# New to the BSD world



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

Hello everyone, I built myself a PFSense Router and it works so well that I decided to try freebsd as a desktop, anyways ive read through the handbook which is simple enough but I just want you guys to give my check list a once over to make sure im not heading for disaster.

Is Freebsd 8.0RC a good idea or is it ugly?

Once I figure that out heres the plan:

Install *BSD (I got this down good, except that I keep hearing about ZFS? and that its good?!? dont know, I went with UFS2)

Once Im loaded I guess I install KDE4? (Make install clean) or is their something I missed (Thats all the handbook page says about it), I tried XFCE but it didnt go so hot, he died....

Would it be safe to assume that building KDE4 will include kdm? and then ill I have to do is follow the handbook for writing the x files...(no pun)

and Finally, (sorry for this mess of a post) is it safe to assume that my audigy 4 and Nvidia 9600 will have working drivers? Nvidias website didnt have nothing of use, and I didnt check ports for anything just yet.

Thanks in advance


----------



## mfaridi (Oct 19, 2009)

if you install FreeBSD 32bit you can install nividia driver and use it .and use much effect


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

mfaridi said:
			
		

> if you install FreeBSD 32bit you can install nividia driver and use it .and use much effect



I have to use 64bit since i got 4gb of ram


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

Couldnt find an edit button for my post so I just doubleposted (sorry in advance) It seems that nvidia is cooking up a driver for bsd64 (as of Sept09) possibly for the upcoming Freebsd 8.0....errr sadly that means only 3gb of ram for me....


----------



## SirDice (Oct 19, 2009)

You only _need_ the binary nvidia drivers if you want accelerated 3D and/or use multiple monitors.


----------



## Const (Oct 19, 2009)

Try PC-BSD. It's FreeBSD tuned for desktop use


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

Const said:
			
		

> Try PC-BSD. It's FreeBSD tuned for desktop use



PCBSD doesnt use ports natively, im not afraid of text and typing, and PCBSD wont have the drivers  I need either, my main machine is going to have to be down until nvidia finishes the amd64 drivers I checked and apparently they are VERY close (I.E all features required implemented)

PCBSD is what I would put on a notebook or something... If I wanted PBI's (Pointy/clicky) and not ports I would just run Linux.


----------



## ale (Oct 19, 2009)

nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> Couldnt find an edit button for my post so I just doubleposted (sorry in advance)


No problem


			
				nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> It seems that nvidia is cooking up a driver for bsd64 (as of Sept09) possibly for the upcoming Freebsd 8.0....errr sadly that means only 3gb of ram for me....


You can go i386 fow now, just to start learning the os. Probably you will not need all that amount of ram on the beginning, even on a desktop system.
When nvidia will release the amd64 driver you can backup your data and configurations and reinstall.


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

ale said:
			
		

> No problem
> 
> You can go i386 fow now, just to start learning the os. Probably you will not need all that amount of ram on the beginning, even on a desktop system.
> When nvidia will release the amd64 driver you can backup your data and configurations and reinstall.



The more I have been looking around freebsd, the worse it seems to get (No offense) its like looking at a car that looked nice from a distance.

My current issues:
*Wine....or lack there of...it may work on 32bit bsd, but amd64 isnt happening

*Installing BSD without a cd, Opensuse lets me load the ISO onto a thumbdrive via unetbootin, but freebsd makes me burn cds faster than I kill burritos.

I really dont want to keep wasting CD's, its the 21st century, also I would go 32bit, but then I would be wasting 1gb of ram


----------



## bigearsbilly (Oct 19, 2009)

WINE?
I think you'll find running MS apps is not a priority for most BSD users. Why not use windows?
I use:
emulators/VirtualBox for XP and linux.

To be honest,
If you are after a snazzy 3d desktop whilst using MSN and 
browsing youtube you've probably got the wrong OS.
You'll have trouble getting decent *flash* too.

BSD is more about what's underneath than it is a pretty desktop.

It's not a BSD problem it's reliance on 3rd party stuff
like *flash*. not much we can do about it.


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

bigearsbilly said:
			
		

> WINE?
> I think you'll find running MS apps is not a priority for most BSD users. Why not use windows?
> I use:
> emulators/VirtualBox for XP and linux.
> ...




I like games, Wine under linux runs my games fine, it looks like ill be moving back to linux for my gaming needs


----------



## bigearsbilly (Oct 19, 2009)

yes well,
i wouldn't hold your breath for the nvidia driver!
plus FreeBSD 8 is  still a release candidate not production.

unfortunately, as you say, BSD is not enough in the real world, even
though it's about the best designed OS there is.


----------



## ale (Oct 19, 2009)

nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> *Installing BSD without a cd, Opensuse lets me load the ISO onto a thumbdrive via unetbootin, but freebsd makes me burn cds faster than I kill burritos.
> 
> I really dont want to keep wasting CD's, its the 21st century


This statement looks really stupid to me.

Did you read the 8.0-BETA1 annoucement?
Do you know that you can install with just disc1?
Do you know that there is a few megs iso (~43 megs) for install from the net?
Do you know that you just need a cd/dvd to install (if not with memstick) and then you'll never need to download a new iso for years?
And maybe the most shocking for you...do you know that there's a new technology called CD/DVD-RW?

If one of the most important thing to judge an os for you is it need to burn a cd to install, well...


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 19, 2009)

ale said:
			
		

> This statement looks really stupid to me.
> 
> Did you read the 8.0-BETA1 annoucement?
> Do you know that you can install with just disc1?
> ...



and when I go to blog my experience about bsd amongst my fellow linux bretheren, I shall have this engraved on a plaque above my pc whilst im loading suse via a thumbdrive.....


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 20, 2009)

> 8.0-BETA1 annoucement
> 
> The amd64 and i386 architectures include a file named:
> 
> ...



Reading not your strongest suit? 
Anyway. Thread going nowhere like this. Don't ask for help if you don't want it.

Closed.


----------



## lme@ (Oct 20, 2009)

Sorry, DutchDaemon, but nerdistmonk didn't rant about FreeBSD and also didn't say that he doesn't want to read the docs.
So there's no need to close the thread.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 20, 2009)

Fine, so long as this doesn't turn into another 'FreeBSD can't do what Linux does, so it sucks' type of thread.


----------



## graedus (Oct 20, 2009)

nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> I like games, Wine under linux runs my games fine, it looks like ill be moving back to linux for my gaming needs



I game too, and 'fine' under wine'd linux-emulation is not prime. If you use *NIX, and game as well, you have custom windows installation in it's own drive, running at 100% native performance, dedicated and secured just for that purpose. Or buy a videogame console, your pick.

This thread just corroborates all the stereotypes of a linux-distribution user and the serious philosophical differences between linux-kernel users and *BSDs, among them "using the right tool for the job pursued". I shall keep your thread as a case study, thank you!


----------



## SeanC (Oct 20, 2009)

nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> i have to use 64bit since i got 4gb of ram



2^32 = 4.29gb.


----------



## graedus (Oct 20, 2009)

SeanC said:
			
		

> 2^32 = 4.29gb.



ehem...
2^32 B == 4 GiB == 4*1024^3 B


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 21, 2009)

graedus said:
			
		

> ehem...
> 2^32 B == 4 GiB == 4*1024^3 B



I wasnt trying to start a holy war, I just kept hearing that Freebsd was better than linux, and it does seem like bsd is being updated constantly, but it seems it just doesnt meet my demands. No offense intended. I am using ClarkConnect for my router (Linux based) and I loaded back onto Kubuntu (Debian wont install from a thumbdrive due to a bug in the installer).

And no I dont have any windows touching this pc or any others, Wine plays the games I like (Call of duty 4, spore, etc)
I think BSD will have its day, it just wont be today, once x64 bsd gets nvidia 3d drivers (which are very close) and wine under amd64 takes shape, then I think I might be making the switch. 

Thanks for the hospitality (most of you anyways)


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 21, 2009)

on a further note, I really like bsd and it holds a special place and like I said it will have its day on my pc in the future, What can I say, I like its "headers" 

--Peace out (and no for the record, I dont like snazzy, im more of a fluxbox kind of person or maybe even using a tty for browsing while updating with the DE stopped)


----------



## bigearsbilly (Oct 21, 2009)

sorry about the snazzy comment!
(try sawfish and rox-filer, you'll love it)

well I've used linux for about 10 years and I had a fling with solaris 10 (756 Mb RAM for an installer? ridiculous)
and i've been on BSD for the last 18 months. 

You have to spend time with it and appreciate all the things it _can_ do, not the things it can't. 

things like Never wating for an fsck when you boot.

though few can argue it's enough for everything in the 21st century - I'm job hunting and I need linux for the flashy web sites and office documents. No escaping it.


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 21, 2009)

bigearsbilly said:
			
		

> sorry about the snazzy comment!
> (try sawfish and rox-filer, you'll love it)
> 
> well I've used linux for about 10 years and I had a fling with solaris 10 (756 Mb RAM for an installer? ridiculous)
> ...




Freebsd is the only OS thats closest to being 21st Century ready, heres how that works out in my mind:

Freebsd is:

1)A complete operating system (and the kitchen sink)
2)Doesnt use Alsa. Pulse, or other a$$warming accessories
  (I Like OSS)
3)Has consistency of breakfast gravy or portland cement (I always know BSD will start, Ive never had it just crap out from doing a update)
4)Has ports (I Like it)
5)Has binarys (Thankyou sir, I would like another)
6)Is a blood relative to Unix (Linux is unix like, i dont like mimes or rhymes)

Heres what I wished BSD had (and its not much of a list, but its enough for me not to be able to put it to work)

1)OSSv4 (Its under bsd license now or so ive heard)
2)Nvidia Drivers (I might get this one when version 8.0 is finalized)
3)Wine working as good as it does under the linux (1.1.29 works as good as having windows IM SERIOUS)
4)Make putting a desktop enviroment in a little easier (I loaded XFCE and XDM, I wrote the files it needed, and yet the stinker still wouldnt start with any of the xbinary commands)

Like I said as soon as bsd can get me consistent wine and 3d graphics acceleration (For wine lol) Ill jump right over, beleive me I DO NOT enjoy kubuntu this thing stinketh of a$$ (They call 9.10 beta a beta HA, 20 kernel errors later, I cant even turn on konqueror without the entire kernel crashing)

--Peace out (and no im not demanding anything, im just speaking whats on my mind, I need 2 things out of that list to enjoy bsd to its fullest)


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 21, 2009)

OSS 4 is in ports (audio/oss)

```
PORTNAME=       oss
DISTVERSION=    4.2-build2000
```


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 21, 2009)

DutchDaemon said:
			
		

> OSS 4 is in ports (audio/oss)
> 
> ```
> PORTNAME=       oss
> ...



Well then like I said that list was a small one hehe, stratch oss off the list then, thanks dutch. That just leaves the 2 most important ones (To me anyways) wine 1.1.29 (working under amd64) and nvidia-drivers for amd64 (which as mentioned i might get those under the Christmas tree this year)

im guessing that XFCE doesnt work so hot under bsd? I couldnt get him resuscitated. Maybe kde will work better. I dont expect bsd to tie my shoes, but I couldnt find what lone dingleberry was keeping xfce from starting (I tried 3 different commands listed in the handbook and on the forums and I followed the instructions for making the xinitrc or whatever)


----------



## DutchDaemon (Oct 22, 2009)

I've had zero troubles with XFCE4 under FreeBSD 7 and 8; it's fast and uses little resources. I just use startx with .xinitrc (startxfce4) though, don't care for login managers.


----------



## bigearsbilly (Oct 22, 2009)

this thread  is going on a bit, but...

as they say:
linux is a child of the internet 

but BSD is the mother of the internet.
BIND = Berkely Internet Name Daemon
TCP, sockets all grew up on BSD. 
Read the Stevens' books, APIUE and UNP and it's peppered with
_this_ protocol and _that_ system call  "first appeared on BSD blah.blah". 

but this chap can put it better:

the greatest software ever written


----------



## Beastie (Oct 22, 2009)

nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> im guessing that XFCE doesnt work so hot under bsd?


Xfce works fine. And it can work on 10-years old H/W. I don't use DMs either, but when I tried XDM with Xfce, it worked exactly like it should, from the first time.
Before trying to start Xfce, did you make sure *Xorg* was working fine?


----------



## graedus (Oct 22, 2009)

Hrm, I have KDE4, XFCE4 and WindowMaker working on -STABLE fairly well in the same machine, all added through packages. There are well documented ways to add up DE's and setting up startx or a login manager.

From my experience, users coming from linux need to set aside for a lil' bit their working linux knowledge and follow the handbook until they understand the way FreeBSD intends to work, becasue the linux learning curve gets in the way at the very beggining. Once you acknowledge that, you can add up your linux learning curve to the mix.

_Edit: damn typos!_


----------



## graedus (Oct 22, 2009)

nerdistmonk said:
			
		

> 3)Wine working as good as it does under the linux (1.1.29 works as good as having windows IM SERIOUS)



About that point, truth is wine has made giant steps, but a full 8 years (in a few days) of XP uninterrupted stable realm really helped. This means vendors keep producing win32 code for drivers and software. This particular condition has worked to wine's benefit, particularly within linux since its custom built considering it first before BSD or Solaris. That's why you have working binary blob drivers for funky webcams in linux, for example.


But windows 7 introduces a very different set of rules. Windows 8 in a couple of years might break all backward compatibility and relegate to virtualization (not emulation). Microsoft wants computers to be renewed each 3 or 4 years to keep taxing the user. Once oldschool win32 support phases out in the gaming industry, then it will be uphill once again for games, wine, and binary blobs.

FreeBSD doesn't have, for example, many of those benefits, but won't have to regret later for broken compatibility. Just keeping it real. I'm glad ubuntu+wine, for example, solves many small business problems related to (legacy or not) software, and the power gamer can do with a linux box, but are you really wishing to keep embracing old win32 binaries (or early win64 which has the same curses) and their coding practices altogether in order to maintain the status quo?

The linux gamer power user is very biased to keep embracing windows-only tech and complaints when it's unavailable, which is very ironic. I would thought that instead the gamer with extra requirement would be learning the powershell and tweaking windows services for unix, or have a working "windows server" workstation instead. Using the right tool for the right job doesn't necessarily mean it would be for free (be it in $ or time learning)

I admit, as I said, using the right tool for the job, even if its Windows, if otherwise you wouldn't be able to (like gaming) because of the mainstream dictates so, but you're losing the big picture here.

FreeBSD, and ultimately linux as well, is out of most the mainstream picture because of unsupported hardware and software from the vendor's part (binary blobbing is a big issue), not because the systems themselves are unusable.


----------



## aragon (Oct 22, 2009)

And the new OSS in 8.0 is possibly better than OSS v4...


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 22, 2009)

aragon said:
			
		

> And the new OSS in 8.0 is possibly better than OSS v4...



I replaced my Soundblaster XFI (Dont hurt me  ) and put a soundblaster 4670 in, so bsd will love me for that.

and I dont need wine to run Windows 7 programs, every game I own (about 500 games) is designed for XP and 1.1.29 will run most of them (I cant play them all, not enough time) so I could care less about further updates, if freebsd gets 1.1.29 working under amd64 then im golden, almost all other issues are fixing themselves through the course of time.


----------



## foo_daemon (Oct 22, 2009)

I'm not sure how well it works, but there are instructions for compiling wine on freebsd amd64 here.  It might be worth a shot.  I was planning to test it out myself when I switch to amd64 with 8-Release.


----------



## nerdistmonk (Oct 22, 2009)

foo_daemon said:
			
		

> I'm not sure how well it works, but there are instructions for compiling wine on freebsd amd64 here.  It might be worth a shot.  I was planning to test it out myself when I switch to amd64 with 8-Release.



wow well that should be _very hard_ I wonder if that can be applied to amd64, also did I mention that while im not neccsarly scared of the command line, I am by no means a terminal god? 
Ill try this thats if I find 1.1.29 (not that I have the hots for build numbers, but that one has been very nice to me game-wise) so hopefully something good happens thanks foo.

(Believe me, when ever I sit down in front a pc, it isnt like you hear trumpets with the ground a shaking and a catholic choir singing ROFL)


----------

