# Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD...



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

Hi,

I still have a dilemma about whether I should move from Linux to FreeBSD. I was always tempted by jails, ZFS and stability which I thought were FreeBSD's virtues. But then I read this about jails:
(_mod: url removed_)
And yet another rant on FreeBSD release 10  from the same guy here:
(_mod: url removed_)

And I would appreciate if someone from FreeBSD community could dispute with his arguments here for me.

I would be actually happy on Linux (zfs-on-linux, openvz seems great, hardware support etc.), but recent events (systemd viral destruction of everything unix-like) made me seriously think about migration to more transparent and more unix-like system.

Btw. I tried FreeBSD 10 in VirtualBox and didn't finish configuration due to very odd behaviour in FreeBSD's vim (`pkg install vim`), it is somewhat terrible to use, so I stopped for this moment with experimenting. I was determined to follow this guy: https://cooltrainer.org/a-freebsd-desktop-howto/

Many thanks for factual answers


----------



## SirDice (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> Hi,
> I have still dilemma if I should move from Linux to FreeBSD. I was always tempted by jails, ZFS and stability which I thought were FreeBSD's virtues. But then I read this about jails:
> (_mod: url removed_)
> And yet another rant on FreeBSD release 10  from the same guy here:
> ...


Site is a known troll. We will not discus it, nor will we allow links back to his page. It's all bullshit (pardon the expression but the subject has been beaten to death numerous times already).


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				SirDice said:
			
		

> the subject has been beaten to death numerous times already.



Where? I read all comments (there are not too many of them) on reddit:
_(mod: url removed)_

and no arguments...just that guy must be bsd-hater - so does he lie in those articles or are those true?


----------



## nakal (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Well, it seems he is mostly trolling from what I see. I can imagine that bhyve is not working well, because it is experimental, but the other arguments are lies or he has got a very weird kind of hardware. Everyone can construct such a story for a piece of hardware which is not working well (actually yesterday, I could not start the latest Ubuntu installation CD on an Asus laptop and FreeBSD/PC-BSD worked without a problem).

What I want to know about is your problem with vim that I cannot understand. Please be a more exact here what is happening.


----------



## SirDice (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> Where?


Here. And most of those threads have eventually been trashed. 

This is exactly what the author wants, attention. And by bringing the subject up once again we've fallen into the same trap. Please just ignore the guy. It may take a while but eventually this stuff will be buried deep in the history of the internet.


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				nakal said:
			
		

> the other arguments are lies or he has got a very weird kind of hardware



I can say that I cannot find piece of evidence for his jail backdoor, which brought down apache.org - and find out this:
(mod: url removed)

So I post question on his article and it is in attachment.

But for a speed: I can compare with Linux Mint (with full blown mate desktop) and just installed FreeBSD 10  in the same VirtualBox on the same machine (i7) and Linux Mint boots to lightdm quicker then freebsd to login prompt.


----------



## wblock@ (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Some untruths are so blatantly obvious they do not need to be refuted.  Repetition does not make them any more true.


----------



## wblock@ (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

The vim posts have been split into a different topic.


----------



## scottro (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Linux probably does usually boot faster than FreeBSD, but how does everything else work? Linux is now going to systemd, which will make faster boots. However, it seems that some things are getting sacrificed in the name of a faster boot.    See, for example, http://boycottsystemd.org

Many Linux distributions are aimed at the desktop user, where speed of booting is more important. FreeBSD's slogan, The power to serve, indicates that it is aimed at being a server O/S. On production machines, you're far more concerned with it booting properly than the speed of booting. (Which is one complaint that many are making about systemd, now that it's found its way into the latest RedHat and CentOS releases, which are more likely to be used by system administrators.)

Speed of booting is not, in this case, an indication of speed of operating system. In the end, I often think that people pull up lots of technical arguments to justify what often seems to be an emotional decision. (Not an original statement on my part--I think the first time I saw similar phrasing was in an old mailing list article about Mutt vs. Pine.)  

Seriously, try it, see if you like it.  It might not be for you, and there's nothing wrong with that either. Obviously, most of us like it or we wouldn't be here, but speed of booting, in my less than humble opinion, is a feature that doesn't necessarily mean quality.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Many years ago, when I first stumbled across that blog, I tried to find out who that anonymous person was. Most people who know what they're talking about don't post a lot of articles without revealing who they are. After a lot of searching and following posts on the mailing lists and some forums, I convinced myself this guy is someone who wanted to be a FreeBSD contributor. He may have actually contributed some code at one time and he wanted to do more. However, what he wanted to contribute was often outrageous to the point where he was ignored. He would rant on the mailing lists about how everyone else was crazy if they didn't do things his way. His ideas were so far out of line that no one would even consider any of his thoughts. This infuriated him.

It was shortly after some incident online (removed his account from the mailing lists?) that this blog appeared. 

So my impression became, while he may be technically competent, he directs all that knowledge against the system he feel has wronged him. His rants spew things out that look real but are either false, supposed to work that way, or "who cares?".

So put no effort into reading that thing.


----------



## freethread (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



> Anyone who complains about the fact that a machine takes too long to boot and shut down (one or two minutes?), most probably has nothing to do in the remaining time.


Anon


----------



## Durden (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

The http://boycottsystemd.org/ website is also a major troll. I'm not a systemd fan but every point that site makes is false and the guy goes full retard at the end in his last claim. If we're going to avoid a systemd future we'll need to do so honestly, http://boycottsystemd.org/ is not that type of site.


----------



## bsdkeith (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

The only reason Linux boots quicker than FreeBSD is that they load some parts of the system in parallel, whereas FreeBSD loads sequentially as did Linux originally.

Edit: Does it really hold you back? It is probably less than 1 minute difference.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

I see the same thing about browsers on some forums. People will complain because one browser comes up 10 seconds faster than another so it must be a better browser. That they say it takes 10 seconds (and more) to come up is pretty astounding in itself.


----------



## ManaHime (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

I personally boot my system only every time I either need to reboot for update or switch to some other OS for gaming purpose. My computer could take 5 to 10 minutes to boot for all I care, once it's done you don't have to do it for a while! In my opinion what's really important is how the system behave after.


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				scottro said:
			
		

> Linux probably does usually boot faster than FreeBSD, but how does everything else work? Linux is now going to systemd, which will make faster boots. However, it seems that some things are getting sacrificed in the name of a faster boot.    See, for example, http://boycottsystemd.org
> 
> Many Linux distributions are aimed at the desktop user, where speed of booting is more important. FreeBSD's slogan, The power to serve, indicates that it is aimed at being a server O/S. On production machines, you're far more concerned with it booting properly than the speed of booting. (Which is one complaint that many are making about systemd, now that it's found its way into the latest RedHat and CentOS releases, which are more likely to be used by system administrators.)
> 
> ...



The boot speed thing: I know, it just was first thing what I noticed. I know about boycottsystemd.org and hope that it will have some results. I hate systemd. If it was just init system then very good, make it stable, make it do one thing and one thing only and properly. But it is with every update more bloated cancer-like thing - I am so affraid that it will became so tight up with linux kernel, that all distros would just be redhat clones in different colors, wallpaper and package system...I don't want to sound just like hater/troll but systemd is wrong in every way possible and redhat want or already seized linux future - systemd is forced on linux users...


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				freethread said:
			
		

> > Anyone who complains about the fact that a machine takes too long to boot and shut down (one or two minutes?), most probably has nothing to do in the remaining time.
> 
> 
> Anon



Don't take my comment on speed too seriously - I use debian stable with zfs-on-linux, ecryptfs and when I came home I just push the power button and in the meantime change my cloths - my pc boots cca 30s-60s - I never bothered to count...


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				Durden said:
			
		

> The http://boycottsystemd.org/ website is also a major troll. I'm not a systemd fan but every point that site makes is false and the guy goes full retard at the end in his last claim. If we're going to avoid a systemd future we'll need to do so honestly, http://boycottsystemd.org/ is not that type of site.



That may be, but I installed centos 7 on some machine and read redhat's doc - systemd is all over system, other projects (totally unrelated to it) start to have dependencies on it. Systemd took over udev, it blows up to ship itself with ntp, dhcp and whatever - it is not just init system. But ok, every linux user wants uniform base system for better penetration, support etc. - but its devs are so arrogant, their bugs either throw on other's shoulders or say that it is a feature...and mostly as the whole it kills unix philosophy.

For example the most important thing on any server/pc whatever - logging. Binary log is just so stupid idea and that arrogance/ignorance:
https://www.libreoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64116

But this argue doesn't belong on freebsd forum, so everyone can keep her/his opinion...


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				drhowarddrfine said:
			
		

> Many years ago, when I first stumbled across that blog, I tried to find out who that anonymous person was. Most people who know what they're talking about don't post a lot of articles without revealing who they are. After a lot of searching and following posts on the mailing lists and some forums, I convinced myself this guy is someone who wanted to be a FreeBSD contributor. He may have actually contributed some code at one time and he wanted to do more. However, what he wanted to contribute was often outrageous to the point where he was ignored. He would rant on the mailing lists about how everyone else was crazy if they didn't do things his way. His ideas were so far out of line that no one would even consider any of his thoughts. This infuriated him.
> 
> It was shortly after some incident online (removed his account from the mailing lists?) that this blog appeared.
> 
> ...



Man I am really pissed - that post what I did on his page (attachment) - HE DELETED IT! He must be really weirdo...


----------



## osp (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				bsdkeith said:
			
		

> The only reason Linux boots quicker than FreeBSD is that they load some parts of the system in parallel, whereas FreeBSD loads sequentially as did Linux originally.
> 
> Edit: Does it really hold you back? It is probably less than 1 minute difference.



No, not at all, I just noticed it - on just installed freebsd, should not be too much of services to start up to begin with, so it just was obvious "flaw"


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Sep 12, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> that post what I did on his page (attachment) - HE DELETED IT! He must be really weirdo...



That's another thing. iirc, most of the comments are known to be made by him under different names. At least that's what someone else figured out. Those are as outrageous as his blog and, as you found out, yours will never show unless you state something equally contemptuous.


----------



## SirDice (Sep 13, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> Man I am really pissed - that post what I did on his page (attachment) - HE DELETED IT!


This is exactly what he's after. Getting you aggravated and not being able to do anything about it.


----------



## nakal (Sep 15, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

You should always count boot time under the following conditions:

Machine is fully booted.
User has logged in.
All basic applications are started (for me: Firefox, Claws-Mail, Chat-Client)
The harddisk is totally quiet and idle.

Check this and you will see how quick FreeBSD is. The second thing is.. you boot only one time a day. And I tell you a third thing: FreeBSD has never shown any problems with booting and I have tried out systemd on many different configurations, all of them showing race conditions during boot phase (How do you see it when you need to boot twice because the keyboard is not initialized when slim is started and you cannot type your username/password? Or NFS shares are not mounted, or you cannot shut down the PC?). Come on... I want a PC that is stable and not a lottery device.


----------



## osp (Sep 15, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				nakal said:
			
		

> You should always count boot time under the following conditions:
> 
> Machine is fully booted.
> User has logged in.
> ...



I know, systemd is my primary and probably only reason why I want to switch to FreeBSD. If it was just init system and they (lennart and redhat people) make it stable, cut the arrogance, doesn't make it dependency to other unrelated stuff and throw away journald (systemd binary logging crap), I would not have problem with it that much actually. But that is not the case - on linux, there soon won't be a place to hide from it, unfortunately


----------



## rusty (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Recently seen it claimed (from systemd apologists) that BSD users should be 'for' a systemd system as it mirrors BSD design. They believe that Lennarts ideal of creating a base system under the governance of systemd is no different than what we have when using a base system with FreeBSD.
/bonkers


----------



## osp (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				rusty said:
			
		

> Recently seen it claimed (from systemd apologists) that BSD users should be 'for' a systemd system as it mirrors BSD design. They believe that Lennarts ideal of creating a base system under the governance of systemd is no different than what we have when using a base system with FreeBSD.
> /bonkers



Yes, I read it in comment on Reddit, I think. I disagree with such a statement. Systemd is antiunix binary blob, and *BSD is just analogy to any linux distro - complete OS. Apples and oranges. Web is full with rants (from both sides) like this one https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 and articles like this one http://www.infoworld.com/d/data-center/systemd-harbinger-of-the-linux-apocalypse-248436?source=fssr - I am using on one computer Centos 7 (RHEL 7) with Gnome and systemd and it is buggy as hell (mostly GNOME though) - I hope RedHat loses customers, fire Lennart and find some sanity...meanwhile  thanks to them *BSD's ranks could grow with broken-hearted Linux users.

P.S. I like the Unix philosophy: one program do one thing and it does it perfectly, but it doesn't mean that OS has to be clone of 30 years old system. I miss Linux's /proc on FreeBSD for example. I guess no OS can satisfy everyone.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> I miss Linux's /proc on FreeBSD for example. I guess no OS can satisfy everyone.




```
procfs			/proc				procfs	rw			0	0
linproc			/usr/compat/linux/proc	linprocfs	rw,noatime	0	0
```


----------



## osp (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> osp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My /proc is empty (procfs is not mounted, so it has the same functionality as on Linux?), and linprocfs is something to fool emulated Linux binaries - am I right? On Linux /proc is the place where one can find everything about the running system and modify it in one place:

```
% ls -1 /proc
acpi
asound
buddyinfo
bus
cgroups
cmdline
consoles
cpuinfo
crypto
devices
diskstats
dma
driver
execdomains
fb
filesystems
fs
interrupts
iomem
ioports
irq
kallsyms
kcore
keys
key-users
kmsg
kpagecount
kpageflags
loadavg
locks
mdstat
meminfo
misc
modules
mounts
mtrr
net
pagetypeinfo
partitions
scsi
self
sched_debug
slabinfo
softirqs
spl
stat
swaps
sys
sysrq-trigger
sysvipc
timer_list
timer_stats
tty
uptime
version
vmallocinfo
vmstat
zoneinfo
... (and directories for all running processes)
```


----------



## DutchDaemon (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

You're looking at an empty mountpoint. Put the procfs line in /etc/fstab and `mount-a`. Then you'll see stuff like this:


```
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 .
drwxr-xr-x  21 root        wheel       512 Sep 16 11:09 ..
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 0
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 1
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 10
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1096
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 11
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1105
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1114
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1127
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1128
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1131
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1135
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1136
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 1139
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 1141
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1157
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1163
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1166
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1167
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1169
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1172
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1174
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1178
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1180
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1182
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1184
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1187
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1190
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1191
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1192
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1193
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1194
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1195
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 1197
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1198
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1199
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 12
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1205
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1219
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1226
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1228
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1229
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1234
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1236
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1237
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1239
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1248
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1249
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1250
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1251
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1252
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1253
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 1256
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 13
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 14
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 15
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 153
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 16
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 17
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 18
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 19
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 2
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 275
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 3
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3205
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3271
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3281
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3282
dr-xr-xr-x   1 _dhcp       _dhcp         0 Sep 16 12:36 331
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3640
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 3648
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3656
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3657
dr-xr-xr-x   1 someuser    someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 3669
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 4
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 405
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 424
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 438
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 5
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 6
dr-xr-xr-x   1 unbound     unbound       0 Sep 16 12:36 693
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 7
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 751
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 779
dr-xr-xr-x   1 _ntp        _ntp          0 Sep 16 12:36 792
dr-xr-xr-x   1 _ntp        _ntp          0 Sep 16 12:36 793
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 795
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 8
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 802
dr-xr-xr-x   1 messagebus  messagebus    0 Sep 16 12:36 821
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 827
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 858
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 863
dr-xr-xr-x   1 smmsp       smmsp         0 Sep 16 12:36 866
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 870
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 898
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 9
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        someuser      0 Sep 16 12:36 938
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 939
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 940
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 941
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 942
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 943
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 944
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 945
dr-xr-xr-x   1 nobody      nobody        0 Sep 16 12:36 962
dr-xr-xr-x   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 980
lr--r--r--   1 root        wheel         0 Sep 16 12:36 curproc -> 3669
```

It may not be exactly the same (procfs(5)), but luckily FreeBSD doesn't do an 'echo file system'. It puts configurations in places like /etc and uses dedicated tools to query the running system and processes.


----------



## kpa (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

The FreeBSD's own procfs(5) is very rarely used/needed because the standard BSD utilities like procstat(1), vmstat(8) combined with sysctl(8)s and other sources happen to do good enough job in providing the necessary information and configuring the system if needed. The concept of the /proc filesystem is seen as an excess and bloat very much in here.


----------



## osp (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				kpa said:
			
		

> The FreeBSD's own procfs(5) is very rarely used/needed because the standard BSD utilities like procstat(1), vmstat(8) combined with sysctl(8)s and other sources happen to do good enough job in providing the necessary information. It's seen as an excess and bloat to have to use a filesystem for just gathering information about the system.



Well, I sometimes used path to stdin/stdout of process (/proc/<pid>/fd/...) and use that as the file name - I think it is very powerful and versatile. However, Linux proc is not just a file system for processes, there are also exposed kernel variables and such which you can modify on the fly in very elegant way (/proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max, /proc/sysrq-trigger etc.) - I read that idea was inspired/taken from Plan9 OS.

_[ Would you be so kind to format your posts from now on? You're causing the staff extra work, thanks. -- DD ]_


----------



## DutchDaemon (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

@kpa addressed that. There are dedicated tools for that on FreeBSD, which have evolved over decades. Use them.


----------



## osp (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> It may not be exactly the same (procfs(5)), but luckily FreeBSD doesn't do an 'echo file system'. It puts configurations in places like /etc and uses dedicated tools to query the running system and processes.



Well, changes in _L_inux proc are not permanent, for these are /etc also (mostly), it is just for quer_y_ing and modifying on the fly. But I have to say that many things on Linux are (best term would be czech "kočkopes") "mix of all flavours" - nothing is coherent, from configuration files and their placement to user-space tools.


----------



## SirDice (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				kpa said:
			
		

> The concept of the /proc filesystem is seen as an excess and bloat very much in here.


It's also considered a security risk.


----------



## nakal (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Please ask specific questions about the functionality you miss on FreeBSD and _not_ about facilities/tools that don't exist for your unspecified problems. I sometimes get a headache when people try to solve a simple problem and cannot find a solution, because instead of telling what they want to achieve, they discuss all the problems they have with some exotic tools (and no one really knows if these tools are even needed).


----------



## phoenix (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> DutchDaemon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The FreeBSD equivalent to Linux' /proc and /sys is sysctl(8).  It's so much nicer and easier to use than trying to muck around in sub-directories cat'ing out files.

On FreeBSD /etc/sysctl.conf is actually useful.


----------



## Juanitou (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				nakal said:
			
		

> Please ask specific questions about the functionality you miss on FreeBSD and _not_ about facilities/tools that don't exist for your unspecified problems. I sometimes get a headache when people try to solve a simple problem and cannot find a solution, because instead of telling what they want to achieve, they discuss all the problems they have with some exotic tools (and no one really knows if these tools are even needed).


I learnt recently that some people call this The XY Problem. At first I thought it was a genetic illness…


----------



## Oko (Sep 16, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				osp said:
			
		

> P.S. I like the Unix philosophy: one program do one thing and it does it perfectly, but it doesn't mean that OS has to be clone of 30 years old system. I miss Linux's /proc on FreeBSD for example. I guess no OS can satisfy everyone.


/proc is coming from Plain 9 OS which created at ATT by the same people who created UNIX. I would be hard press to come up with the single technology that was introduced/invented in Linux first.. systemd? Not so fast. Check SMIT on AIX. Anyhow there is a really good read for people who do/don't like UNIX. UNIX haters handbood  http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...MAXpufA2oiPU8z6a8x-fXpw&bvm=bv.75097201,d.aWw


----------



## osp (Sep 18, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				phoenix said:
			
		

> The FreeBSD equivalent to Linux' /proc and /sys is sysctl(8).  It's so much nicer and easier to use than trying to muck around in sub-directories cat'ing out files.
> 
> On FreeBSD /etc/sysctl.conf is actually useful.



Sysctl linux kernel use too  But I admit, that I have to just accustom to how things are done on different OS - right now I was able to lock out myself from it completely 
https://forums.freebsd.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=48081


----------



## gpatrick (Sep 19, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*

Solaris has had SMF (Service Management Facility) since 2005 and AIX has always had SRC (System Resource Controller).  I don't find Linux using systemd any different than what Solaris and AIX have.


----------



## nakal (Sep 19, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				Juanitou said:
			
		

> I learnt recently that some people call this The XY Problem.



This is exactly what I meant. Thank you for the hint. I knew that this thing had to have a name.


----------



## crashcoredump2 (Sep 29, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



> I was determined to follow this guy:



Except this guy is a gal. Her write up is very thorough and works very well.


----------



## osp (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this true? I read this off putting text about FreeBSD*



			
				crashcoredump2 said:
			
		

> > I was determined to follow this guy:
> 
> 
> 
> Except this guy is a gal. Her write up is very thorough and works very well.



 Now I look like a misogynist


----------



## Monti (Nov 15, 2015)

nakal said:


> ... Come on... I want a PC that is stable and not a lottery device.


Exactly!


----------

