http://www.trueos.org/ exists but there’s nothing to denote that this is what used to be called PC-BSD in days past. Not very smart marketing, that.
5 • Fedora (by Ron on 2016-08-29 08:32:45 GMT from North America)
Every time Fedora is mentioned or reviewed it gets a poor review because Fedora does not provide codecs installed or the repositories for them. Has anyone ever heard of Easylife at Distrowatch? Just download and install it and then run it and check off the boxes of stuff you want and you have all the codecs for music and dvds and even flash plus lots of other stuff that many find too difficult to search for and install manually. It has all the restricted stuff you need. How hard is that? How nice is it that you have the choice of what you want?
6 • DistroWatch Weekly (by Andy Mender on 2016-08-29 09:08:12 GMT from Europe)
I also don't agree the name "PC-BSD" should be changed. I understand the developers' concerns regarding naming conventions, but I feel PC-BSD was already a strongly established trademark. For so long it was fine to produce 2 separate distributions. Why merge the names now? :(
There were talks about RPM Fusion and why it should be provided as an initial install option. The bigger problem, though is that many media programs don't have support for those codecs compiled in. OpenSUSE suffers from similar issues.
7 • Finding software licensing information (by solt87 on 2016-08-29 09:44:42 GMT from Europe)
On Debian (and it's descendants) one can also use the Virtual Richard Stallman (vrms) program to report installed non-free software. =)
8 • @4 (by e ludolf on 2016-08-29 10:13:39 GMT from Europe)
Please read the website they clearly explain everything.
Its hard to read nowedays by some people (if not most of them)
9 • PC-BSD -> TrueOS (by Paraquat on 2016-08-29 11:12:12 GMT from Asia)
Just thought I'd add that there's no reason why there couldn't be a "PC-BSD Desktop" and "PC-BSD Server" edition. It's a common naming convention among Linux distros (ie Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian, etc). I suppose the only reason why that practice hasn't been adopted by BSD developers is because until PC-BSD came along, there really weren't any actual desktop versions. PC-BSD was the first to tap into that market, and they gained well-deserved name recognition for it, though now it seems they are about to blow it off...which is sad since PC-BSD 11 is only weeks away from being released, and I'm planning to give it a test drive myself.
10 • Korora/Fedora (by kc1di on 2016-08-29 11:20:13 GMT from North America)
I Tried Korora and Fedora when the newest were released, found the to be capable and good distros, but I don't care for the quick release cycle. I know they have an upgrade option but have never had much success with that. If they would opt for a stable branch for those of us who like it that way I would most likely us it. Some have suggested using centos instead but that is not really designedfor desktop use and is too much work to make it work, just my 2 cents worth :)
11 • PC-BSD > TrueOS (by Anamezon on 2016-08-29 11:36:32 GMT from Europe)
IMHO (and it seems by the comments so far I am not the only one thinking this) quite an unfortunate change - with "PC-BSD" it was so easy to comprehend what OS it is and what is the target system, while these True/Perfect/Ultimate/Top/(insert similar here) boasts always had me thinking "yeah, right! I'll drop my good-working but still-fake/ordinary OS for the sake of some marketing idiot somewhere" ... please come to your senses and reverse this renaming decision, and trust me - "TrueOS ...gives us a more catchy name" couldn't be further from the truth!!!
12 • @10 Upgrading Korora (by Hoos on 2016-08-29 12:02:03 GMT from Asia)
I have upgraded my Korora installation from 21 to 22, then 22 to 23 without any issue, following the instructions on the Korora website.
I will be upgrading to ver 24 soon when 23 is closer to its end of life date, namely around Oct 2016.
13 • PC-BSD > TrueOS (by starskeptic on 2016-08-29 12:33:35 GMT from North America)
e ludolf @8
"Please read the website they clearly explain everything."
where exactly - the site says nothing...
14 • PC-BSD (by Scrumtime on 2016-08-29 12:41:44 GMT from North America)
Don't like that name change at all.. PC-BSD was clear and straight to the point True OS could be anything !!!
Always bothers me when people title something or quote something as being True or Honest..as it usually isnt....
Korora ... I keep trying it and always seem to get problems ....though it does seem to improve maybe ill give it another go after jessies review...
Sad to hear of the passing of Jonathan "avenj" Portnoy from the Gentoo fold....
15 • PC-BSD to TrueOS (by G Savage on 2016-08-29 13:43:08 GMT from North America)
That's asinine. This was the fastest OS I ever ran, It ran so fast I thought I broke the machine. I drive stick, I prefer bolt actions, I like total control over everything that goes on in my machines. BSD does that. And PC-BSD rhymes - it's a marketers dream. Why would they throw that away?
16 • Software Licenses (by cykodrone on 2016-08-29 13:56:10 GMT from North America)
Licenses are not an issue with me, but the reputation of the corporation backing the software is. If they're known for predatory behaviour or spyware, I will NOT use the software.
17 • TrueOS is a 64-bit OS (by David Walser on 2016-08-29 14:09:33 GMT from North America)
I just hope that Hewlett Compaqard doesn't object to their Tru(e) naming of their 64-bit UNIX OS...
18 • Package License Information (by John Doe on 2016-08-29 14:19:12 GMT from Asia)
Another way to quickly determine whether a software package is licensed under a Free Software license or a proprietary one is by quering it's repo info:
In Debian, packages fall under three sections: main, contrib and non-free.
main: Free Software only;
contrib: Free Software that has dependencies on proprietary software, and software which has some issues with it's license;
non-free: Proprietary software only.
In Ubuntu, packages fall under four sections:
main & universe: Free Software only;
restricted & multiverse: Free Software with dependencies on proprietary software, software with licensing issues and completely proprietary software packages.
19 • Dropping "PC" from distro names is only a good thing (by zhaich on 2016-08-29 14:28:21 GMT from North America)
I'm the exact opposite of course. Never liked the name PC-BSD, just as how I feel PCLinuxOS is one of the worst names for a distro I've ever come across. If you're gonna name something, at least put some creativity into it. "BSDComputerOS" doesn't cut it. Having to brand every BSD OS with "BSD" at the end just to say "We're not Linux!" is a convention that I feel needs to die. True OS is okay, it markets their server OS which was less noticeable than before, but I do agree that not tying the former name with the new is marketing failure. However, considering the PC-BSD site hasn't been updated yet, this marketing probably hasn't rolled out yet.
It's also clear they want to make use of their server OS more often, which might be a bit worrying for their desktop users.
20 • Package licensing (by Andy Mender on 2016-08-29 14:33:12 GMT from Europe)
Arch Linux and derivatives also have a "nonfree" repository, which is enabled by default, but can easily be disabled by the user :).
I think a non-free repo should be available too all distributions on install. Toggling it ON would of course trigger an inquiry from the user, whether he/she agrees with the licensing restrictions. However, forcing the user to go through some gimmicks post-install is a no-go to me.
21 • Licences (by a on 2016-08-29 15:09:33 GMT from Europe)
Well hard to answer this poll (again). I care about licences: I will not use proprietary communication software for security reasons. But for the rest, I don’t care.
22 • PC-BSD (by win2linconvert on 2016-08-29 15:11:00 GMT from North America)
I agree the PC-BSD name chance is a bad idea. If a name change is absolutely necessary, just add OS. True OS is a non starter. PC-BSD or PC-BSD OS are more catchy, and accurately descriptive. Just my humble opinion.
23 • TrueOS (by hce.humphrey.chimpden.earwicke on 2016-08-29 15:23:54 GMT from North America)
Reminds me of when DEC renamed Digital Unix as Tru64 Unix.
We laughed, and laughed...
It was actually a good product, for its time, but not many folks took it seriously after the name change.
24 • TrueOS? (by Andy Mender on 2016-08-29 15:35:50 GMT from Europe)
Reading through various comments I'm starting to have doubts whether "TrueOS" is a good software product name even for a server operating system. Unlike "PC-BSD", TrueOS doesn't say anything about the product and feels like making too much of a statement. An alternative to "PC-BSD" could've been "SERVER-BSD" or something similar. To balance it against the PC-BSD name, but not sound too corny.
Having a look at American day to day products helps. The names usually mean something and have a lot to do with the use of the product. For instance, "Poo Away" kitty litter, "Glide" dish washing liquid, etc.
25 • TrueOS (by Andrew on 2016-08-29 15:44:58 GMT from Europe)
PC-BSD was not a very good name but "True" OS is ridiculous, it sounds like bad cheap marketing for some scam product.
26 • PC-BSD → TrueOS, cont’d (by SuperOscar on 2016-08-29 16:31:01 GMT from Europe)
> "Please read the website they clearly explain everything."
> where exactly - the site says nothing...
My point exactly. No doubt there might be something down there somewhere deep, but at least the front pages of both the old and the new site didn’t even whisper of what’s going on.
27 • Naming, licenses... (by Vukota on 2016-08-29 17:01:11 GMT from Europe)
I couldn't agree more. Microsoft experimented at the time with "code" names (probably as their PR folks were bored with regular brand names) and learned through debacle that it was a worst thing they ever tried (now they do it only until the release as it sticks well with geeks that jumps the ship first).
28 • Name Change (by Jose on 2016-08-29 17:19:09 GMT from North America)
I liked the name PC-BSD. I always thought of BSD as strictly a server OS. PC-BSD makes it clear, this one is for PC's!
Likewise, PCLinuxOS tells everyone, this distro is tuned for PC's.
TrueOS sounds like Troll bait. MAC/Windows users are going to say it's their OS that is the one and only TrueOS.
29 • PC-BSD -> TrueOS (-> TrueBSD) (by Svajunas on 2016-08-29 18:17:19 GMT from Europe)
TrueOS sounds terrible, couse it's not informative name! TrueBSD (or smthg?) I think is better choice...
30 • Learn More button (by Doug on 2016-08-29 19:40:55 GMT from North America)
@26 The learn more button isn't deep at all.
I looked at TrueOS.org to see if there was any info on the name change, saw a "Learn More" button, right on the front page.
As for the licensing, I just want my pc to work and be able to do stuff, so I voted the last option.
31 • License? (by Alexi on 2016-08-29 20:11:21 GMT from Europe)
I rarely factor in the license in my consideration. I don't like licenses. I also don't like autoplaying video ads too, the ones Distrowatch has.,
32 • PC-BSD (by Justin on 2016-08-29 20:16:51 GMT from North America)
I'll jump on the bandwagon. While all the BSD names seem a little too similar/much for me (like the K applications from KDE), at least it was functional. I liked the idea of SERVER-BSD. TrueBSD isn't bad either.
TrueOS sounds gimmicky and sets yourself up to be a joke. I remember similar marketing stuff from my earlier days for low-level features. It became the butt of many jokes because the name implied it was way better than it really was. I hope this doesn't end up that way.
PCLinuxOS is a mouthful and I always mixed it up with Linux PC OS. That one needs a rename as well.
33 • poll (by Jordan on 2016-08-29 20:35:03 GMT from North America)
Licenses? We don't need to $%^&*^! licenses. (countdown to post removal)
34 • PC-BSD (by M.Z. on 2016-08-29 21:18:48 GMT from North America)
I have to agree with the general consensus on the name change for PC-BSD. The name PC-BSD has a lot of virtues, it's simple, straight forward, and genuine/authentic (& like #15 said the fact that it rhymes is a big plus). TrueOS could mean anything & I tend to agree with those that said it sounds gimmicky. If I had to pick a name for their project I would definitely stick with PC-BSD for the desktop & perhaps True-BSD or iX-BSD for the server. Or maybe System-BSD or Sys-BSD for the end part of iXSystems. At any rate I think there are a lot of other good options for names, but the one they planed seems like a bad idea to me.
I always liked the current name from the first time I ran across it here of DW several years back. I've tried it a few times since version PC-BSD 7.1, but could never find hardware that it liked.
Us PCLinuxOS users also call it PCLOS (I pronounce it P.C. low-ce). I rather like PCLinuxOS/PCLOS as a name, though it is certainly a bit more cumbersome than PC-BSD. Given how long PCLOS has been building their solid reputation I think losing that name would be bad, though not as as bad as the PC-BSD name change.
35 • What's all that PC-BSD/TrueOS stuff all about, anyway? (by Carlos on 2016-08-29 21:41:56 GMT from Europe)
36 • TrueOs@4@8 (by gee7 on 2016-08-29 22:25:43 GMT from Europe)
> "Please read the website they clearly explain everything."
> where exactly - the site says nothing...
The information on the name change is at:
It is not on the Main page (Home page) of the web site probably because they wanted to keep the main page clean and clear of excess verbiage, but the link to "more-on-trueos" is there at the top of the Home page.
37 • FreeBSD (by Bill on 2016-08-30 00:36:14 GMT from North America)
Call it what you like. Changing the name will not get more people interested in BSD. Grub issues have always been it's major nemesis. Tried on three different computers, but could never get it to even begin an install process. There is some good things that BSD is capable of but unless people can do an easy install it will not get anywhere in the top of Open Source Software Systems. For those who like the unix type of OS, there will always be some avid followers, but will there be enough followers to keep it going?
Just my two-bits.
38 • BSDs (by M.Z. on 2016-08-30 02:09:25 GMT from North America)
DesktopBSD is not a particularly good suggestion, it was already an actual project & died several years back.
I certainly agree that there are problems with BSD on the desktop & I've had lots of hardware problems that have kept me from using BSD there. That being said the BSDs are fairly successful open source projects in their own right & I have had a great deal of luck with other BSD based OSs like the FreeBSD based pfSense firewall distro. I've generally found it to be extremely stable & robust and have very few issues with it. To my recollection I only ever had on significant issue with the OS directly & that was due so some unusual old hardware.
At any rate I've had lots of troubles with BSD on the desktop & lots of luck with it as a firewall. To my understanding the FreeBSD foundation had been doing very well for it's self over the past few years and takes in hundreds of thousands of US $s per year and BSDs are still the backbone of lots of major websites like Netflix. It may be some time before BSDs do as well on the desktop as Linux, but there is a big future there & FreeBSD in particular will be around for a long time to come.
PS they already raised over $250k this year:
39 • BSD, BFD (by imnotrich on 2016-08-30 04:24:02 GMT from North America)
Why not just call is Desktop-BFD or Server-BFD and be done with it?
40 • PCBSD (by billc on 2016-08-30 04:48:07 GMT from Oceania)
I agree with most of the above, I don't like the name change.
This is not the first questionable decision made by the PCBSD developers - the dropping of the Warden (GUI for Jails management) was equally crazy.
Still it is an amazing OS with incredible tools and the awesome ZFS. Well worth watching. Still a bit rough around the edges but it could be a very strong alternative to Linux on the desktop in the near future.
41 • PC-BSD and FreeBSD (by AndyMender on 2016-08-30 07:25:26 GMT from Europe)
The main reason is probably that FreeBSD is not desktop-oriented in the sense people understand what a desktop computer really is. It has some super powerful features, works great even without X11 and handles network traffic with grace. It can be made to work as a GUI-driven OS, requiring a similar level of expertise as Arch Linux or perhaps Devuan. On laptops it's much easier with all-Intel hardware - at most a 4th gen processor (core i + Intel HD Graphics up to 4400). The current limitation is Intel and ATI/AMD iGPU support and wireless.
PC-BSD plays a pivotal role in lowering the boundary for less computer-savvy people to accept BSD :). Whether it's "true" or not, the "PC" in the name is crucial.
42 • TrueOS vs PC-BSD (by Koroshiya Itchy on 2016-08-30 08:56:55 GMT from Europe)
Desktop computers (PCs) are less relevant now than they were a few years ago and they are getting less and less relevant every year, fast and steadily. This is not to say that they are going to disappear any time soon, as some people used to claim, but they are no longer the largest market. The market right now is on the mobile devices and therefore if you want to make your living out of developing an OS you better make sure it is well positioned to jump into that market. You can, of course, use the desktop to promote your OS, as Canonical tried to do (late and clumsily), but that is not THE market any more.
This is to say that PC-BSD is no longer a good name. I do not know if TrueOS is, but you do not want to have "PC" or "desktop" on the name of your OS.
43 • @38 (by JJ on 2016-08-30 14:36:45 GMT from North America)
I'm glad to hear the FreeBSD foundation is doing well. While that seems like a lot of money, in a way that isn't. That will pay for maybe 2-4 developers full time, really less when they have to cover infrastructure costs. They can get more people by paying "bonuses" for working on the project.
I'm happy for choice, and I'm glad people are working on BSDs.
44 • TrueOS (by aary on 2016-08-30 14:59:50 GMT from Asia)
Isn't PC BSD too straight ball?
No problem with the new name TrueOS. It sounds cool for me.
I would love to run it, if it will allow my hardware :P
45 • Desktops less relevant? (by Andy Mender on 2016-08-30 15:23:03 GMT from Europe)
I wouldn't say desktop computers are becoming irrelevant quickly. I think they still have a significant presence in various money-making quarters like game development or as computing workstations in sciences and company offices. They're not relevant for mobile computing, true. That's sort of obvious, though, with the sharp improvement of tablets and smartphones in terms of both software and hardware. However, having a stable, long-term job and an apartment, a desktop tower + smartphone is the combo to go for. Most of the mobile stuff you can do on your smartphone, while a solid desktop is a must-have if you want to store any kind of data and do some actual computer work at home.
46 • Desktops (by curious on 2016-08-30 15:31:54 GMT from Europe)
And don't forget that from a user interface perspective, notebooks (especially the larger ones) are also desktops. They are still very relevant for professional users.
47 • BSD or whatever (by David on 2016-08-30 16:59:51 GMT from Europe)
A quick check shows 1-2% of webservers using BSD (according to whom you ask), while at Stack Overflow the percentage of BSD users was too small to show up in the survey. So, does it really matter what you call BSD? EndangeredOS, perhaps?
48 • Renaming BSD (by Greycoat on 2016-08-30 17:20:24 GMT from North America)
@47 - Maybe they should call it Ball-Less BSD since it's based on Eunuchs. :)
Seriously, I like PC-BSD more than TrueOS.
49 • TrueOS: Not just a name change (by Ken Moore on 2016-08-30 21:00:48 GMT from North America)
Distrowatch jumped the gun on announcing TrueOS - but they are also wrong by declaring it *just* a rename of PC-BSD. TrueOS is the next evolution of the PC-BSD project and an official announcement of it is scheduled for later this week.
*spoilers*: There is a *lot* that is different!!
~~ PC-BSD & TrueOS developer
50 • @ 49 • TrueOS: Not just a name change by Ken Moore (by Alexi on 2016-08-30 21:31:10 GMT from Europe)
If yours is THE TrueOS, then what are the others here? Non-True OSs? Or Untruthful OSs, Ken?
51 • software licenses (by argent on 2016-08-30 22:40:41 GMT from North America)
Always use the bare minimum of software to get the job done, agree with #16 cykodrone regarding compromised software.
Concerning non-free in particular, this is where donating plays a most important role. Someone is paying for the non-free, donations helps sustain and promote it's developement.
52 • PC-BSD new name and new future (by TUXBSDSOLARISUSER on 2016-08-30 23:26:38 GMT from North America)
The PC-BSD name change has been discussion since last 2 years on the forum.
With such as name, the challenge is big. I hope that future releases will match with the new BIG name TrueOS. Imagine a new Distro called: THE ONE OS !!!! WOW Imagine the sarcasm of every competitor in case of failure.
Since the release of version 10, there has been much change at several levels in PC-BSD. The Lumina came, the complete overhaul of AppCafe, adding several small system utility. The installation system has also been modified and improved. All these changes came with lot of instability on desktop user experience. Many, many, many instability oh my god.
The website change from Joomla to Wordpress, the forums redesign etc ... I must say not always for the better. Sometimens hard to follow...
I think, PC-BSD was more change in the last two years than in all existence of PC-BSD.
Version 10 of PC-BSD has been one of change with what it brings in instability. In my book the user experience on Desktop has been the worst of all versions.
Maybe the team want clean the table and start a new fresh name in version 11.
Many hard work development has been done and it will bring happiness users verison 11.
I hope more stability.....
this is just my opinion
53 • Marketspeak Autobot Translator (by Arch Watcher 402563 on 2016-08-31 00:48:55 GMT from North America)
What a boatload of comments rebranding inspired. I doubt there are five PC-BSD users here. I have installed it a few times.
What's more interesting about the project is the Lumina desktop, LibreSSL, absence of system D-, and PersonaCrypt.
Where TrueOS loses me is conjoining "Safe and Secure" claims with "SysAdm™ Remote Management." I hope SARM has an off switch.
FreeBSD I call KernelGeekOS because you get new kernel featurettes today, your next app version mañana. FreeBSD news covers kernel and filesystems to the nth degree. It reads like LKML. There's nada on improvements to packaging speed and efficiency for upstream apps. You would think clang might have helped. I can't even find a chart of which ports BSD considers out of date with upstream. If Ken or anyone else forks FreeBSD with a buildbot.net farm to front-run ports with upstream version tracking that works, I will move in.
54 • BSD future (by M.Z. on 2016-08-31 07:10:46 GMT from North America)
@haters (mostly #47)
If you dig into the profit & loss statements for the past 2 years (or just look @ the bottom of page 3 of the pdfs) the FreeBSD foundation lost $312k in 2015, but made a net of over 1.6 million US $s in 2014. If they can generate income anywhere near that & do basic housekeeping/budgeting it seems to me that anyone who thinks BSDs will all disappear anytime soon is totally clueless. Their current goal of $1.25 million seems lofty, but again net income from a couple years earlier was even higher & regardless of whether they make that goal or not they seem to have a good deal of resources.
I would like to see it do better on my desktop hardware, but I'm keeping BSD for a firewall OS & I'm confident that I will have the option to do so for years to come.
55 • FreeBSD and BSD future (by Andy Mender on 2016-08-31 10:15:39 GMT from Europe)
FreeBSD offers many ports and tries to track what upstream projects are doing. This is mostly an automated process. Of course, from time to time intervention on the part of the maintainer(s) is required. This is handled deftly with the Bugzilla system in the form of Problem Reports.
One may claim that many ports are not maintained by FreeBSD developers, but seriously how many of them are not even maintained upstream? For instance, I use Window Maker as my day-to-day window manager/desktop environment. Its development halted years ago and it's flagged in the FreeBSD ports tree as lacking maintainers. However, since it still builds on the build farms and the interest of hackers is negligible, it's fine. Contrary, how many GNU/Linux distributions inform the user directly (for instance, via repositories) that a specific program/library is not maintained anymore?
I believe infrastructure organization is one of the strong points of both FreeBSD and PC-BSD/TrueOS, and for that matter they're a great example to learn from :).
56 • BSD (by Scrumtime on 2016-08-31 11:44:07 GMT from North America)
I Dont think most people are PC- BSD or Any BSD haters just that the name change made little sense, that coupled with the fact that most people can't get BSD to work.......I know i tried many times it was one of the first Unix type OSs that i tried many moons ago
Personally PC-BSD never worked then it suddenly dropped 32bit distros when i was starting to make ground with it on a 32bit machine....never really tried it more than a couple of times on a 64bit but still had same problems..
Ghost BSD on the other hand has been a lot easier to work with..
we had a BSD server which worked great though...
57 • BSD (by Andy Mender on 2016-08-31 12:32:40 GMT from Europe)
I think BSDs require some getting used to, much like the simpler GNU/Linux distributions :). There are similarities with CRUX, Arch Linux, Slackware and Devuan/Debian in terms of software management and process supervision, though of course many differences also.
Per personal experience, my initial trials with FreeBSD were largely unsuccessful. I couldn't even get it to boot from a USB stick on a relatively standard 32-bit desktop. With 10.3-RELEASE many improvements came about. Nowadays, it's fairly trivial to make it boot even on UEFI-based netbooks.
Of course, this is mainly a GNU/Linux community so I expect people to have doubts, issues or feel reluctant towards BSDs :).
58 • the value of BSDs (by M.Z. on 2016-08-31 19:52:27 GMT from North America)
If you look at the context I was addressing the negativity of comments like #47 that implied that BSDs don't matter &/or are doomed to disappear due to small market share. I don't like the name change either & I've been frustrated by desktop oriented BSDs due to bad hardware support myself; however, the BSD projects are still very useful & I expect them to be around a good long while because of it.
I do admit that my main direct use of BSD is a firewall with pfSense, but then I rather like the idea that I have a FreeBSD based firewall OS shielding my Linux machines/LAN. I feel that having a different OS with a different security profile adds real value to my personal security setup on my computers. I personally find the BSDs to be very valuable & rely on them everyday both personally via pfSense & via streaming from Netflix.
Of course millions of people stream video from the BSD based servers at Netflix everyday, so on the basis of streaming video content alone BSDs are very important. In fact given the volume of data streamed by Netflix I'd guess the BSDs move huge amounts of data across the web everyday & are pushing a far larger % of the data on the web than the clueless negative types that think BSD will disappear could ever imagine.
59 • PC-BSD (by Alexi on 2016-08-31 20:25:06 GMT from Europe)
PC-BSD was a known distro.
But, once it becomes the TrueOS, some other dev would be releasing the OnlyTrueOS, another the AbsolutelyTrue OS, another the TrulyTrueOS...
60 • BSD moves 1/3 of all data across the web (by M.Z. on 2016-08-31 21:05:51 GMT from North America)
To those saying BSD does nothing I found a couple of articles on Ars Technica that say that BSD moves at least 1/3 of all data across the Internet during peak data usage hours. That is at least if you can read between the lines of what they say about Netflix. An article from 2015 confirms that Netflix uses BSD for all their 'OCA' streaming servers & another from 2014 shows that Netflix is responsible for 9.5% of uploads & over 1/3 of all downloads in North America during peak data usage hours.
And the second paragraph here:
61 • Dam Upstream, Blame Dry Riverbed on Climate Change (by Arch Watcher 402563 on 2016-09-01 03:32:44 GMT from North America)
@55 Andy Mender
I like FreeBSD. I have no problems using it as a server. I want it for my desktop. I've said so many times here.
The remark "many ports...are not even maintained upstream" is highly misleading. So misleading, I am thinking WTF, is this the FreeBSD party line?
It isn't a question of a lazy upstream. What I see all the time is an upstream project released a fresh stable version already, but FreeBSD still offers the one from two years back, and you must wait forever to see it bumped a minor increment. If you have a URL for my desired chart of stale ports, by all means post it.
Arch Linux lets one click a package page to flag its shipping Arch version out of date. I cannot believe FreeBSD needs a Bugzilla to handle such simple notice.
I myself remain puzzled why all the fine infrastructure, the tortuous shift to clang, and many people involved with FreeBSD do not understand this problem. I suspect they are all running MacOS desktops and FreeBSD servers.
Release notes for Linux distros tend to say "We've updated LibreOffice to version X.Y.Z and mpv got a boost to version A.B.C." Equivalent FreeBSD notes trumpet that "The kernel now has a flag IF_GOOF_THEN_TWERK and our scheduler was redesigned from scratch while we fiddled with compiler intermediate code." There is nada information on what ports got an update.
I have watched desktop packages expecting a maintainter to ship the latest stable upstream version, then watched a few months more, then asked, only to be told, I'll see when I can get around to it. FreeBSD is unholy that way. I think any package more than 6 months out of date needs an automatic red flashing light to dance on the FreeBSD foundation's desk.
62 • @61 (by Andy Mender on 2016-09-01 08:04:03 GMT from Europe)
1. How is saying "many ports are not even maintained upstream" misleading? This is a generalization, which has no deeper meaning. It just means that some projects were abandoned upstream, nothing more. It's not a "party line" of any sort.
2. "FreeBSD still offers the one from two years back". Which programs do you mean specifically? I haven't noticed a single port that's 2 years behind GNU/Linux distros. The programs I typically use are perfectly up to date. Also, here is a list of ports without an official maintainer: http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portsconcordanceformaintainer.py?maintainer=ports%40FreeBSD.org. They still get updated properly as long as no breaking changes were introduced upstream and the ports still build.
3. Bugzilla is used to report issues with ports or claim maintainership of a port.
4. Clang vs GCC is a "red herring", you know? Some binaries run faster, some slower. There is not a single "across the board" proof that Clang is bad as a compiler. If that's the case, why would anyone use it then?
5. Be aware that in FreeBSD ports and the base system are separated. Therefore, most news per system updates will be about the core utilities, the kernel, etc. On the other hand, how is version bumping in GNU/Linux distros informative? What does "we've updated Firefox to version X.Y.Z" really tell you?
I would rather read about distro-specific infrastructures that were introduced to make users' lives easier.
6. Again, which specific packages do you find to be out-of-date and you simply cannot live without them being the most current release?
Many people, me included, use FreeBSD as a desktop operating system successfully. Not sure what do you expect from FreeBSD so that it would satisfy your vision of a desktop operating system, which has not been touched by GhostBSD or PC-BSD/TrueOS already.
63 • @62 (by billc on 2016-09-01 09:31:05 GMT from Oceania)
Some people cannot be helped, Andy. I thought of responding to @61 but I would not have been as tactful as you.
Arch Watcher, are you having a bad day? Most of your comments in previous weeks have been so sensible and worth reading. Why suddenly the FreeBSD hate? If you want it for your desktop so much then why not join the team and help instead of just ranting?
btw GhostBSD 10.3 is awesome.
64 • @ 59 • PC-BSD -- Trueos (by Len on 2016-09-01 09:31:59 GMT from Africa)
What would be the TruestOS in the Distrowatch's Hit list? Mint, Debian, Ubuntu or OpenSuse, or maybe Fedora and RedHat?
65 • Deadwood in the Riverbed (by Arch Watcher 402563 on 2016-09-01 09:44:42 GMT from North America)
It's misleading as an excuse for FreeBSD to allow stale ports for apps alive and well upstream. Abandoned projects shouldn't exist in a well-maintained source tree. Such deadwood just enlarges my critique of ports.
What "we've updated Firefox to version X.Y.Z" really tells me is that the distro cares about desktop apps.
Ports and base aren't separated. They are more integrated than for Linux equivalents. That's even a BSD marketing bullet, namely, overall integration. If you mean that BSD org honchos don't pay much attention to actual ports, I agree, and that's the problem.
Look, I don't want a dust storm, but must we "prove" easy homework. Contrast FreshPorts.org with any upstream official release.
LibreOffice on FreeBSD is now sitting at version 5.0.6, behind BOTH "fresh" and "still" upstream. I can have the current "fresh" 5.2 on Gentoo, Void, Manjaro, Alpine, etc. Upstream 5.1 shipped half a year ago (Feb 2016). So 5.0.6 is officially half a year stale. Of course FreshPorts.org does not tell you so. Arch Linux shows red-letter text saying "out of date" when that's the status.
RetroShare took maybe half to a full year for the maintainer to act on upstream stable release 0.6.X. The major new stuff in 0.6 even included more help for BSD builds. It should have been easier for him than 0.5.
I could go on.
I am not saying anything about clang. I am saying FreeBSD did a major tooling overhaul instead of getting its maintainers in line. It's how FreeBSD rolls: kernel hacking, compilers, filesystems, server infrastructure, firewalls, throughput studies, conferences, etc. Apps are an afterthought left to maintainer discretion. My dashed hope was that clang would somehow benefit app updates.
Apparently, according to you, then given commit privs, I can even post an abandoned dead project from some lost upstream to ports, and no one will discipline me or even ask questions. The BSD kernel gets treated with far more respect.
66 • My Meds Are All Current (by Arch Watcher 402563 on 2016-09-01 10:17:34 GMT from North America)
Dear billc, thank you for the concern but no, not today.
I had a bad day when for no good reason, FreeBSD 9 failed to boot a stock PC that was then ten years old. So I waited for the next big release and kept taking my meds.
The next big release booted. But I had another bad day realizing how out-of-date its desktop software would be. Debian flashbacks gave me seizures so I switched my meds to a Linux distro that keeps apps current. Then my bad days stopped. I could sleep again.
Until the distro forced System D- medicine on me. After that caused seizures and insomnia, I switched to Linux distros that use less dangerous chemicals. Then my bad days stopped once more, and I found calm again.
Do I today read FreshPorts correctly, that KDE on FreeBSD is still version 4, two years after KDE 5 shipped? Save me, I'm drowning in proofs. Oh the flashbacks, oh they hurt...
Call me for the apocalypse, BSD ports might be current by then.
67 • @66 (by billc on 2016-09-01 11:17:45 GMT from Oceania)
"My Meds Are All Current" - Good to hear, LOL. Personally I will put up with a 6-month old word processor if it is on top of the stability and security of FreeBSD. Remember that FreeBSD gives us incredible technologies such as jails and the ZFS.
You could also edit the port so that it downloads a more current version of the software you want. That might not work with LibreOffice as it is so big and complex but it will often work with other packages.
Like you I am allergic to systemd. I am a long-time Slackware, BSD and Gentoo user but I keep an eye on Void and Alpine. I like Manjaro but I don't like the petty bickering that goes on in Arch.
68 • BSD (by Koroshiya Itchy on 2016-09-01 15:20:50 GMT from Europe)
A problem with BSD, be it on the workstation or the server, it is its inability to profit from CUDA GPU accelerators.
69 • OpenOffice vs LibreOffice (by James Glaser on 2016-09-01 19:16:09 GMT from North America)
My choice of OO due mostly to the Apache licence.
70 • Windows-only RemixOS (by OstroL on 2016-09-01 20:01:18 GMT from Europe)
Don't know, whether this is the first time Distrowatch is giving links to a "distro" that only works with Windows. But now that Distrowatch had done that, you'd want to download it and try it. If you guys are those, who use Linux only, you have a problem of checking it out. Have a look here to find out how to try it out.
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20160822&mode=67 post 97
Distrowatch should've first try the distro out in its Linux-only computers, before anouncing the Windows-only "distro" in its home page. Now, we might even have a "hit-ranking" for a Windows-only "distro."
71 • Remix OS (by Jesse on 2016-09-01 20:33:21 GMT from North America)
>> "Don't know, whether this is the first time Distrowatch is giving links to a "distro" that only works with Windows. But now that Distrowatch had done that, you'd want to download it and try it."
I am not sure where someone would get such a strange idea. I did run Remix OS, downloading it and setting it up from my Linux-only workstation. That's how I got software and screen shot information. There is nothing Windows-only about Remix OS, anyone running a Linux-only environment can run Remix OS.
I try all new operating systems I add to the database, including Remix OS and I always do so from a pure Linux environment.
72 • @71 Jessie (by OstroL on 2016-09-01 20:55:17 GMT from Europe)
Tell us how you set it up in your Linux-only workstation?
Remix OS Installation Tool works only in Windows, so how did you start the .exe file in your Linux-only workstation?
73 • Remix OS (by Jesse on 2016-09-01 21:40:17 GMT from North America)
>> "Remix OS Installation Tool works only in Windows, so how did you start the .exe file in your Linux-only workstation?"
You don't run the .exe when you're installing from Linux. It's not needed. There are two ways to install Remix OS from Linux. The USB-drive option is decribed in the Remix OS documentation. To install to a hard drive instead, you can create a FAT partition, mount the Remix ISO file and copy the contents of the ISO to the new partition. You may need to run GRUB's update script (or manually add a GRUB entry for Remix). Then reboot.
I suspect the reason there is an .exe launcher is because Windows users do not have the same partitioning and boot loader tools Linux users usually have pre-installed. It's not because Remix is Windows-only,
74 • @ 73 • Remix OS by Jesse (by Alexi on 2016-09-01 21:56:14 GMT from Europe)
Oh, so read the read me file. It took sometime for you to reply. So, you created a FAT partition on your Linux-only workstation and installed it the way the Remix OS documentation told you. So, how much storage does your Remix OS has in your FAT partition? 8GB or more?
That guy gave a how-to last week. There are many ways to install Remix OS on a Linux-only computer. You can install it in your Ubuntu root. But, just by mounting the Remix OS iso file and copying the contents of the ISO to the new partition, it won't run. You didn't install RemixOS in your Linux-only workstation. I've used it since the beta days, so I know.
75 • RE: 70 - 74 Remix OS (by lb on 2016-09-01 22:06:26 GMT from Asia)
I have no idea what you guys mean by this "Windows-only", "Linux-only" talk. Remix OS provides a regular ISO image which you burn on a DVD, then you use that DVD to boot up any x86 computer, irrespective of which OS it runs (or whether it runs an OS at all). Just like any of the hundreds of other live Live distributions and operating systems we report on.
Or am I missing something?
76 • Remix (by mandog on 2016-09-02 00:42:15 GMT from South America)
I had it running on my notebook with grub2 it will run on ntfs,fat,ext4 with no problems but it really is not that good android-x86-6.0-rc2.iso is far better and has a dedicated installer
77 • Fedora_25_alpha_with_default_Wayland (by k on 2016-09-02 05:54:01 GMT from North America)
Seems to be for more expert users/developers, and not older hardware?
Installer took an extraordinary time to complete, and then final result would
not startup beyond user login. Lucky to have stable Debian on separate disk
in same machine, cleared away all the "debris" from that "learning experience".
The installer does start from Fedora's usual warning about the release being
really infested with "bugs", so other beginners beware. :)
78 • @75 Am I missing something? (by Alex on 2016-09-02 06:52:22 GMT from Europe)
Yes, you are.
Jessie "installed" this Remix OS to a usb stick. Then, he started it in the guest mode. That's how the "screenshot" came by. https://distrowatch.com/images/slinks/remixos.png and here is the screnshot of Jessie's screenshot https://s15.postimg.io/4wd9ksizt/Screenshot_11.png
You may notice the words Guest Mode on the top right corner.
When asked how he "set it up in his Linux-only workstation," Jessie became evasive. He knows that we know he didn't install it. Aha, btw it won't install into a DVD, because it has to create the 'data' folder, but maybe you might try with a rewritable DVD.
79 • RE: 78 Remix OS (by ladislav on 2016-09-02 09:27:17 GMT from Asia)
I was reacting to comment 70 where the poster talks about Remix OS being "Windows-only". We have also received an email or two accusing us of listing a "Windows-only" system on DistroWatch.
You won't find a single Windows machine anywhere at my place. Yet I was able to boot Remix OS, use it, install applications, take a screenshot. You can even become root and do whatever you want with it.
So if there is any other post saying that Remix OS is a "Windows-only" system, then his/her post will quickly find itself in /dev/null. It's just complete rubbish.
80 • @78 top left corner not right corner (by Jordan on 2016-09-02 15:01:47 GMT from North America)
No big deal but what's missing is giving a crap about this "Windows only" huff contest.
81 • Remix OS (by Jesse on 2016-09-02 16:34:21 GMT from North America)
>> "When asked how he "set it up in his Linux-only workstation," Jessie became evasive. He knows that we know he didn't install it."
@78: I didn't become evasive, I clearly answered all the question you asked. I don't know what else you really expect. I mean, do you want a step-by-step guide on how to install Remix OS from a Linux system? If so there are plenty of guides out there. And, despite your claims, I have installed Remix OS to a hard drive. The screen shot was from a live USB device, but I also put Remix OS on a hard drive too to confirm it can be done.
If you want to e-mail me, I'll even send you the steps I took to install Remix OS on a drive, pulled from my bash history file. Maybe then you'll stop making baseless claims about the distribution?
82 • Apache OpenOffice (by M.Z. on 2016-09-02 17:31:28 GMT from North America)
I actually prefer the OpenOffice name (just as a subjective like the way it sounds sort of thing) & think it still has good name recognition & branding, but the project has been troubled for a long time now. Even if you just look at the amount of releases you can tell that AOO has been falling behind LibreOffice for some time & some in the project are even questioning whether the project has a future.
Here are some grizzly details a ran into today:
I think its fairly sad as the old pre-Oracle OpenOffice helped me & I imagine many others see a world without propriety software as a serious possibility. At some point after switching to OpenOffice & Firefox & developing a certain affection for what such projects were doing I started looking into Linux & other open OS alternatives. I installed my first copy of Mint in 2008 & ditched Windows for PCLinuxOS completely 3 years later. Of course that may not have happened for me if I hadn't had such a positive experience with OpenOffice & other open source projects first.
83 • @82 (by billc on 2016-09-02 19:45:32 GMT from Oceania)
The problem is that Oracle is far less friendly towards open source than was Sun Microsystems. Recall that Oracle "acquired" Sun after the GFC. Sun had developed Solaris, Java, OpenOffice and MySQL - all four have since been forked by the open source community, not trusting Oracle, to become OpenIndiana, OpenJDK, LibreOffice and MariaDB respectively.
84 • Devuan (by Koroshiya Itchy on 2016-09-03 12:03:08 GMT from Europe)
After being a Debian user for many years, I migrated to Lubuntu 14.04 when Debian imposed systemd upon us offering no alternative. This week I decided to give Devuan 1.0-beta a try on my old Lenovo S10-3s netbook (RAM upgraded to 2GB and SSD). I used the netinstall image in non-graphical expert mode. The installation experience has not changed since Debian 7. This enabled me to choose a non-PAE 586 kernel of the 3 series. I have also activated the backports, which resulted in the kernel being updated to 4.6.0 686, which, I believe, it is also non-PAE. I installed LXDE instead of the default XFCE.
The desktop experience is clearly better with Lubuntu.Devuan, as Debian, does not configure the DE for you. Using lxappearance was flawless in Lubuntu but has glitches in Devuan/Debian and you need to log out for certain changes to take effect. The Synaptics touchpad did not work well with Lubuntu but it is somehow worse in Devuan and requires manual configuration in both cases.
Other than that, Devuan feels a lot crispier than Lubuntu. It boots faster (really fast!) and switching it off takes just a couple of seconds. Firefox still feels heavy on this hardware, same as Chromium, but better with Devuan than with Lubuntu (maybe due to the non-PAE kernel?). Opening applications is also faster. The backported version of Midori is very buggy, but QupZilla works just fine.
In summary, so far Devuan seems like a keep for this netbook. I would like to profit to thank the Devuan developers for giving us our freedom back.
85 • Lumina DE, 64-bit only? (by Linux Apocalypsis on 2016-09-04 08:49:10 GMT from Europe)
I have tried to build the Lumina DE in Devuan 32-bit by following the instructions on the Lumina website.
The compilation fails after a long while with a very generic Qt5-related error. Has anyone succeeded compiling this thing in a 32-bit environment.
Number of Comments: 85
Display mode: DWW Only • Comments Only • Both DWW and Comments
|• Issue 823 (2019-07-15): Debian 10, finding 32-bit packages on a 64-bit system, Will Cooke discusses Ubuntu's desktop, IBM finalizes purchase of Red Hat|
|• Issue 822 (2019-07-08): Mageia 7, running development branches of distros, Mint team considers Snap, UBports to address Google account access|
|• Issue 821 (2019-07-01): OpenMandriva 4.0, Ubuntu's plan for 32-bit packages, Fedora Workstation improvements, DragonFly BSD's smaller kernel memory|
|• Issue 820 (2019-06-24): Clear Linux and Guix System 1.0.1, running Android applications using Anbox, Zorin partners with Star Labs, Red Hat explains networking bug, Ubuntu considers no longer updating 32-bit packages|
|• Issue 819 (2019-06-17): OS108 and Venom, renaming multiple files, checking live USB integrity, working with Fedora's Modularity, Ubuntu replacing Chromium package with snap|
|• Issue 818 (2019-06-10): openSUSE 15.1, improving boot times, FreeBSD's status report, DragonFly BSD reduces install media size|
|• Issue 817 (2019-06-03): Manjaro 18.0.4, Ubuntu Security Podcast, new Linux laptops from Dell and System76, Entroware Apollo|
|• Issue 816 (2019-05-27): Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.0, creating firewall rules, Antergos shuts down, Matthew Miller answers questions about Fedora|
|• Issue 815 (2019-05-20): Sabayon 19.03, Clear Linux's developer features, Red Hat explains MDS flaws, an overview of mobile distro options|
|• Issue 814 (2019-05-13): Fedora 30, distributions publish Firefox fixes, CentOS publishes roadmap to 8.0, Debian plans to use Wayland by default|
|• Issue 813 (2019-05-06): ROSA R11, MX seeks help with systemd-shim, FreeBSD tests unified package management, interview with Gael Duval|
|• Issue 812 (2019-04-29): Ubuntu MATE 19.04, setting up a SOCKS web proxy, Scientific Linux discontinued, Red Hat takes over Java LTS support|
|• Issue 811 (2019-04-22): Alpine 3.9.2, rsync examples, Ubuntu working on ZFS support, Debian elects new Project Leader, Obarun releases S6 tools|
|• Issue 810 (2019-04-15): SolydXK 201902, Bedrock Linux 0.7.2, Fedora phasing out Python 2, NetBSD gets virtual machine monitor|
|• Issue 809 (2019-04-08): PCLinuxOS 2019.02, installing Falkon and problems with portable packages, Mint offers daily build previews, Ubuntu speeds up Snap packages|
|• Issue 808 (2019-04-01): Solus 4.0, security benefits and drawbacks to using a live distro, Gentoo gets GNOME ports working without systemd, Redox OS update|
|• Issue 807 (2019-03-25): Pardus 17.5, finding out which user changed a file, new Budgie features, a tool for browsing FreeBSD's sysctl values|
|• Issue 806 (2019-03-18): Kubuntu vs KDE neon, Nitrux's znx, notes on Debian's election, SUSE becomes an independent entity|
|• Issue 805 (2019-03-11): EasyOS 1.0, managing background services, Devuan team debates machine ID file, Ubuntu Studio works to remain an Ubuntu Community Edition|
|• Issue 804 (2019-03-04): Condres OS 19.02, securely erasing hard drives, new UBports devices coming in 2019, Devuan to host first conference|
|• Issue 803 (2019-02-25): Septor 2019, preventing windows from stealing focus, NetBSD and Nitrux experiment with virtual machines, pfSense upgrading to FreeBSD 12 base|
|• Issue 802 (2019-02-18): Slontoo 18.07.1, NetBSD tests newer compiler, Fedora packaging Deepin desktop, changes in Ubuntu Studio|
|• Issue 801 (2019-02-11): Project Trident 18.12, the meaning of status symbols in top, FreeBSD Foundation lists ongoing projects, Plasma Mobile team answers questions|
|• Issue 800 (2019-02-04): FreeNAS 11.2, using Ubuntu Studio software as an add-on, Nitrux developing znx, matching operating systems to file systems|
|• Issue 799 (2019-01-28): KaOS 2018.12, Linux Basics For Hackers, Debian 10 enters freeze, Ubuntu publishes new version for IoT devices|
|• Issue 798 (2019-01-21): Sculpt OS 18.09, picking a location for swap space, Solus team plans ahead, Fedora trying to get a better user count|
|• Issue 797 (2019-01-14): Reborn OS 2018.11.28, TinyPaw-Linux 1.3, dealing with processes which make the desktop unresponsive, Debian testing Secure Boot support|
|• Issue 796 (2019-01-07): FreeBSD 12.0, Peppermint releases ISO update, picking the best distro of 2018, roundtable interview with Debian, Fedora and elementary developers|
|• Issue 795 (2018-12-24): Running a Pinebook, interview with Bedrock founder, Alpine being ported to RISC-V, Librem 5 dev-kits shipped|
|• Issue 794 (2018-12-17): Void 20181111, avoiding software bloat, improvements to HAMMER2, getting application overview in GNOME Shell|
|• Issue 793 (2018-12-10): openSUSE Tumbleweed, finding non-free packages, Debian migrates to usrmerge, Hyperbola gets FSF approval|
|• Issue 792 (2018-1203): GhostBSD 18.10, when to use swap space, DragonFly BSD's wireless support, Fedora planning to pause development schedule|
|• Issue 791 (2018-11-26): Haiku R1 Beta1, default passwords on live media, Slax and Kodachi update their media, dual booting DragonFly BSD on EFI|
|• Issue 790 (2018-11-19): NetBSD 8.0, Bash tips and short-cuts, Fedora's networking benchmarked with FreeBSD, Ubuntu 18.04 to get ten years of support|
|• Issue 789 (2018-11-12): Fedora 29 Workstation and Silverblue, Haiku recovering from server outage, Fedora turns 15, Debian publishes updated media|
|• Issue 788 (2018-11-05): Clu Linux Live 6.0, examining RAM consumpion, finding support for older CPUs, more Steam support for running Windows games on Linux, update from Solus team|
|• Issue 787 (2018-10-29): Lubuntu 18.10, limiting application access to specific users, Haiku hardware compatibility list, IBM purchasing Red Hat|
|• Issue 786 (2018-10-22): elementary OS 5.0, why init keeps running, DragonFly BSD enables virtual machine memory resizing, KDE neon plans to drop older base|
|• Issue 785 (2018-10-15): Reborn OS 2018.09, Nitrux 1.0.15, swapping hard drives between computers, feren OS tries KDE spin, power savings coming to Linux|
|• Issue 784 (2018-10-08): Hamara 2.1, improving manual pages, UBports gets VoIP app, Fedora testing power saving feature|
|• Issue 783 (2018-10-01): Quirky 8.6, setting up dual booting with Ubuntu and FreeBSD, Lubuntu switching to LXQt, Mint works on performance improvements|
|• Issue 782 (2018-09-24): Bodhi Linux 5.0.0, Elive 3.0.0, Solus publishes ISO refresh, UBports invites feedback, Linux Torvalds plans temporary vacation|
|• Issue 781 (2018-09-17): Linux Mint 3 "Debian Edition", file systems for SSDs, MX makes installing Flatpaks easier, Arch team answers questions, Mageia reaches EOL|
|• Issue 780 (2018-09-10): Netrunner 2018.08 Rolling, Fedora improves language support, how to customize Kali Linux, finding the right video drivers|
|• Issue 779 (2018-09-03): Redcore 1806, keeping ISO downloads safe from tampering, Lubuntu makes Calamares more flexible, Ubuntu improves GNOME performance|
|• Issue 778 (2018-08-27): GuixSD 0.15.0, ReactOS 0.4.9, Steam supports Windows games on Linux, Haiku plans for beta, merging disk partitions|
|• Issue 777 (2018-08-20): YunoHost 220.127.116.11, limiting process resource usage, converting file systems on Fedora, Debian turns 25, Lubuntu migrating to Wayland|
|• Issue 776 (2018-08-13): NomadBSD 1.1, Maximum storage limits on Linux, openSUSE extends life for 42.3, updates to the Librem 5 phone interface|
|• Issue 775 (2018-08-06): Secure-K OS 18.5, Linux is about choice, Korora tests community spin, elementary OS hires developer, ReactOS boots on Btrfs|
|• Issue 774 (2018-07-30): Ubuntu MATE & Ubuntu Budgie 18.04, upgrading software from source, Lubuntu shifts focus, NetBSD changes support policy|
|• Issue 773 (2018-07-23): Peppermint OS 9, types of security used by different projects, Mint reacts to bugs in core packages, Slackware turns 25|
|• Issue 772 (2018-07-16): Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre 0.2.4, UBports running desktop applications, OpenBSD auto-joins wi-fi networks, boot environments and zedenv|
|• Full list of all issues|
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the Star Lite, Star LabTop and more. Available with a choice of Ubuntu or Linux Mint pre-installed with many more distributions supported. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|Random Distribution |
m0n0wall was a project aimed at creating a complete, embedded firewall software package that, when used together with an embedded PC, provides all the important features of commercial firewall boxes (including ease of use) at a fraction of the price (free software). m0n0wall was based on a bare-bones version of FreeBSD, along with a web server (thttpd), PHP and a few other utilities. The entire system configuration was stored in one single XML text file to keep things transparent. m0n0wall was probably the first UNIX system that has its boot-time configuration done with PHP, rather than the usual shell scripts, and that has the entire system configuration stored in XML format.