# Is Linux compat still the correct way to run Acrobat Reader under FreeBSD?



## user0 (Apr 13, 2016)

I am kind of used to Acrobat Reader 8/9 interface and find that they usually display better quality fonts than Okular etc, and would like to use it under BSD as well.
Do I need to run its Linux version?
Is there a guide for setting it up? If I remember correctly it comes in a rpm/deb package - how can I install that?


----------



## SirDice (Apr 14, 2016)

Adobe stopped supporting Linux. So there is no Linux version of the Reader anymore. Besides that, both Acrobat Reader 8 and 9 are not supported anymore (even on Windows) and contain some serious security flaws.


----------



## user0 (Apr 14, 2016)

There are still the old versions that can be obtained from Adobe FTP and I am perfectly happy using them even if Adobe thinks they should announce end of support.
I never had to even think of support for Acrobat Reader in all the years since using it for the first time some 15+ years ago, so their bugs and security flaws are essentially irrelevant.
There really are no viable alternative to the old AcroRead when it comes to the features and document display. The open source tools like Okular either cannot display 2 pages scaled to 100% side by side or the fonts are ugly and have nothing to do with the look of an original.
What are you proposing?


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 14, 2016)

user0 said:


> There are still the old versions that can be obtained from Adobe FTP and I am perfectly happy using them even if Adobe thinks they should announce end of support.
> I never had to even think of support for Acrobat Reader in all the years since using it for the first time some 15+ years ago, so their bugs and security flaws are essentially irrelevant.


So you only ever use it to display .pdf files you created yourself? In any other case, this is just grossly negligent. There are many high quality free .pdf viewers out there, use one of these.


----------



## user0 (Apr 14, 2016)

This is turning into an argument of Adobe Reader vs open source alternatives and I am not really interested as my mind is made up.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 14, 2016)

We cannot stress *enough* that you put your system and your data at *a very real risk* using this software. This is not about open-source or closed-source, it is about a software that has severe and well-known security flaws in the latest version available. If you still want to use it for whatever reason you think is reasonable .... yes, linux compat is the _only_ way to run it. In this special case, I refuse to call it a _correct_ way.


----------



## tobik@ (Apr 14, 2016)

user0 said:


> This is turning into an argument of Adobe Reader vs open source alternatives and I am not really interested as my mind is made up.


I am still going to suggest that you take a look at Okular's settings (Settings->Configure Okular). Under the Performance tab there are several knobs you can adjust, some are also for font rendering (in particular you might want to try turning on text hinting and see if that makes a difference for you).


user0 said:


> Okular either cannot display 2 pages scaled to 100% side by side


It can. Turn off View->Continuous Mode, turn on View->View Mode->Facing pages, set zoom as appropriate. Enabling View->Trim margins is also nice in this mode.


----------



## wblock@ (Apr 14, 2016)

There is the old standard graphics/xpdf, which has a poor user interface but works on about anything.  Then there is graphics/mupdf which is fast and looks nice, but has almost no user interface.  Either has less overhead and is safer to run than an old version of Reader.  Or a new one, for that matter.  Adobe has been adding things like Javascript that only make it less secure in later versions.

If you really have your heart set on Reader, maybe try it with Wine.  This is not any safer than the Linux emulator, programs have way too much access to the FreeBSD environment.  But at least it might be possible to use the most current, least insecure version.


----------



## user0 (Apr 14, 2016)

This is great and I am ready to believe that the open source readers have gone a long way, but I want Adobe reader.
And when I am saying "I" it actually means my users who do not have time or desire to learn how to work around unfamiliar software.
This is not a sandbox full of computer enthusiasts, but a distributed team of low paid volunteers who have to do tough crap on the tight deadlines and I do not have guts to tell any of them to stop and learn new stuff.
So I will install Adobe one way or another regardless. You can help me or walk away.


----------



## zspider (Apr 14, 2016)

Well then you'd better get it working on the Linux emulator, because you're never going to see a native port of Reader here. Don't like that go talk to Adobe. I'm sure they'll pay close attention.


----------



## aragats (Apr 14, 2016)

A agree with everything related to Adobe reader, it's bad and I don't use it, xpdf(1) is great! Sometimes I use Firefox with its embedded PDF rendering engine.
However, how to deal with fillable documents?


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 14, 2016)

user0 said:


> This is great and I am ready to believe that the open source readers have gone a long way, but I want Adobe reader.
> And when I am saying "I" it actually means my users who do not have time or desire to learn how to work around unfamiliar software.


So you're even operating a system used by others and you don't bother? That's very irresponsible. And I just assume you have some responsibility. Leaves me kind of speechless ... just give them a Windows VM to run Adobe Reader on, that would be the only valid option.


----------



## wblock@ (Apr 14, 2016)

user0 said:


> This is not a sandbox full of computer enthusiasts, but a distributed team of low paid volunteers who have to do tough crap on the tight deadlines and I do not have guts to tell any of them to stop and learn new stuff.


You might find yourself in the even more difficult position of having to explain to those volunteers how all their work was lost or stolen because you did not want to bother them with learning something different.

Really, I think you underestimate them.  Give any user a window showing a PDF document and they can operate the scroll bars and menus.  If not, a little instruction can go a long way.  And that's something that can be done at leisure, unlike data recovery and reinstallation.


----------



## user0 (Apr 15, 2016)

Thank you for contributing, Acrobat it is.


----------



## zspider (Apr 15, 2016)

user0 said:


> Thank you for contributing, Acrobat it is.



Can't say you weren't warned or that anyone misled you. XPDF would've been more than adequate.

I wish you luck getting it to work on the Linux emulator. But sooner or later the donkey is going to throw you off and you'll have no choice but to dump Reader. Linux emulation moves forward, while Linux Reader 8/9 is permanently frozen in time 3 years earlier and several versions behind.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 15, 2016)

Some people just don't take well-meant advice. It's obvious to most of us here, but I want to state it clearly: this is NOT about closed-source / proprietary software. Not at all. There's nothing wrong with that. What's wrong is software with well-known bugs and security issues and no further support from the vendor. user0, if you really think this is a good idea, you got your answer: There's no native version for FreeBSD, and you can either run a very outdated and dangerous Linux version or a not-so-outdated (and therefore *maybe less* dangerous) Windows version. These are your options.


----------



## marino (Apr 15, 2016)

user0 said:


> So I will install Adobe one way or another regardless. You can help me or walk away.



As an aside, the last sentence comes off pretty rude.  you're the one that entered a community to request advice, which you got.  You can take it or leave it, but to tell people that you asked for help to walk away ... surely you can see how that makes you look to others?


----------



## user0 (Apr 15, 2016)

No! I got a lecture on how Acrobat sucked and I should not use it. It got me nowhere.


----------



## aragats (Apr 15, 2016)

Well, just consider that you didn't get any help (although in my opinion any piece of information is valuable anyway).
Not all questions asked here get answers, thus (in your opinion) this is one of them.
But why people who frankly wish to help should "walk away"?..


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 15, 2016)

And then, nobody said Acrobat Reader "sucked", in fact, I liked it when it was still supported and used it a lot.

It's simple as that: nowadays it's a gaping security hole, because there is no support, no updates whatsoever for years and there will never be any again. Maybe you like your holes, that's ok for me, but it's very important to *know* the fact. If you *still* insist on using it, that's your problem, but I don't see how you didn't get your answer? The answer is *yes* you need linux compat (either that or wine or a VM) in order to run it. If there's still something unanswered, just kindly point it out instead of putting down people trying to warn you not to shoot yourself in your foot ...


----------



## CurlyTheStooge (Apr 15, 2016)

gpatrick said:


> Some of these remarks remind me of Theo and his attitude. FreeBSD has always had a helpful and pleasant community, please don't tarnish the reputation.



Exactly. I've been keeping an eye on this thread but honestly I wasn't surprised at all.

Regards.


----------



## zspider (Apr 15, 2016)

gpatrick said:


> Everyone should take a breath and wait 10 minutes before submitting what you wrote. I've been "testy" before with replies and have regretted it.
> 
> Some of these remarks remind me of Theo and his attitude. FreeBSD has always had a helpful and pleasant community, please don't tarnish the reputation.



I'm not seeing the issue here, all they did was state the truth and provide the best advice possible. It's very unwise to be using software that is not supported and not only has major security issues, but a history of them as well. The security situation in computer land has never been more dire than it is now.  We and the OP cannot afford to be politically correct about this and I'm sure as hell not  going to be.

If he wants to take the Dagger of Warding(so to speak), then that's his choice. But don't berate  those who act in your best interests.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 15, 2016)

This is turning into a meta discussion. I'm mostly with zspider here. But I don't think we need a lot of pathos on this. I kind of get gpatrick's point in the sense that a lot of people giving advice they weren't asked for can be annoying. For anyone speaking German: "Ratschläge sind auch Schläge" (loosely translated: advice is also spankings ... the word-play only works in German).

So, I just want to add, it's easily experienced as annoying or even rude, but that isn't the intent. As I read this thread, everyone is just trying to keep the OP from doing "something stupid" (and that's NOT the same as _being_ stupid -- Forrest Gump was wrong on that *g*).

So my conclusion would be: back to topic, please. The warnings were there, they were numerous and to the point. More we can't do. If the OP *still* wants to run Acrobat Reader on the FreeBSD box he's operating, let's help him IF there are still unanswered questions. Let's wait for that.


----------



## aragats (Apr 15, 2016)

Here is a page stating that Adobe Reader 11.x works in wine(1):
https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=27093
I haven't tried though, but will, since rarely I need to fill out official forms in PDF.


----------



## SirDice (Apr 15, 2016)

You can try to resurrect print/acrobatviewer but I really, really, don't recommend it.


----------



## tobik@ (Apr 15, 2016)

aragats said:


> I haven't tried though, but will, since rarely I need to fill out official forms in PDF.


Okular supports forms too. It also has a special review mode for annotating PDFs with notes, drawings, highlights etc. It has the best support for this of all open source PDF viewers AFAIK.


----------



## aragats (Apr 15, 2016)

Well, Okular is a KDE application. I'm using a very slim desktop environment with x11-wm/dwm.
I need emulators/wine to run a couple of commercial programs anyway.

My first try with wine:
1. I downloaded Adobe Reader 11.0.10 for Win7 from: https://get.adobe.com/reader/otherversions/
2. To be able running the installer I needed winetricks from: https://wiki.winehq.org/Winetricks
3. Winetricks in its turn needed archivers/cabextract
4. I ran `winetricks mspatcha`
5. I ran the Adobe Reader installer
It works! However wine(1) ver. 1.9.4 crashes when I open a fillable form PDF.


----------



## user0 (Apr 16, 2016)

Reader 11 is not wanted here. Not even 10. Adobe 9 was the latest that we are prepared to tolerate, everything Adobe have done since received very adverse reaction from our users who did not want anything to do with the UI changes which they thought were inconsiderate on Adobe's part.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 17, 2016)

From a security point of view (and I insist that's the POV a system operator should have -- while it's great to be helpful to your users, they won't thank you _in the event_ something bad happens ...), this is just getting _worse_ here. Just saying. But then, there shouldn't be a problem getting the old Linux version of the Reader to run with linux compat. Did you try?


----------



## user0 (Apr 18, 2016)

No, I did not try the old reader for Linux as I could not find one anywhere. It seems to have vanished from the ports.
It is still available from Adobe but when I tried to run INSTALL.sh it said that it would not work on this system, and I did not have time to play any further.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 18, 2016)

Ah sure it won't work without some fiddling. Well the reason why it "vanished" should be pretty clear now, but svn doesn't forget, so you can as SirDice already mentioned take the latest version of that port as a starting point. Maybe at least jailing it would be a good idea ...

*edit:* Didn't pay attention, I meant this port, of course. Will be some work as well to fix e.g. dependencies ....


----------



## marino (Apr 18, 2016)

Zirias said:


> Ah sure it won't work without some fiddling. Well the reason why it "vanished" should be pretty clear now, but svn doesn't forget, so you can as SirDice already mentioned take the latest version of that port as a starting point. Maybe at least jailing it would be a good idea ...



Given the pace of ports evolution, having an undeleted port work without modification would be quite lucky.
Somebody familiar with ports can quickly fix whatever went obsolete (unless it's a dependency) but somebody with zero experience would be lost, even if they manage to pull it from svn archive.   Ports stop building surprisingly quickly if they aren't maintained with rest of tree.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 18, 2016)

marino@ said:


> Somebody familiar with ports can quickly fix whatever went obsolete (unless it's a dependency) but somebody with zero experience would be lost


I really didn't expect it to be a big problem, but you're right! Now I was hooked and I HAVE it working, but I didn't expect this would involve hacking some kernel module code. What the hell is this? Adobe Reader 9 would crash when sched_setscheduler syscall returned an error and to work around this, back then, a kernel module was created just to hijack that syscall and ignore errors in case the calling process is acroread? Seriously? This was obvioulsy a piece of junk even when it was supported by Adobe 

Nevertheless, here it is, in all its glory (showing a file I created myself with latex, just to be sure):



The patches themselves aren't huge, though.


----------



## user0 (Apr 19, 2016)

I think it would be easier to convince the user to downgrade to FreeBSD 9. Remember: the users always get what they want.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 19, 2016)

user0 said:


> I think it would be easier to convince the user to downgrade to FreeBSD 9.


The downgrade wouldn't help here, ports are the same for all versions, and this port is -- as it should be -- long dead. But as you can see, it's still possible to build it. You can pull my modified source (these ports are all in the "obsolete" directory) and try yourself...


user0 said:


> Remember: the users always get what they want.


This is definitely *not* true in any organization where the CISO takes his job seriously. While IT tries to provide anything users need, which is the primary goal, the party ends where the user demands a horribly insecure solution.


----------



## user0 (Apr 20, 2016)

I thought that the older FreeBSD have the ports tree on the DVD media. There's installation option to install the ports IIRC. Does it not contain acroread9 anymore?


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 20, 2016)

Using the ports tree from an old DVD is the same as checking out an old revision of this whole tree. Sure you will have this port available. But you will have to stick with ages-old versions of all other ports, too. *This includes a heap full of unfixed security issues in all ports.* As soon as you update your tree with portsnap or svn, acroread9 will be gone for good.

*edit:* Really, no offense intended, but this idea is even a lot more dangerous than installing acroread9 alone. If you still feel you absolutely need to have acroread9, use my updated ports posted above.


----------



## user0 (Apr 22, 2016)

Thank you for the patches and pointer at the SVN old revision!
I must be doing something wrong with the patches. Downloaded the files, checked out SVN revisions:


```
root@leo00:/usr/ports/print/acrobatviewer# make
===>  Staging for acroread9-9.5.5_1
===>  acroread9-9.5.5_1 depends on package: acroreadwrapper>=0.0.20110529 - not found
===>  Patching for acroreadwrapper-0.0.20130208
===>  Applying FreeBSD patches for acroreadwrapper-0.0.20130208
Ignoring previously applied (or reversed) patch.
1 out of 1 hunks ignored--saving rejects to Makefile.rej
=> Patch patch-Makefile failed to apply cleanly.
*** Error code 1

Stop.
make[1]: stopped in /usr/ports/print/acroreadwrapper
*** Error code 1

Stop.
make: stopped in /usr/ports/print/acrobatviewer
```


```
root@leo00:/usr/ports/print/acroreadwrapper# make
===>  Patching for acroreadwrapper-0.0.20130208
===>  Applying FreeBSD patches for acroreadwrapper-0.0.20130208
Ignoring previously applied (or reversed) patch.
1 out of 1 hunks ignored--saving rejects to Makefile.rej
=> Patch patch-Makefile failed to apply cleanly.
*** Error code 1

Stop.
make: stopped in /usr/ports/print/acroreadwrapper
```


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 22, 2016)

What files did you download? What I linked to above were my changes to the very latest revisions of the required ports just before deletion. Tested ok on 11.0-CURRENT and should probably work on other versions as well, when my poudriere machine finishes a bulk, I can put them to a test just to see.

If you really really *still* want to install this mess, your easiest option would be:

Get my ports working tree: `git clone https://github.com/zirias/zfbsd-ports`
Go to the obsolete directory
`make install clean` in www/linux-libgtkembedmoz, print/acroreadwrapper and print/acroread9, in this order.

But I, once again, strongly suggest you have a look at the latest version of graphics/okular instead, it's  come a long way and does everything quite fine now. Opening up security holes just to accomodate habit really isn't worth it.


----------



## user0 (Apr 23, 2016)

That worked but acrobat still does not run:


```
[root@leo00 /]# acroread
acroread  acroread8  acroread9 
[root@leo00 /]# acroread
/usr/local/Adobe/Reader9/ENU/Adobe/Reader9/Reader/intellinux/bin/acroread: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0)
/usr/local/Adobe/Reader9/ENU/Adobe/Reader9/Reader/intellinux/bin/acroread: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0)
/usr/local/Adobe/Reader9/ENU/Adobe/Reader9/Reader/intellinux/bin/acroread: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2)
[root@leo00 /]# acroread8
?warning: localized acroread (ENU) not found.
!fatal: No acroread binary found.  Check $LANG or $ADOBE_LANG, and installed acroread packages.
[root@leo00 /]# acroread9
/usr/local/Adobe/Reader9/ENU/Adobe/Reader9/Reader/intellinux/bin/acroread: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0)
/usr/local/Adobe/Reader9/ENU/Adobe/Reader9/Reader/intellinux/bin/acroread: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0)
/usr/local/Adobe/Reader9/ENU/Adobe/Reader9/Reader/intellinux/bin/acroread: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2)
```

I must be doing something wrong.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 23, 2016)

That looks more like a version mismatch of linux-c6 ports. My linux_base-c6 is version 6.7_1. Oh and you're running acroread as root. Eeek.


----------



## zspider (Apr 23, 2016)

Zirias said:


> But I, once again, strongly suggest you have a look at the latest version of graphics/okular instead, it's  come a long way and does everything quite fine now. Opening up security holes just to accomodate habit really isn't worth it.



And a day will come when that Adobe software is not going to work with any modern system. It's going to be alot more painful to switch then, instead of just getting it over with now.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Apr 24, 2016)

Being headstrong about wanting an old version I can almost understand, but when also running as root I start to think this is trolling.


----------



## user0 (Apr 24, 2016)

What are you referring to as 'running'? It does not run.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 24, 2016)

Yes, obviously it doesn't, as your glibc version doesn't match some other linux libs. Try upgrading all your linux-c6 related ports/packages. The point is, you *try* running it as root, and given your linux libs issue is resolved, it *would* run as root. Still trying to keep you shooting your foot harder than necessary, I say *at least* run it as an unprivileged user.


----------



## user0 (Apr 28, 2016)

Not sure what else I can upgrade. It is what comes down from the ports today.
I did portsnap fetch extract, uninstalled everything mentioned in this thread, rebuilt and reinstalled and still getting the same errors.
This confuses me:


Zirias said:


> *your* glibc version doesn't match some other linux libs


I am not sure I understand significance of the bold part. Doesn't glibc come with linux-c6? If c6 installs a wrong version, or acroread9 expects a wrong version, what a user like me should do?


----------



## kpa (Apr 28, 2016)

user0 said:


> Not sure what else I can upgrade. It is what comes down from the ports today.
> I did portsnap fetch extract, uninstalled everything mentioned in this thread, rebuilt and reinstalled and still getting the same errors.
> This confuses me:
> 
> I am not sure I understand significance of the bold part. Doesn't glibc come with linux-c6? If c6 installs a wrong version, or acroread9 expects a wrong version, what a user like me should do?



Welcome to the wonderful world of Linux distros and their refusal of co-ordinating of what should be in their "base system" 

You would need an acroread binary that is built for CentOS 6.5 which I think is not available. The other solution would be to find suitable compatibility libraries for CentOS 6.5 for running older applications from earlier versions of CentOS or from other distros.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 28, 2016)

kpa, this is NOT the issue here. The messages looked like /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0). That this happens trying to run acroread is irrelevant, it says the installed libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 is not happy with the symbol/version info in glibc. Both come from the linux-c6 ports, so something is broken on the OP's system. acroread itself happily runs with the most recent linux-c6 ports, see my screenshot above.


----------



## user0 (Apr 28, 2016)

How a vanilla FreeBSD 10.1 with updated ports tree can be broken?


----------



## user0 (Apr 29, 2016)

At this point it sounds like weirdness of Fedora is a lesser pain than fighting the complete showstopper mysteries of FreeBSD 10.1 (the only recent version which does not constantly go into kernel panic from almost everything) or staring at the kernel dumping memory in FreeBSD 10.3 or PCBSD 10.3 several times a day.

I did not have anywhere near that many issues in FreeBSD 9, it is sounding like brain rot of Linux has infected FreeBSD project as well by this time. It was nice while it lasted, and slowly but surely the entire free/open source software world is sliding into a cess pit as releasing without testing becomes a norm.

I get paid peanuts for working for a worldwide charity organization that teaches the poorest people how to open their own small business to change their lives and the lives of their communities instead of immigrating into the Western hemisphere and overburdening already overstretched welfare systems, and we depend on free software. With its overall quality getting out of hand and its hardware requirements skyrocketing, we may have to close shop. At least from my pinhole view of its IT infrastructure I see how the front line people get frustrated not being able to do their work. I never thought that a day will come when I will have to tell them there is no more help I can offer. Most of them are seriously pissed by the direction the enlightened ivory tower dweller software developers are taking the OSs, window managers and software packages they are used to and trained for. None of them cares for the security issues you are so worried about, as they know full well that their work is primarily performed on the government produced PDFs, offline with no internet connection for weeks or months, but of course that is insignificant for the the geeks.

One very wise man used to say: you may be 100% correct, but at the same time totally wrong.


----------



## zirias@ (Apr 29, 2016)

Yep, they can't be bothered using okular and this will destroy humanity. I totally get this.


----------



## aragats (Apr 29, 2016)

user0, why don't you switch to Linux? It fits your needs more. I have Debian Jessie at work, it works fine, acroread can be installed with one-line command, it's still in their repositories. (OT: systemd was removed right after the system installation).


----------



## SirDice (Apr 29, 2016)

user0 said:


> None of them cares for the security issues you are so worried about, as they know full well that their work is primarily performed on the government produced PDFs, offline with no internet connection for weeks or months, but of course that is insignificant for the the geeks.


Until they get infected with the latest ransomware and their entire administration is held for ransom. Just because it doesn't have an internet connection doesn't mean it cannot be infected. People stick USB sticks into everything. Including their home PC that IS connected to the internet. Heck, they'll even insert that USB stick they found in the parking-lot, just to satisfy their curiosity. And don't even think that running FreeBSD, Linux or OS-X is going to magically protect you. It won't.


----------



## marino (Apr 29, 2016)

user0 said:


> I get paid peanuts for working for a worldwide charity organization that teaches the poorest people how to open their own small business to change their lives and the lives of their communities instead of immigrating into the Western hemisphere and overburdening already overstretched welfare systems, and we depend on free software. With its overall quality getting out of hand and its hardware requirements skyrocketing, we may have to close shop. At least from my pinhole view of its IT infrastructure I see how the front line people get frustrated not being able to do their work. I never thought that a day will come when I will have to tell them there is no more help I can offer.



Sounds like beggars acting like choosers.



> Most of them are seriously pissed by the direction the enlightened ivory tower dweller software developers are taking the OSs, window managers and software packages they are used to and trained for. None of them cares for the security issues you are so worried about, as they know full well that their work is primarily performed on the government produced PDFs, offline with no internet connection for weeks or months, but of course that is insignificant for the the geeks.



You've been given several valid pieces of advice that includes A) the users are flat-out wrong/uninformed not to care and B) regardless you are supposed to make sure they don't have to because even though you are paid in peanuts, you're still getting paid, so you might as well do the job correctly.



> One very wise man used to say: you may be 100% correct, but at the same time totally wrong.


A) who exactly said this?  B) does not apply here, unless you think it's probable that everyone else but you is wrong.


I'm actually surprised people kept helping rather than just let you shoot yourself in both feet.


----------



## zspider (Apr 30, 2016)

user0 said:


> At this point it sounds like weirdness of Fedora is a lesser pain than fighting the complete showstopper mysteries of FreeBSD 10.1 (the only recent version which does not constantly go into kernel panic from almost everything) or staring at the kernel dumping memory in FreeBSD 10.3 or PCBSD 10.3 several times a day.
> 
> I did not have anywhere near that many issues in FreeBSD 9, it is sounding like brain rot of Linux has infected FreeBSD project as well by this time. It was nice while it lasted, and slowly but surely the entire free/open source software world is sliding into a cess pit as releasing without testing becomes a norm.
> 
> ...



I've been using FreeBSD for 6 years officially now. Kernel panics only happen to me twice a year at most. The rest of the time it runs like a swiss watch.

I'm not sure if the brainrot and it's promoters have shown up here yet, but I'm not certain they won't. I hope they stay in their own hell.

Adobe is the one to blame for the problems and lack of support for Acrobat Reader though. Only they can fix it and they won't.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Apr 30, 2016)

I understand and accept anger and frustration, but that's not what's happening here. I suggested earlier, but now it is clear - the OP came here to troll.


----------

