# So I installed FreeBSD 8.2... now what? (noob questions)



## sysop1911 (Jul 20, 2011)

I downloaded the FreeBSD 8.2 release for i386 and successfully installed it on my Dell desktop.  So here are my noob questions...

I thought there was a GUI?  My install is all command prompt.
If there is a GUI, how do I install it?
How can get from the $ prompt to the # prompt and what is the difference?

I'm sure I'll think of more questions later.  Thanks.


----------



## jb_fvwm2 (Jul 20, 2011)

Welcome.  Several websites show roundups of all the GUI's installable (twm, fvwm2, openbox, windowmaker, etc).  Installing the GUI is tricky, easy once the xorg (X) configuration is done. (I'd advise customizing the prompt to show the current path, easier to avoid mistakes... depends upon your shell.) Maybe check the HowTo section here, and guides on the web, and the handbook which should be on your disk, for further configuration.  Way too much to explain in one post here in the time I have left today. Maybe others will chime in; and the forum search (the bar at the top) is very efficient in this forum vs many others.


----------



## fonz (Jul 20, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> I thought there was a GUI?  My install is all command prompt.


You need to install a window manager (or even a desktop environment if you're into that sort of thing) seperately.



			
				sysop1911 said:
			
		

> 2)If there is a GUI, how do I install it?


Start by installing X-windows, see the handbook. Then choose a window manager or desktop environment of your choice and install that. Choice aplenty.



			
				sysop1911 said:
			
		

> 3)How can get from the $ prompt to the # prompt and what is the difference?


You must be kidding, but I'll bite. The # prompt is for the superuser, or administrator in Windows speak. See su(1) and/or security/sudo.

Fonz


----------



## cnxhm (Jul 20, 2011)

hi
if you want a GUI,you need install Xorg fisrt, and then install a desktop environment or a 
window manger, such as sawfish,fvwm,xfce,gnome,kde.Just pick one of them.
If you're just a beginner on *nix, i suggest you install the gonme.


----------



## SirDice (Jul 20, 2011)

If you are a real beginner with FreeBSD you might want to give PC-BSD a try.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jul 20, 2011)

The latter is more of a strong suggestion than a hint, really. I keep wondering why people simply expect a GUI on FreeBSD.


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 20, 2011)

Probably because us noobies don't know any better.  ;-)


FWIW, command line interface should not be hard for me to learn.  I've done a small bit of Linux on CL before (forgot about the $/# difference) and I used to love MS-DOS back in the day.  However, I would like a GUI because I can't see any reason to use a non-GUI these days.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 20, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> However, I would like a GUI because I can't see any reason to use a non-GUI these days.


The command line is far more flexible and useful than the gui can ever be and you'll find you will use the guy less as you learn more.


----------



## d_mon (Jul 20, 2011)

> I would like a GUI because I can't see any reason to use a non-GUI these days



good point!



			
				fonz said:
			
		

> You must be kidding, but I'll bite



...:e...


----------



## troberts (Jul 20, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> ....I used to love MS-DOS back in the day.  However, I would like a GUI because I can't see any reason to use a non-GUI these days.


While a GUI and mouse are needed for things like GIMP, Inkscape, etc., FreeBSD is an operating system and not all applications need, or even use, a GUI. Including a GUI would be more of a problem than a benefit because anyone that does not want the included GUI will have to spend time removing it and install the one they want, if they even want one to begin with.


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 20, 2011)

drhowarddrfine said:
			
		

> The command line is far more flexible and useful than the gui can ever be and you'll find you will use the guy less as you learn more.



Even with the GUI, you can use the Xterm for command-line stuff, no?


----------



## nakal (Jul 20, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> I would like a GUI because I can't see any reason to use a non-GUI these days.



How about when you don't have any video graphics adapter, like my servers? Why would you want to have a GUI there?

FreeBSD is a minimal system that you need to extend to fit your needs. It's for experts and a universal system... it's not restricted to desktop use.


----------



## d_mon (Jul 20, 2011)

> Why would you want to have a GUI?



u wrong 'homie'!



> Requirements for Success
> *To consider the desktop a success*, the user should be able to do the following after installation:
> 
> Have a graphical login screen.
> ...


----------



## fonz (Jul 20, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> To consider the desktop a success, the user should be able to do the following after installation:


Says who?

Fonz (by the way: half the things you list *don't* require a GUI...)


----------



## d_mon (Jul 20, 2011)

rhyous...


----------



## kpa (Jul 20, 2011)

And more than half of those have nothing to do with FreeBSD Operating System but are functions of application software that happens to be available for FreeBSD.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jul 20, 2011)

*To consider the desktop a success* != *To consider FreeBSD a desktop*.

It isn't. It has never been. It will never be. It isn't designed to be. It _can_ be, if _you_ do the work.

PC-BSD (KDE) is ready. GhostBSD (Gnome) is ready. There's also an XFCE version somewhere. Look at _those_ instead of considering FreeBSD something it is not, and will never be. Unless you do the legwork which the PC-BSD and GhostBSD people have already done. But be ready to face a considerable (command-line) learning curve which will catapult your knowledge of operating systems in general. Don't expect it to be easy in any way.


----------



## _martin (Jul 20, 2011)

Hi, 

hehe - nice nick - inspired by 1911? 

Hm, you did ask indeed a noob questions. Nothing wrong about that, but you should definitely browse handbook (UNIX basics) and/or even any other UNIX basics you can google.

The prompt can be set to anything, so you can't rely on what that means. But by default $ means user shell, # root one.

You can find a chapter how to install X ('core' of the GUI you are looking for) in here (handbook chapter 5). I do recommend you something easy, either GNOME or KDE. Easy in the sense it's similar to WindowsÂ®.

It's useless to comment whether to use GUI or not. It's on you. Desktop without GUI - whatever floats your boat I say.


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 20, 2011)

Can you guys list some of the reasons one would use the command-line interface instead of the GUI?

If I put a GUI top of it, this is simly software that will work with FreeBSD, not a GUI version of the FreeBSD OS, correct?

I would very much like to learn the command line interface, but no one answered my question about whether I would be able to do everything with Xterm that I could do with the non-GUI FreeBSD... so would I still have all the same functionality?

Thanks for all the responses, people.

BTW, handle was inspired by Razor1911... not that I was ever in the scene or anything.


----------



## pkubaj (Jul 21, 2011)

There's no GUI version of FreeBSD. The GUI you can have on FreeBSD is the same as is on Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris etc.

You can do with xterm everything you can do in console. Xterm is a console emulator, like many others.


----------



## jb_fvwm2 (Jul 21, 2011)

One can "text browse" (w3m, lynx etc), restart networking (say if a wifi connnection drops), update ports, use editors, math programs (/ised/), calculators, spreadsheets, simple calendars, todo lists, etc *then* start X and intrinsically atop of it a window manager, then start xterms/Eterms/aterms etc, and start browsers from within the xterms, etc, do all the stuff you could do *before* the "desktop" within the xterms, and additionally now do "graphic" (display jpg, png, gif, avi, etc) not to mention music files (either from a gui or from the console...) your usage would probably vary year to year. (If the shell you are using is setup to save history, across reboots, and one periodically saves its history file, you are potentially saved hundreds of hours eventually, from relearning sytnax simply by searching (grepping) within the saved files. ) if need be. (Not specifically trying to supply a complete answer, just a start of one...)


----------



## UNIXgod (Jul 21, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> Can you guys list some of the reasons one would use the command-line interface instead of the GUI?
> 
> If I put a GUI top of it, this is simly software that will work with FreeBSD, not a GUI version of the FreeBSD OS, correct?
> 
> ...



Not everyone needs a gui for their servers. Some of us run them on our workstations and ultimately ssh into a non gui server. Consider what you would do with a server. Run services and automate tasks...from the command line.

Yes you can do everything in xterm that you can inside the console. 

Here is a link from the docs for new people. It has tutorial on unix command interface.

http://www.freebsd.org/projects/newbies.html

Learn the command line and free yourself =)


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 21, 2011)

jb_fvwm2 said:
			
		

> One can "text browse" (w3m, lynx etc), restart networking (say if a wifi connnection drops), update ports, use editors, math programs (/ised/), calculators, spreadsheets, simple calendars, todo lists, etc *then* start X and intrinsically atop of it a window manager, then start xterms/Eterms/aterms etc, and start browsers from within the xterms, etc, do all the stuff you could do *before* the "desktop" within the xterms, and additionally now do "graphic" (display jpg, png, gif, avi, etc) not to mention music files (either from a gui or from the console...) your usage would probably vary year to year. (If the shell you are using is setup to save history, across reboots, and one periodically saves its history file, you are potentially saved hundreds of hours eventually, from relearning sytnax simply by searching (grepping) within the saved files. ) if need be. (Not specifically trying to supply a complete answer, just a start of one...)



So basically everything I do in Windows.


----------



## jb_fvwm2 (Jul 21, 2011)

True, but usually the configuration takes longer (a second internet connection or dual boot sometimes useful...) but if one is careful ( reading guides before install... backing up files... ) and practiced, the time lost can be automated to a large degree; also reboots are usually not necc. during port  (vs system) upgrades, the following command suffices 
	
	



```
rehash
```
. Trickier is upgrading, say yearly v8 > v9 > ...


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 21, 2011)

Can someone give me advice on which GUI I should install on my FreeBSD install?  Which was is regarded as the best?  Thanks.


----------



## rusty (Jul 21, 2011)

Now you're going to start a Vi vs Emacs war 

If I want a full desktop I'm partial to KDE4 however I also enjoy (and mainly use) x11-wm/wmii-devel.


----------



## d_mon (Jul 21, 2011)

I DO NOT WHY PEOPLE LIKE TILING!(yeah screaming) just don't get it!! perhaps u box is from obscurantism age?  

ps i hate tiling wm's


----------



## rusty (Jul 21, 2011)

Go on, give a TWM a go, perhaps something even more minimalistic would be better, x11-wm/dwm for example?


----------



## fonz (Jul 21, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> Can someone give me advice on which GUI I should install on my FreeBSD install?  Which was is regarded as the best?


There's no such thing as "the best", it just depends on what you want.

Some people prefer a simple tiling/stacking window manager that doesn't use too many resources, others don't mind something heavier if it means they can spruce up their desktops with gadgets and eye-candy. Some people prefer something that looks and feels good right away, others like tinkering endlessly with configuration options. Some people like it when tools and gadgets are integrated, others like to piece everything together themselves. Some people like a uniform appearance with every application and/or control panel having a similar look, others like diversity (and then some don't even care). Some people like it when their environment looks like something they already know (e.g. Windows), others find it important to "be different".

If you let us know what you want, we can recommend something that suits your needs.

Fonz


----------



## fonz (Jul 21, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> I DO NOT WHY PEOPLE LIKE TILING!(yeah screaming) just don't get it!!


No need to scream. Really.

Further, you might want to show a little bit more respect for people who have different tastes than you. Or even different requirements, for that matter. Tiling window managers are obviously not for you, but other people may have good reasons for using them.

Fonz


----------



## DutchDaemon (Jul 21, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> I DO NOT WHY PEOPLE LIKE TILING!(yeah screaming) just don't get it!! perhaps u box is from obscurantism age?
> 
> ps i hate tiling wm's



Enough with this juvenile behavior in every single topic you open on these forums. You're on notice. Read your PM.


----------



## sk8harddiefast (Jul 21, 2011)

FreeBSD noob


----------



## jb_fvwm2 (Jul 21, 2011)

One method I used when using fvwm2, is find .fvwmrc (files) on the web, download about six large ones, test each one, and adapt the seemingly best one as the new fvwm2 install.  Saved having to learn the syntax of the file, configure the tweaks, etc. One can do that also with twm, etc etc usually, obtaining cpu load graphics, mail message notification icons, taskbars etc. Maybe not possible with the larger kde, gnome etc...


----------



## rusty (Jul 21, 2011)

d_mon said:
			
		

> perhaps u box is from obscurantism age?



No not at all.
I use wmii because I _want_ to use wmii, not because some opinionated fool thinks it's because of "obscurantism".

This PC: AMD Phenom II 965 - 8GB RAM - GTS450 - 2x WD500GB RE4 | 3x Seagate 2TB


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 21, 2011)

Need a little more help.  I looked around the web, but I can't seem to do much.

1)How I change from the $ prompt to the # prompt?  I already tried "su - root" but it gives me an error.  I am currently logged in as the admin user I created during install

2)With $ prompt I can do a 'whoami', but not an ls or a cd or any of that.

3)How do I know what ports i have installed?  During install, I looked the at port available, but there all foreign language translations of the main documentation.  I assume ports are in /user/ports (a directory I can't get to).

Thanks for all the help.


----------



## fonz (Jul 21, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> How I change from the $ prompt to the # prompt?  I already tried "su - root" but it gives me an error.  I am currently logged in as the admin user I created during install


Add the admin user to the wheel group.



			
				sysop1911 said:
			
		

> How do I know what ports i have installed?
> [snip]
> I assume ports are in /user/ports


The _ports collection_ is in /usr/ports, you can _install_ them from there. Ports (and/or packages) that you _have_ installed show up in /var/db/pkg.

Fonz


----------



## wblock@ (Jul 21, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> Need a little more help.  I looked around the web, but I can't seem to do much.



Multiple questions in a single thread usually gives poor results.



> 3)How do I know what ports i have installed?



`% pkg_info | less`


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 21, 2011)

Ok, I logged in as root and added my other account to the 'wheel' group.  Now I can change to superuser when I'm logged in with the other account.

When I do a 'ls', I only see a bunch of files like, '.login', '.cshrc', '.profile', etc.  How come there are no directories like 'usr' and 'etc'?


----------



## UNIXgod (Jul 21, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> Ok, I logged in as root and added my other account to the 'wheel' group.  Now I can change to superuser when I'm logged in with the other account.
> 
> When I do a 'ls', I only see a bunch of files like, '.login', '.cshrc', '.profile', etc.  How come there are no directories like 'usr' and 'etc'?



ls() takes an argument which can be a path. Most commands work as so
_
command switch(s) argument(s)_

In effort to navigate with looking around with ls you would type

`# ls /`

this shows you the content of the root of the file system. 

pwd() is the present working directory and cd will take you to the directory which you provide the argument. cd provides some shortcuts as well. look at the man pages for more information


----------



## _martin (Jul 21, 2011)

You should really, really take some time and study those newbie links that were shared here. Either handbook or all in one place http://www.freebsd.org/projects/newbies.html (as posted by UNIXgod).

To list the root directory, do:

`# ls /`

You can consider that dir C:\ of MS-DOS.


----------



## UNIXgod (Jul 21, 2011)

In effort to avoid the "debate" on which wm or de to use my best advice to you is to try as many as possible. Ultimately you will settle with one that allows you to work the way you want. For example though you may feel that icons are an important interface item today you may outgrow that concept and find them unnecessary tomorrow. The philosophy of open source is simple. No one can make the decision for you on which tools you prefer. Your freedom to choose which tools out-ways anyone elses position on what's best for you. You and only you can evaluate the tools to see which best suites your style and needs.


----------



## sysop1911 (Jul 21, 2011)

I hear you.  Thanks for all the help you guys.  I look at the docs now.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 22, 2011)

sysop1911 said:
			
		

> Can you guys list some of the reasons one would use the command-line interface instead of the GUI?



Once desktop environments have overly bloated themselves out of this dimension, all you will be left with is the command line... So get used to it and start using it NOW!


----------



## fonz (Jul 22, 2011)

kpedersen said:
			
		

> Once desktop environments have overly bloated themselves out of this dimension


You are mistaken. Desktop environments simply (try to) adjust to the resources available to them. See this article on KDE.

Fonz


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 22, 2011)

Lol.

KDE certainly seems adjusted. (To computers 20 years from now)


----------



## ipyakuza (Aug 8, 2011)

I strongly recommend anyone who is interested in jumping into FreeBSD with little to no experience to buy a copy of Absolute FreeBSD (http://www.amazon.com/Absolute-FreeBSD-Complete-Guide-2nd/dp/1593271514) book or ebook available and give it a read from cover to cover.  I've been on Windows, OS X, and linux the last 10+ years and every time I tried to give FreeBSD a shot I stumbled due to its differences from linux and quickly gave up.  Once I read through the book it made so much sense about how the design and most importantly how to properly find an answer or ask for help.  I run it on my new laptop and all of the stumbling/trial-error/compiling and querying for answers has quickly made me a competent user. If your looking for point and click with a pretty interface then use OS X.  If you really want to have a sweet desktop on FreeBSD then you better roll up your sleeves and get ready to learn.


----------

