# want to leave xp...



## d_mon (Jul 18, 2011)

...to erase the partition and install some? *BSD...* 

looking4 tips...ain't wanna feel remorse later(of leaving private sof)

got *arch* on second part

ideas are welcome!


----------



## fonz (Jul 18, 2011)

The best tip I can think of is: read (relevant parts of) the handbook, particularly the installation and post-installation chapters.

FreeBSD is becoming more and more suitable for desktop systems, but the base system is relatively barebones (for good reasons). If you want a desktop environment and applications, you'll have to install them yourself.

Good luck,

Fonz

P.S. If you still have XP around, I recommend that you first make an inventory of the hardware you have (make and model of video card, sound card, NIC, etc.). If I'm not mistaken the handbook show how to do that in Windows.


----------



## d_mon (Jul 18, 2011)

thx homie...i had installed pcbsd,freebsd and freeBSD 9(current)b4!

definitly BSD rocks dude -at least 'free'-!

now..wich one is nicer GRUB o bsd boot?


----------



## SirDice (Jul 18, 2011)

If you're going for a FreeBSD only system you don't need a boot manager. The standard one is the FreeBSD boot-manager; boot0cfg(8). GRUB can be installed via ports; sysutils/grub and sysutils/grub2.


----------



## fonz (Jul 18, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> wich one is nicer GRUB o bsd boot?


Depends on your definition of nice :h

The FreeBSD boot manager is very simple, I like that. Grub on the other hand probably has a lot more features that allow one to make it look more fancy, if that's what you're after.

Fonz


----------



## d_mon (Jul 18, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> If you're going for a FreeBSD only system you don't need a boot manager





> got arch on second part



i'm going to install on first hole(where is xp) (archlinux is on 2nd)...no inconvenient with freeBSD boot-manager?

what to choose[the best] on installation: UFS or ZFS and which de/wm with 256 mb ram,2.26 ghz processor intel P4?

what to choose:  *8* stable, *8.2* release?


----------



## d_mon (Jul 19, 2011)

speechless...nobody cares if someone want to stick or not to BSD!

*ain't got time(like most people) 4 read long 'manuals''handbooks''whatever'...


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jul 19, 2011)

If you believe that "ain't got time to read all that stuff" will go down well with FreeBSD users, you're probably wrong.


----------



## fonz (Jul 19, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> i'm going to install on first hole(where is xp) (archlinux is on 2nd)...no inconvenient with freeBSD boot-manager?


Should be no problem.



			
				d_mon said:
			
		

> what to choose[the best] on installation: UFS or ZFS and which de/wm with 256 mb ram,2.26 ghz processor intel P4?


ZFS is said to be heavy on resources, so with your configuration I'd say UFS.

Which DE/WM to run is largely a matter of personal choice. You have pretty much the same options as on Linux and the arguments are the same, too. I use x11-wm/fvwm2, configured to look like Silicon Graphics' 4Dwm. I also have a netbook on which I currently use x11-wm/blackbox. Both of these are stacking window managers that are relatively lean on resources, but you may want more eyecandy. To quote Status Quo: _Whatever You Want_.



			
				d_mon said:
			
		

> what to choose:  *8* stable, *8.2* release?


Again depends on exactly what you want. But if you need to ask, just go with -RELEASE I'd say.

Fonz


----------



## Zare (Jul 19, 2011)

First, you should learn difference between chainloader and bootloader, and how all those OSes you have installed boot. Second, if you "ain't got time" stick to Windows. UNIX requires time, will and patience. 



> i'm going to install on first hole(where is xp) (archlinux is on 2nd)...no inconvenient with freeBSD boot-manager?



Don't install FreeBSD boot manager. Your GRUB can boot FreeBSD from UFS partition.



> what to choose[the best] on installation: UFS or ZFS and which de/wm with 256 mb ram,2.26 ghz processor intel P4?



You can't choose anything of that kind @ installation. You will get UFS partitions inside a FreeBSD slice with only base system, that lacks any form of GUI. ZFS requires manual installation (and that requires skills you'll never get if you don't change attitude), and 256MB ram on i386 is a no-go for that filesystem. 



> what to choose: 8 stable, 8.2 release?



I generally prefer -STABLE branch on desktop because of faster code updates and up-to-date packages which -RELEASE repository lacks. For -RELEASE, packages are compiled only when that particular version rolls out, receiving only security patches. For -STABLE, clusters are compiling new versions of packages. You can use -STABLE repository on -RELEASE system by setting a few environment variables. That's not problematic but it isn't recommended, either. -RELEASE systems can be upgraded to new minor or major versions via binary upgrade tool. -STABLE can be only re-built. Meaning that you need to fetch the complete system sources and compile "world". That can take a while on 2.26 P4.

This is all written in the handbook. You're asking us to type again what's already been written in official documentation. Because of your laziness to "read long manuals". I'm not responding to your general questions any more - go RTFM.


----------



## d_mon (Jul 19, 2011)

> rtfm



don't have to be rude dude...


----------



## graudeejs (Jul 19, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> don't have to be rude dude...



rtfm => Read The Fine Manual
Nothing rude


----------



## d_mon (Jul 19, 2011)

i can bet ANY MONEY  that bsd isn't fast to boot than arch!(about 10 seconds)


----------



## graudeejs (Jul 19, 2011)

I bet arch isn't as stable (and mature) as BSD

Booting up speed is really not that important in long run (Unless you're booting old OpenSolaris, which takes ages)


----------



## d_mon (Jul 19, 2011)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> (Unless you're booting old OpenSolaris, which takes ages)



:e

possibly *pc**BSD* could be 4me...:OOO

another thing: i need some to replace XP -i mean FULL desktop- that's the idea!      

in the past had inconvenients with USB and cd rom(no read/something about permissions)


----------



## d_mon (Jul 19, 2011)

btw...why BSD has software out of phase? an example: if someone wanna try ff 8 (nightly build) we have it on aur repos...on freeBSD how could get it?


----------



## graudeejs (Jul 19, 2011)

ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/


----------



## d_mon (Jul 20, 2011)

fonz said:
			
		

> I use x11-wm/fvwm2, configured to look like Silicon Graphics' 4Dwm. I also have a netbook on which I currently use x11-wm/blackbox. Both of these are stacking window managers that are relatively lean on resources



some pic(s)?
-------------------
btw i'm going to try to install with a usb(today)


----------



## d_mon (Jul 20, 2011)

hi there...folks i don't like to bother but need some tuto how to install on usb then to hd
and 
where to find the correct iso/image to do that!


----------



## wblock@ (Jul 20, 2011)

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install-pre.html#INSTALL-BOOT-MEDIA


----------



## d_mon (Jul 21, 2011)

killasmurf86 said:
			
		

> rtfm => Read The Fine Manual



http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=RTFM


----------



## graudeejs (Jul 21, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=RTFM



FreeBSD community is known for having it's own polite slang  (jocking)


----------



## mix_room (Jul 21, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=RTFM





			
				&quot said:
			
		

> People who say "RTFM!" might be considered rude, but the true rude ones are the annoying people who take absolutely no self-responibility and expect to have all the answers handed to them personally.



As you linked


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jul 21, 2011)

Fair comment. Dropping this in Off-Topic now.


----------



## fonz (Jul 21, 2011)

mix_room said:
			
		

> As you linked


In fact, the OpenBSD people might say that it would be rude to rob somebody of a learning experience 

Fonz


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jul 21, 2011)

Also be sure to look up LART ..


----------



## d_mon (Aug 6, 2011)

well...i decided to keep xp and rezise the partition to make space for BSD!

fdisk -l:
	
	



```
Disk /dev/sda: 82.3 GB, 82348277760 bytes                              
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 10011 cylinders, total 160836480 sectors  
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes                                 
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes                  
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes                      
Disk identifier: 0xa8a8a8a8                                            
                                                                       
   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System         
/dev/sda1   *          63    81915434    40957686    7  HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sda2        81915904    82964479      524288   82  Linux swap / Solaris                                                                  
/dev/sda3        82964480   160835583    38935552   83  Linux
```

do i have to install or not BSDbootmanager? i'd prefer grub-don't want to lose it-...


----------



## pkubaj (Aug 6, 2011)

Since FreeBSD != Linux, you can't install FreeBSD on a Linux partition. Kind of like installing Windows on ext4.
And if you want to keep your Windows installation, you needn't use GRUB. Just install EasyBCD and add FreeBSD to Windows Boot Manager, or install boot0 to MBR during FreeBSD installation (BootMgr option after making slices).


----------



## d_mon (Aug 6, 2011)

dude...you don't follow...I want to install BSD on window's partition  previously resized!


----------



## fonz (Aug 6, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> i want to installl BSD on window's partition  previously resized!


FreeBSD requires a FreeBSD partition, you can't install it on a Windows partition (not if you wish to keep Windows, anyway). Perhaps you meant you have created some empty space that can be turned into a FreeBSD partition?

Fonz

P.S. Dude, please mind your writing style. See this sticky thread.


----------



## d_mon (Aug 6, 2011)

yes got it! that for no erase windows -compassion-:e


----------



## pkubaj (Aug 6, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> yes got it! that for no erase windows -compassion-:e



Oh, I noticed only the fdisk output :r


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Aug 7, 2011)

@d_mon - you might get better responses if you would quit talking like this is a Windows forum. Most of everyone here are professionals who use FreeBSD in their work and fractured English, calling people 'homies' and all that won't sit well. You are expected to do your homework and sit up straight. If you're going to act like a kid you'll get treated like one. It's not that we don't have a sense of humor but sloppiness and laziness is not tolerated.


----------



## d_mon (Aug 9, 2011)

it is possible to change on 'options editor' release name 8.0-RELEASE for 9.0-BETA1 or some not too old? unetbootin offers me that,seems a little outdated v8.0...


----------



## fonz (Aug 9, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> it is possible to change on 'options editor' release name 8.0-RELEASE for 9.0-BETA1 or some not too old?


Sure. You can even change it to 10.9-PARACHUTE if that makes you happy.



			
				d_mon said:
			
		

> seems a little outdated v8.0...


It's not the most recent, but I wouldn't go as far as calling 8.0-RELEASE "outdated".

Fonz


----------



## wblock@ (Aug 9, 2011)

Don't expect the installer to install a new release correctly just by changing the name.  If that was all it took, there'd be no reason to make new ISOs for new releases.


----------



## d_mon (Aug 9, 2011)

what about 'any' instead of other 'version'? really need info! i'm going to try to install today...


----------



## wblock@ (Aug 9, 2011)

Download an ISO for the version you want to install.  There's a snapshots directory with recent versions of FreeBSD-9, if desired.  If download size is a concern, get the bootonly version.  It's smaller because it downloads needed data from the net during the install.


----------



## d_mon (Aug 9, 2011)

well impossible to install:

message

Cannot resolve hostname 'ftp.freebsd.org'! Are you sure that your name server,gateway and network interfece are correctly configured?


----------



## xibo (Aug 9, 2011)

> well impossible to install:
> 
> message
> 
> Cannot resolve hostname 'ftp.freebsd.org'! Are you sure that your name server,gateway and network interfece are correctly configured?


Maybe you should check whether your server, gateway and network interface are properly configured? Sorry couldn't stand it.
You should have a rescue terminal accessible by hitting ALT + F4 (maybe another F-key). ifconfig will tell you your network interface settings, cat /etc/resolv.conf should contain your name server, and netstat -r -n lists your routing table.



			
				d_mon said:
			
		

> ain't got time(like most people) 4 read long 'manuals''handbooks''whatever'...


Do you notice that during the time you have probably been spending on this threat already, you could have completely read the handbook several times... ?


----------



## wblock@ (Aug 9, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> well impossible to install:
> 
> Cannot resolve hostname 'ftp.freebsd.org'! Are you sure that your name server,gateway and network interfece are correctly configured?



When it asks to use DHCP to configure the interface, say yes.  Unless you don't have a working DHCP server, in which case give it a manual IP and a default route.


----------



## d_mon (Aug 10, 2011)

any other 'idea'? got usb hp 2gb(btw with freeBSD 9.0 image) but no boot! it is necesary boot partition on the usb? how's possible can't install by USB?


----------



## wblock@ (Aug 10, 2011)

Did you install the memstick image to the USB stick as shown in the Handbook?  The link is in message #20.  Other than that, is your computer set to boot from USB?


----------



## d_mon (Aug 10, 2011)

yep i did from arch:
	
	



```
# dd if=FreeBSD-9.0-BETA1-i386-memstick.img of=/dev/sdb1-[color="Red"]or similar,don't remember now[/color]- bs=64k
```

yes is set to boot from USB!


----------



## fonz (Aug 10, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> ```
> # dd if=FreeBSD-9.0-BETA1-i386-memstick.img of=/dev/sdb[color=green][b]1[/b][/color]-[color="Red"]or similar,don't remember now[/color]- bs=64k
> ```


Drop the number (green).

Fonz


----------



## d_mon (Aug 27, 2011)

fonz said:
			
		

> Drop the number (green)



Absolutly right sir! Thumb up...


----------



## d_mon (Aug 27, 2011)

wblock said:
			
		

> Did you install the memstick image to the USB stick as shown in the Handbook?  The link is in message #20.  Other than that, is your computer set to boot from USB?


 well...that was yesterday! today can not enter to my 'new install':*no root login allowed*

http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=25960


----------



## UNIXgod (Aug 27, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> well...that was yesterday! today can not enter to my 'new install':*no root login allowed*
> 
> http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=25960
> 
> ...



er what does root login have to do with kde? sounds like you have a configuration issue. Have you read the documentation?


----------



## xibo (Aug 27, 2011)

UNIXgod said:
			
		

> er what does root login have to do with kde? sounds like you have a configuration issue. Have you read the documentation?



Issue is due to him using KDM to login, which blocks root login by the default setup. It can be changed in the KDM config file (iirc kdmrc.conf somewhere in the kde installation path), though the better solution would be to login with your default user rather then root.


----------

