[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Every year I upgrade to something better and found the past distros very disgusting.

6/2021: Ubuntu, Debian, Mint (for ~15 minutes), Kali Linux

2022: Ubuntu, Lubuntu, RHEL, Fedora (for some days), Arch

2023: Artix (for some days), Gentoo, Alpine (Alpine is the best distro I've ever seen), switched to OpenBSD in the end of the year!

2024: OpenBSD. Have a machine running FreeBSD but currently unplugged and haven't learned anything from FreeBSD.

OpenBSD is so simple and I started reading man pages when I use it. I'm starting to learn tmux. Started to learn sed. Started writing some shell scripts. I can confirm I wasted time using all the distros above except Alpine. Except when I compile the linux kernel on Gentoo. I switched to OpenBSD without any problem. I quickly forgot the /dev/sda1 and learned disklabel. Not using vim without any problem, and I learned how to use vi efficiently.

OpenBSD is not too hard for any "newbies" that can read English. They can type "help" and it will open help(1). When they have read help(1) they will read afterboot(8). afterboot(8) is just comprehensive. It's a pity that package management is about the end of this man page, but package management is just simple: pkg_add and pkg_delete package-name. They may read pkg_add(1) and pkg_delete(1) when they want to upgrade.

Default X11 window manager is fvwm. xterm is launched when X is started. You can move windows with mouse. Minimized windows also appear on the grey screen. But you have to double click much. This is usable. cwm is also available when you want a wm that can be used with a keyboard. It is much more efficient.

2025: plan 9 ???

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I really hope microsoft abandons windows in favour of its cloud apps for people who need it and lets Linux distros rule the desktop world

This only born more commercial distros and make macos and chromeos span even more.

Open source benefits when there are so many companies competing.

https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Don't even read your reply, all I want to say is you are acting like what CIA, through whatever self-claimed civil society organizations or NGOs is doing to Viet Nam and China now.

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

I personally think it is trash..

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Sorry, I thought the comment were by the AMDIsOurLord guy

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

for normal user that have nothing to deal with security I think?

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Should I install all of them :>?

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

What the hell??

They evolve differently. Saying *BSD is like 4.4BSD is still developed by ucb to provide a single base for all BSD.

Michael W Lucas wrote in Absolute FreeBSD (3rd):

Absolute BSD (No Starch Press, 2002) was my first technology book and was written when the various BSD operating system had more in common than they wanted to admit. The second edition, Absolute FreeBSD (No Starch Press, 2007), came out after the BSDs had diverged, and detailed FreeBSD's advances in the previous five year

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

I think no BSD expert will bother this place

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I think you shouldn't argue on why bsd use the bsd license because no one would care, and I will stop here

We should focus on learning and programming, just like Vietnamese these day should be good on Marxism-Leninism that's taught in the university/college to have the right mindset and should't care about anarchism, liberalism, etc and focus on whatever science to help the country.

What does that mean? You can redistribute binary code that is not Open source, and you are also not allowed to find the source code? How is that free?

You can redistribute binary code that is not Open source under a free license

there isn't a problem making OpenBSD nonfree in their opinion, the only problem is they cannot fix the binary code if it have bugs and "can't confirm if the blob contain malware"

Blobs are not even FOSS, so they can only be implemented as Linux is not FOSS.

FOSS???????????

This is source code.

They can exist side by side with linux (like you install gcc and openssh on your linux). I saw microcode are packaged, not installed by default (about arch linux)

If they are linked against linux they must be gpl

Can you read the gpl or that's just long and right and everyone must use it to support GNU

using a license that promote giving code back (put restriction on redistribution) for coreutils, gcc, libc, etc.. has borned Chimera Linux (which point out the quality problem of GNU (in code!) by using BSD userland and LLVM and musl)

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

I appreciate that they are blobfree but “no copyleft” has nothing to do with that

Blobs that are redistributable is still included. The 0x things are redistributable under BSD 3 clause license, with an additional clause prohibiting reverse engineering

Which is much free than the gpl

Actually, I think Copyleft Linux could not include blobs?

What??

[-] scratchandgame@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Not because of an operating system. But the success of other operating systems.

The characteristic of violent revolution is to completely resolve it.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

scratchandgame

joined 8 months ago