Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:17:16 -0400, Tom Worster f...@thefsb.org wrote: I've no experience with VirtualBSD. But I can say that VBox comes with host configs for FreeBSD 32 and 64 clients. Yesterday I fed the FreeBSD 8.2 RELEASE Disk 1 ISO into VBox and it installed very nicely. Network even came up with DHCP. The only problem with the RELEASE discs is that they do not provide something preinstalled preconfigured. However, it's quite simple to follow the steps in the handbook to get KDE or Gnome running and start from there. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
Sorry for top posting - my phone makes it awkward. I take your point about wireless config. Perhaps that was a poor example. To take Windows out of the equation (I've nothing against it per se) how about compiling the kernel? I left Linux a while ago, but at that time compiling and installing a new kernel on Red Hat or Slackware (to stick within my experience) was significantly harder to do than make buildkernel; make installkernel, once you had it figured. I'd suggest that part of the reason for that is the effort in Linux to make it 'easy to learn' and therefore hide the guts of stuff like this away. -- Peter Harrison www.4harrisons.blogspot.com -original message- Subject: Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro From: Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Date: 30/03/2011 18:12 On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:32:29 -0700 (PDT) four.harris...@googlemail.com four.harris...@googlemail.com articulated: Once you've scaled the learning curve, you will appreciate how easy it is to achieve things with FreeBSD compared to other OS which attempt to make things 'easy' for you (wireless networking springs to mind - in my experience if Windows can't do it 'automagically' then you haven't a hope in hell of finding out what's wrong and fixing it). You have conveniently left out the part that if the OS does not have a driver for the wireless card, specifically N protocol cards, then you haven't any hope of getting it to work, period. In any case, the easiest way to get any wireless card to work in Windows, at least up to Win-7, was to deactivate the Windows wireless utility and use the one that accompanies the device, assuming that it does come with a configuration utility. I have not seen any of the top rated ones that did not. If for some reason that did not work, you could still manually enter any of the specific information manually, assuming that you actually took the time to learn (where did I here that term before) how to accomplish it. -- Jerry ✌ freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ In an orderly world, there's always a place for the disorderly. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 04:10:29 -0700 (PDT), four.harris...@googlemail.com four.harris...@googlemail.com wrote: I left Linux a while ago, but at that time compiling and installing a new kernel on Red Hat or Slackware (to stick within my experience) was significantly harder to do than make buildkernel; make installkernel, once you had it figured. Oh, on FreeBSD it's a lot easier than that: make kernel. :-) See /usr/src/Makefile's comment header where the build targets get explained. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On 03/30/11 23:00, Polytropon wrote: There is a project called VirtualBSD that developed a FreeBSD system image that can be used with VirtualBox. Nitpick: the web site says VirtualBSD is a virtual appliance for VMware Thanks for the pointer though, could be useful in encouraging others to try FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On 03/31/11 17:06, Arthur Chance wrote: On 03/30/11 23:00, Polytropon wrote: There is a project called VirtualBSD that developed a FreeBSD system image that can be used with VirtualBox. Nitpick: the web site says VirtualBSD is a virtual appliance for VMware Following myself up, Polytropon was technically correct as the FAQ says VirtualBSD is somewhat compatible with VirtualBox, but not right away and not easily. but I suspect the level of effort needed is going to put people off trying it. Isn't VMware more common than VBox on most systems anyway? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:33:09 +0100, Arthur Chance free...@qeng-ho.org wrote: On 03/31/11 17:06, Arthur Chance wrote: On 03/30/11 23:00, Polytropon wrote: There is a project called VirtualBSD that developed a FreeBSD system image that can be used with VirtualBox. Nitpick: the web site says VirtualBSD is a virtual appliance for VMware Following myself up, Polytropon was technically correct as the FAQ says VirtualBSD is somewhat compatible with VirtualBox, but not right away and not easily. but I suspect the level of effort needed is going to put people off trying it. Isn't VMware more common than VBox on most systems anyway? Thanks for stating that; in fact, I was confusing VMWare and VirtualBox while typing. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:05:36 -0400, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 00:12:26 +0200 Polytropon free...@edvax.de articulated: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:12:23 -0400, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:32:29 -0700 (PDT) four.harris...@googlemail.com four.harris...@googlemail.com articulated: Once you've scaled the learning curve, you will appreciate how easy it is to achieve things with FreeBSD compared to other OS which attempt to make things 'easy' for you (wireless networking springs to mind - in my experience if Windows can't do it 'automagically' then you haven't a hope in hell of finding out what's wrong and fixing it). You have conveniently left out the part that if the OS does not have a driver for the wireless card, specifically N protocol cards, then you haven't any hope of getting it to work, period. Although this is correct, you're concluding the wrong thing, in my opinion. So you are concluding that if it doesn't have a drive it will work? No, this was the introduction for my further arguments, given below the quote of your last paragraph. In any case, the easiest way to get any wireless card to work in Windows, at least up to Win-7, was to deactivate the Windows wireless utility and use the one that accompanies the device, assuming that it does come with a configuration utility. I have not seen any of the top rated ones that did not. If for some reason that did not work, you could still manually enter any of the specific information manually, assuming that you actually took the time to learn (where did I here that term before) how to accomplish it. So what are you doing, basically? You're taking the operating system's responsibility to interact with hardware. I know there are different approaches. One approach is to let the system interface with hardware, usually by its kernel and the corresponding (loadable) modules. A different approach is to use drivers to do that. Those drivers traditionally come from the same source as the hardware comes. Advantage: The hardware vendor doesn't have to pay attention to existing standards. He just has to made sure that his driver works with the system - depending on his target audience, this may be only one special system (version) in particular. You furthermore suggested to explicitely BYPASS the system's means of accessing hardware and to rely on what the hardware vendor provided. You have stated before that you don't use Microsoft. Sadly, I have to deal with it from time to time, but this is related to customers who still use it (usually outdated versions). Fair enough, but now you are displaying your total ignorance of what I was referring to. The Windows Wireless Access Tool is a simple, rudimentary configuration utility. Its primary function was to assist users in entering user-names, passwords, etcetera and in discovering available wireless networks. Most high quality vendors supply their own tool which is more specific to their device. I do not understand specific to device when we're talking about established (even wireless) networking standards. For example, is there a need for a hardware-specific ifconfig program that is required for NICs of brand A, while brand B uses the default ifconfig program, but needs a hardware- specific ping program? If an operating system supports standards (and it SHOULD do that), it should make it easy to do so from a user's point of view so any manufacturer-specific tools are not needed to interact with; the only kind of software would be drivers, but those usually aren't interacted with. Unfortunately, in early versions of Windows, ie, XP, if the user were to start the Windows Wireless Access Tool it could interfere with the vendors own tool. That doesn't sound good. Newer versions all prominently display that another utility is running and ask which one to shut down. Since most vendors want their own utility running full time to manage the wireless network, shutting down the Windows version is the usually accepted protocol. I see. But I don't understand why it should neccessary to give control over networking from one blackbox to another... oh, never mind, I'll return to that statement later on. The Windows version was only created to assist users who were attempting to use devices that did not have such a tool. If you knew anything about Windows and how it handles wireless devices you would have known that. I've fought with Windows in this regards. Thanks, but NO thanks. It was not, and never meant to be a driver for said device. But a tool for interaction. The driver is not such kind of software. If you haven't lost control by the OS choice yet, you have lost it by the driver. Seriously, do you have a clue as to what you are talking about? Yes, I have. It's a typical discussion
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On 3/31/11 1:10 PM, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:33:09 +0100, Arthur Chance free...@qeng-ho.org wrote: On 03/31/11 17:06, Arthur Chance wrote: On 03/30/11 23:00, Polytropon wrote: There is a project called VirtualBSD that developed a FreeBSD system image that can be used with VirtualBox. Nitpick: the web site says VirtualBSD is a virtual appliance for VMware Following myself up, Polytropon was technically correct as the FAQ says VirtualBSD is somewhat compatible with VirtualBox, but not right away and not easily. but I suspect the level of effort needed is going to put people off trying it. Isn't VMware more common than VBox on most systems anyway? Thanks for stating that; in fact, I was confusing VMWare and VirtualBox while typing. :-) I've no experience with VirtualBSD. But I can say that VBox comes with host configs for FreeBSD 32 and 64 clients. Yesterday I fed the FreeBSD 8.2 RELEASE Disk 1 ISO into VBox and it installed very nicely. Network even came up with DHCP. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 02:09:17AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:56:14 -0700, Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote: Quoth Polytropon on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. And on a VW, it doesn't say E and F -- it says 0/1 and 1/1. That's okay - as long as it doesn't say 1/0 which would cause the operating system of the car to crash, and you have to send the onboard computer unit to VW Germany in order to get it replaced. :-) We were speaking in analogies here, where the car *is* the operating system -- so I think if it said 1/0 it would be more accurate to say the car would crash. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpGQUXGi6Omc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
Quoth Chad Perrin on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 02:09:17AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:56:14 -0700, Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote: Quoth Polytropon on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. And on a VW, it doesn't say E and F -- it says 0/1 and 1/1. That's okay - as long as it doesn't say 1/0 which would cause the operating system of the car to crash, and you have to send the onboard computer unit to VW Germany in order to get it replaced. :-) We were speaking in analogies here, where the car *is* the operating system -- so I think if it said 1/0 it would be more accurate to say the car would crash. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] It's uncertain whether the car would crash, or run infinitely. -- .o. | Sterling (Chip) Camden | http://camdensoftware.com ..o | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | http://chipsquips.com ooo | 2048R/D6DBAF91 | http://chipstips.com pgpb6c1QEYGxZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:45:27PM -0500, Jason Hsu wrote: I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). A word of caution -- as you have probably noticed in responses already: FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD (the most well-known three BSD Unix systems) are each developed as complete OSes, from kernel through userland. This is different from how Linux-based systems are developed, where the kernel is its own, completely separate project, and people collect software that they think go well with that kernel into a distribution package. That distribution package comprises an OS, but the OS developers in this case are often more like kit assemblers rather than software developers (though there's usually a lot of software development involved in ensuring everything gets integrated into a smoothly working whole, too). These OSes in the Linux world are typically called Linux distributions, or distros for short. This means that, for instance, Mint is a Linux distro. By contrast, FreeBSD is not a distro of any particular project; it *is* the project. Both Mint and FreeBSD are operating systems, but Linux is just a kernel. FreeBSD is a BSD Unix operating system because it is an OS descended from the original BSD Unix. Mint is a Linux distribution, because it is an OS assembled as a software distribution package based on Linux. The term BSD itself stands for Berkeley Software Distribution, because BSD Unix was originally a software distribution package based on a UNIX foundation, assembled to a substantial degree by Bill Joy. The current BSD Unix systems, however, have departed from that model; the development of the software that makes up the core OS is no longer a distribution of software developed separately and collected into a smoothly-working whole. In each of the major BSD Unix software projects, the OS is now developed as a cohesive whole, each separately from the others (though they do share code a fair bit). The BSD in FreeBSD is there for historical purposes, rather than because Berkeley or Distribution is in any way particularly accurate or relevant now. As such, you may encounter some poorly specified, potentially confusing statements that BSD has no distros or something like that. Hopefully this explanation will help clear up any confusion you may encounter. But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. Perhaps if you could tell us where you encountered problems, when you tried to configure FreeBSD to [your] liking, we could point out some different ways of doing things that would get you from zero to functional OS in relatively short order. I occasionally give PC-BSD a try, to see how suitable it is to recommending for people who just want to avoid the Microsoft taxes (including antivirus subscriptions, et cetera). My impression is that it is much like Ubuntu, in that it interferes with my ability to get things done. I guess I'm the wrong person to ask about something like that. It is possible that some of the problems you have had with various BSD Unix flavors is related to the fact you are trying to run them all in a virtual machine. Abstracting the hardware away from the OS might introduce difficulties in getting everything working properly. You might be better served by installing something on bare metal -- directly on the hard drive -- if you have a machine you can spare for that purpose. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. PC-BSD is pretty much the analogous choice for BSD Unix based systems, I think. It is possible that many of PC-BSD's problems relate to its use of KDE4; I'm not really sure. It is possible to install a different desktop environment or window manager and use that instead, though. That might relieve some of the difficulties you have with it. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? The sad truth seems to be that, unless someone else sets up the computer in advance, some vapid media whore like Paris Hilton or
RE: Easiest desktop BSD distro
When I find things in FreeBSD difficult to accomplish (eg. first time upgrading world kernel from source) I reflect on something I read I think in the introduction to 'Learning Perl' which applies equally to FreeBSD. If there is a choice between making things easy to learn and easy to use, the design principle is to make it easy to use - even if that comes at the cost of a steeper learning curve. Once you've scaled the learning curve, you will appreciate how easy it is to achieve things with FreeBSD compared to other OS which attempt to make things 'easy' for you (wireless networking springs to mind - in my experience if Windows can't do it 'automagically' then you haven't a hope in hell of finding out what's wrong and fixing it). So the easiest BSD? Any of them, if you're prepared to invest the time learning it. -- Peter Harrison www.4harrisons.blogspot.com -original message- Subject: Easiest desktop BSD distro From: Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com Date: 29/03/2011 21:14 I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. -- Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
--On March 30, 2011 9:49:02 AM -0600 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:45:27PM -0500, Jason Hsu wrote: I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). A word of caution -- as you have probably noticed in responses already: What a delightful answer. I especially liked As vi is to Notepad, so FreeBSD is to Ubuntu or Mint, I think; My compliments on a job very well done. -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. *** It is as useless to argue with those who have renounced the use of reason as to administer medication to the dead. Thomas Jefferson There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them. George Orwell ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:32:29 -0700 (PDT) four.harris...@googlemail.com four.harris...@googlemail.com articulated: Once you've scaled the learning curve, you will appreciate how easy it is to achieve things with FreeBSD compared to other OS which attempt to make things 'easy' for you (wireless networking springs to mind - in my experience if Windows can't do it 'automagically' then you haven't a hope in hell of finding out what's wrong and fixing it). You have conveniently left out the part that if the OS does not have a driver for the wireless card, specifically N protocol cards, then you haven't any hope of getting it to work, period. In any case, the easiest way to get any wireless card to work in Windows, at least up to Win-7, was to deactivate the Windows wireless utility and use the one that accompanies the device, assuming that it does come with a configuration utility. I have not seen any of the top rated ones that did not. If for some reason that did not work, you could still manually enter any of the specific information manually, assuming that you actually took the time to learn (where did I here that term before) how to accomplish it. -- Jerry ✌ freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ In an orderly world, there's always a place for the disorderly. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
If there is a choice between making things easy to learn and easy to use, the design principle is to make it easy to use - even if that comes at the cost of a steeper learning curve. And you can always create easy-to-learn GUI-based tool that works on the top of low-level tools. BTW Microsoft came to this idea too (see MinWin) So the easiest BSD? Any of them, if you're prepared to invest the time learning it. FreeBSD probably is the easiest to study in all BSD family because it has a really good handbook. But for people with *nix background (like linux) any BSD should not be difficult. -- Peter Harrison www.4harrisons.blogspot.com -original message- Subject: Easiest desktop BSD distro From: Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com Date: 29/03/2011 21:14 I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. -- Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
I only know FreeBSD so I can't recommend any other BSD as being easier. And I don't use a windowing system on it. But I've an answer to a question you didn't ask: FreeBSD in VirtualBox a convenient way of learning. It saves a lot of uninteresting messing around. And it allows me to save my project (by saving VM state), get on with some other work and come back to it later. Regarding your problems with internet speed, I think you can download one of the small FreeBSD images, run that and instruct the FreeBSD install program to get the files via FTP. Configure the installer to install only the set of OS parts you want. That should save a lot of download relative to the ISO images that contain everything. I've never done this but I expect others can help if you run into difficulty. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:56:14 -0700, Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote: Quoth Polytropon on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. And on a VW, it doesn't say E and F -- it says 0/1 and 1/1. That's okay - as long as it doesn't say 1/0 which would cause the operating system of the car to crash, and you have to send the onboard computer unit to VW Germany in order to get it replaced. :-) Aloha Poly, Your replies are the funniest ever on the list. Make me smile. Have a great day. -- ~Al Plant - Honolulu, Hawaii - Phone: 808-284-2740 + http://hawaiidakine.com + http://freebsdinfo.org + + http://aloha50.net - Supporting - FreeBSD 7.2 - 8.0 - 9* + email: n...@hdk5.net All that's really worth doing is what we do for others.- Lewis Carrol ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote: Quoth Polytropon on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. And on a VW, it doesn't say E and F -- it says 0/1 and 1/1. On a lot of the older VWs (and Mercedes cars, as well) it says R and 1/1. The R supposedly stood for reserve. I had a Saab for a while that went from 0 to 1, and the middle of the 0 lit up when fuel was low. User interface inconsistencies between cars are actually quite rampant, as anyone who's ever sat down in a rental car and tried to figure out how to turn on the windshield wipers can attest. ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
Allow me to add something here: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:49:55 -0400, Tom Worster f...@thefsb.org wrote: FreeBSD in VirtualBox a convenient way of learning. It saves a lot of uninteresting messing around. And it allows me to save my project (by saving VM state), get on with some other work and come back to it later. There is a project called VirtualBSD that developed a FreeBSD system image that can be used with VirtualBox. It is a preinstalled and preconfigured OS + applications comparable to PC-BSD, but it uses Xfce instead of KDE, and (in my opinion) it looks much better. :-) Project homepage: http://www.virtualbsd.info/ Screenshots: http://www.virtualbsd.info/screenshots/ Downloads: http://www.virtualbsd.info/download.html In order to download the 1.3 GB image, you can easily install e. g. the ctorrent program from ports, download the torrent file from the web page mentioned above, and then let ctorrent get the file. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:12:23 -0400, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:32:29 -0700 (PDT) four.harris...@googlemail.com four.harris...@googlemail.com articulated: Once you've scaled the learning curve, you will appreciate how easy it is to achieve things with FreeBSD compared to other OS which attempt to make things 'easy' for you (wireless networking springs to mind - in my experience if Windows can't do it 'automagically' then you haven't a hope in hell of finding out what's wrong and fixing it). You have conveniently left out the part that if the OS does not have a driver for the wireless card, specifically N protocol cards, then you haven't any hope of getting it to work, period. Although this is correct, you're concluding the wrong thing, in my opinion. In any case, the easiest way to get any wireless card to work in Windows, at least up to Win-7, was to deactivate the Windows wireless utility and use the one that accompanies the device, assuming that it does come with a configuration utility. I have not seen any of the top rated ones that did not. If for some reason that did not work, you could still manually enter any of the specific information manually, assuming that you actually took the time to learn (where did I here that term before) how to accomplish it. So what are you doing, basically? You're taking the operating system's responsibility to interact with hardware. I know there are different approaches. One approach is to let the system interface with hardware, usually by its kernel and the corresponding (loadable) modules. A different approach is to use drivers to do that. Those drivers traditionally come from the same source as the hardware comes. Advantage: The hardware vendor doesn't have to pay attention to existing standards. He just has to made sure that his driver works with the system - depending on his target audience, this may be only one special system (version) in particular. You furthermore suggested to explicitely BYPASS the system's means of accessing hardware and to rely on what the hardware vendor provided. If you haven't lost control by the OS choice yet, you have lost it by the driver. If you don't care for having control about who plays foul with your system (which you can't either notice or even test for), also fine. Dealing with black boxes is what the main target customers of the home PC area are used to. They accept it as being normal. They don't know that there are different ways of doing things. And: As long as everything works as intended - no problems. But diagnosing and SOLVING problems - the not easy parts of the story - you are lost without knowledge and proper tools, and basic skills, of course. And if something doesn't work, the typical customer does not try to solve the problem. If he doesn't delegate it, he buys something different and tries again. Trial error, if you want. And it's not even a financial problem as such hardware costs nearly less than nothing. The targeted customers have been trained to think the following: If I invest time in getting this working, I loose money. Instead of doing that, I invest money into a different product which hopefully will work. What does it imply? If the Windows can't bring up the wireless network, the manufacturer has to do it using his black box driver. If this also doesn't work (maybe because the driver is not compatible to the Windows), the product gets discarded, and a new one is bought. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:45:23AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote: Quoth Chad Perrin on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: We were speaking in analogies here, where the car *is* the operating system -- so I think if it said 1/0 it would be more accurate to say the car would crash. It's uncertain whether the car would crash, or run infinitely. Mathematically, that seems to be the case, but implementations tend to result in crashy behavior -- or, quite often, raise exceptions. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpYzNSB85upw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:41:54 -0600, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:45:23AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote: Quoth Chad Perrin on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: We were speaking in analogies here, where the car *is* the operating system -- so I think if it said 1/0 it would be more accurate to say the car would crash. It's uncertain whether the car would crash, or run infinitely. Mathematically, that seems to be the case, but implementations tend to result in crashy behavior -- or, quite often, raise exceptions. We're talking about a car. It doesn't raise exceptions, it simply explodes! :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:57:45AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:41:54 -0600, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:45:23AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote: It's uncertain whether the car would crash, or run infinitely. Mathematically, that seems to be the case, but implementations tend to result in crashy behavior -- or, quite often, raise exceptions. We're talking about a car. It doesn't raise exceptions, it simply explodes! :-) If my car exploded, I would certainly take exception to that behavior. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpOQ2jJQ5015.pgp Description: PGP signature
Easiest desktop BSD distro
I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. -- Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: Easiest desktop BSD distro
I've always heard PC-BSD is the way to go on the desktop, so if that's not going too well then I'm not sure. I don't think there is a BSD that Paris and Jessica would be able to install. Then again, that's not really what made them noteworthy. -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Jason Hsu Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 2:45 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Easiest desktop BSD distro I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. -- Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org font size=1 div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in' /div This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. /font ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:45:27PM -0500, Jason Hsu wrote: I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. I'm not sure I understand the question. Have you actually installed FreeBSD? Are you familiar with FreeBSD Ports system? -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:45:27PM -0500, Jason Hsu wrote: I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. FreeBSD is just one OS. There are some other BSD's such as PC-BSD, but it is not like Lunix with many different candy coatings over the same chewy carmel center. In BSD, each is its own OS, although there are definite similarities. If you really mean to learn BSD, then download the latest FreeBSD RELEASE (which is 8.2 at the moment) installation ISO, burn it, install it, configure it and use it. Everything goes on it easily from /usr/ports/... Just follow the handbook. In FreeBSD, the handbook is your friend followed by the man pages and Google. They are very good compared to what you find elsewhere on other systems. If you are not willing to do that, then really you are not that interested in learning it, so why bother. As for the Grub issue, I have dual booted FreeBSD alongside of various MS stuff many times with no problem and no need of Grub. I just make sure the MS is installed first and then use the FreeBSD MBR. It is quite plain and not pretty, but works just fine. I haven't tried W-7 yet. But, although I have installed numerous Linux machines, mostly CentOS, and they use Grub, I have never dual booted a Linux and never had to configure Grub to deal with that. I think, a long time and many versions ago, the FreeBSD MBR could boot the more well known Linuxen in a dual boot situation, but who knows how more weird it has gotten since then. I am quite certain that Grub will boot FreeBSD, because FreeBSD still uses the most standard, most common old fashioned DOS boot protocol to get started -- and just getting the first block read in and executing is all you need of the MBR which is what Grub is as well as FreeBSD MBR. So, just whack on FreeBSD and learn it. Once you know it pretty well you can play around with dual booting Lunix if you still want to or maybe you will discover the cleaner and more straightforward BSD system more to your liking and just stick with it. Who knows. It should only take a few days. jerry -- Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? To each their own, but I wouldn't want a system that Paris Hilton could handle any more than I'd want a vehicle that a four-year-old can drive. -- .o. | Sterling (Chip) Camden | http://camdensoftware.com ..o | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | http://chipsquips.com ooo | 2048R/D6DBAF91 | http://chipstips.com pgpRQg722vvD7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On 30/03/2011, at 07:15, Chip Camden wrote: So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? To each their own, but I wouldn't want a system that Paris Hilton could handle any more than I'd want a vehicle that a four-year-old can drive. There is something to be said for the keep it simple principle however. I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. If you want to learn, then facing challenges is the best way to learn. Be prepared to spend some time doing research. Have two computers on hand, one with your FreeBSD, and another with linux or something known working on it that you can do your research on. Backup everything before you start, in case of the worst. I have wiped many machines by accident while learning (and as such learn the value of backups and how to restore systems). You will not master anything unless you actually put in the time and effort. Facing challenges will catalyse this process. Sincerely, William Brown Research Teaching, Technology Services The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005 CRICOS Provider Number 00123M - IMPORTANT: This message may contain confidential or legally privileged information. If you think it was sent to you by mistake, please delete all copies and advise the sender. For the purposes of the SPAM Act 2003, this email is authorised by The University of Adelaide. pgp.mit.edu PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. To boot FreeBSD, you need the code in the master boot record to simply pass control to the boot sector code sitting in the FreeBSD partiton. The boot sector code on the FreeBSD partition has everything it needs to boot FreeBSD. So, in GRUB: title FreeBSD root(hd0,2) makeactive chainloader +1 (hd0,2) means FreeBSD is on the 3rd partition of the hard drive. Side note: When you install FreeBSD there is an option to don't touch the MBR (master boot record). However in practice and with certain versions of FreeBSD I have found that even with the don't touch selected, it still modifies little things in the MBR. Therefore, I would recommend backing up the 512 bytes in the MBR on your system so that you can restore in case things become unbootable, which was the case for me when I installed CURRENT a few days ago. Another side note: FreeBSD might not be for the faint at heart. It's very powerful however. For me, FreeBSD is an opportunity to learn more about how computers actually work. And I'm delighted by the experience. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
Quoth William Brown on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: On 30/03/2011, at 07:15, Chip Camden wrote: So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? To each their own, but I wouldn't want a system that Paris Hilton could handle any more than I'd want a vehicle that a four-year-old can drive. There is something to be said for the keep it simple principle however. Yes, but keep it simple need not mean do everything for you. Often, a simpler design means more choices, and more choices means more responsibility and more steps to completion. -- .o. | Sterling (Chip) Camden | http://camdensoftware.com ..o | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | http://chipsquips.com ooo | 2048R/D6DBAF91 | http://chipstips.com pgppvyL57nMjx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
...I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). There is no distro in BSDworld. BSD family is complete operating system. Linux distros are a combination of a kernel and all the tools necessary for an operating system to work properly. But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking... BSD operatings system family has many member. Each one is develeoped with a common criteria that users and -almost- developers are the same people. So it is not a surprise that you had trouble with the configuration. The configuration troubles can be solved by reading the documentation and applying it. Also the hardware has got its nasty part. Not all hardware are BSD compatible. Some may work and some may not. Consult the release notes before attempting to installing and trying to configure the hardware. An unsupported piece of hardware would consume your time for nothing but pain. ...I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. I have 10+ years old computers that could not run those Linux distributions you had mentioned but could easily run FreeBSD and OpenBSD current branches as well as STABLE and RELEASE. There is no analogous choice for BSD familiy of operatings systems from my point of view compared to Linux distros you've mentioned. There is no flash for BSD. Ypu need Linux compatibility and Linux stuff is needed to install flash. I do not nedd flash. No codec needed on my boxes. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? There is no BSD distro. What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? It is quite common that anyone can suggest PC-BSD for easy to use keeping in mind casual computer user. Though I am not sure Paris or Jessica is casual. I prefer FreeBSD and OpenBSD for my laptops and desktops also for servers, network management and for all kind of computing stuff. Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. Well, try to install OpenBSD as it is straight forward to install. OpenBSD doetects and configures all the hardware if supported. Installer is text based. Just answer the questions and you are done. Desktop is FVWM. You may not like the look and feel. You can install another desktop or window manager via packages. The ISO files for installation is quite small ~ 200MiB in size. Consult the OpenBSD FAQ before downloading and installing it. Patches are released as source code not binary. You have to compile and install patches, fallow the instructions of the relevent patches. And a couple of words: Read the documentationand make sure you understand it! Read the release notes and errata! Check the compatibility of the hardware you have! Backup you data! There is no BSD distro thing! BSD is direct descendent of UNIX! (so things are quite different in BSD realm) -- Gökşin Akdeniz (Gökşin Akdeniz) goksin.akde...@gmail.com Anahtar parmakizi/key fingerprint = FE10 8C14 A144 4FDE BE18 D5E3 E758 F49A 8A5D F8AE [Son kullanma tarihi/expire date: 2011-06-08] signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:23:48PM -0700, Chip Camden wrote: Quoth William Brown on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: On 30/03/2011, at 07:15, Chip Camden wrote: So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? To each their own, but I wouldn't want a system that Paris Hilton could handle any more than I'd want a vehicle that a four-year-old can drive. There is something to be said for the keep it simple principle however. Yes, but keep it simple need not mean do everything for you. Often, a simpler design means more choices, and more choices means more responsibility and more steps to completion. But often better eventual results. Just a nit here -- I would think of BSD as less cluttered rather than simpler. Those that have all the extra built-ins with no thinking required tend to be more complicated, not simpler. They just cover it up by allowing fewer choices -- as you imply above. jerry -- .o. | Sterling (Chip) Camden | http://camdensoftware.com ..o | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | http://chipsquips.com ooo | 2048R/D6DBAF91 | http://chipstips.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:45:27 -0500, Jason Hsu jhsu802...@jasonhsu.com wrote: I want to learn BSD. I may emphasize the word LEARN. You'll see why later on. :-) I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). This is a typical use for FreeBSD. For example, I'm using it as my home desktop for many years now. One thing to keep in mind: In opposite to the Linusi, FreeBSD does not come in different distributions. It is ONE operating system. The base system is standardized. You can install additional software by two means: either from source, using the ports collection, or from precompiled binary packages. Depending on your needs, one solution may be better than the other. You can also use both ways in combination. Systems like PC-BSD use the FreeBSD operating system (the base system) and come with software preinstalled and preconfigured. PC-BSD is very KDE-centric (which maybe is no problem). It also has a third way of installing software: It seems to be primarily intended to be friendly to those users who feel familiar with the strange concept of downloading stuff with a web browser when they want to install something. But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. There is EXCELLENT documentation that will help you: The FAQ and the handbook can be viewed online. They cover the most common things related to FreeBSD. The friendly community of this mailing list will also help you if you encounter a problem. Please be patient and read the documentation FIRST. Really, it is that simple, and it is important. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. Admittedly, building and configuring a system from scratch takes some time. It also REQUIRES you to have certain knowledge. Trial error will lead you nowhere (except into problems). Still, as you wanted to LEARN FreeBSD, this is a good chance. You'll learn the basics of UNIX, which are ESSENTIAL if you want to survive in the UNIX world, no matter if you are on a BSD, on Linux, or on one of the commercial UNIXes; basically, you will find yourself in learning by doing. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. As I'm not a multi-booter, I would assume that it is sufficient to add an entry to the GRUB configuration file to point to the slice / partition where you did install FreeBSD into. It should be /dev/sdan, where n is the correct partition number. FreeBSD also has its own boot loader. The default MBR boot system boots FreeBSD. You can also install the boot manager which would allow you to boot FreeBSD or Linux. I've been using it in the past, but that was maaany years ago. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. Do you plan to use FreeBSD in a VirtualBox environment or do you have the chance to install it on real hardware? If so - DO IT. You'll often see better results. There's also FreeSBIE. It's a lightweight and versatile FreeBSD live file system that you can boot AND USE from CD. It's very good for checking hardware compatibility. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. Maybe you should direct your PC-BSD related questions to the respective boards or mailing lists. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. Okay, that looks like a total no-go. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I'm not sure if this OS - derived from FreeBSD - is primarily intended for desktop use... but as the BSDs are multi-purpose operating systems (embedded, desktop, server, mixed forms), it should be possible... I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. I've been starting with Slackware in the 90s... :-) It taught me the UNIX basics that I can now apply ANYWHERE in the UNIX world. I'm not sure most user-friendly distros do that anymore, as they tend to hide the essential stuff behind GUIs. When there is no CLI, you won't learn ANYTHING. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. The last point would be a no-go for me as I know much better interfaces (more user-friendly, more productive) from my IT career. :-) Codecs are no problem on FreeBSD, you install them as any other software. Keep in mind that because of lawyer-blah, lobby-blah and idiots-blah the codecs are not included in the base system. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. All the BSDs have hardware requirements (for the respective operating systems) that make any modern Linux cry. Basically, you need to CHOOSE WISELY which software you use. There is lots of good stuff that can even turn grampa-PCs into usable
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:39:36 -0400, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote: Just a nit here -- I would think of BSD as less cluttered rather than simpler. The definition of simple is individual, it depends on present knowledge and the ability of thinking (concluding, deriving, understanding). Simple things SIMPLE, complex things POSSIBLE. FreeBSD utilizes this approach by providing small units that fulfill a certain purpose and that can be combined to do something more complex, instead of trying to build a one size fits all complex that denies the simplest choices. Sadly, such things are more common in software than you want them to be... Those that have all the extra built-ins with no thinking required tend to be more complicated, not simpler. They just cover it up by allowing fewer choices -- as you imply above. A good preconfiguration does help. If common tasks are already well prepared, built-ins can be very helpful. Instead, you often find a pile of garbage in software that you're forced to pick what you intend to use, always hoping it will work as intended. If problems occur and you want to diagnose what's wrong - well, big problem. As nobody thought of doing so, you don't have the option to diagnose anything. Is THAT simple? I don't think so. ++ || | An error occured! | || | (Yes) (No) (All) | || ++ :-) The often called attribute simple does take the opportunity to LEARN. As it has been initially mentioned, the OP wants to learn BSD. So how can anybody learn if there is no way to do so, because the simple concept states: You'll do it THAT way. You can't do it differently. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Period. Reboot and try again. There's also the belief (as in church) that certain systems or programs are simple because WHEN problems occur, they are ignored, or solving them is delegated to somebody else who has the knowledge and experience to do so. For the user, the mystic It's so simple, it does anything on its own! prevails and gets communicated to others, although it's just wrong. Aggressive advertising also uses this approach. After all, I'll repeat my statement: PCs are not simple. Face it, it's a fact. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
--On March 29, 2011 2:23:48 PM -0700 Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote: Quoth William Brown on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: On 30/03/2011, at 07:15, Chip Camden wrote: So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? To each their own, but I wouldn't want a system that Paris Hilton could handle any more than I'd want a vehicle that a four-year-old can drive. There is something to be said for the keep it simple principle however. Yes, but keep it simple need not mean do everything for you. Often, a simpler design means more choices, and more choices means more responsibility and more steps to completion. I totally agree. However, there are different degrees of choices. For example, an installer that says, Now it's time to partition your disk. Go do that, and when you finish, I'll return you to this screen for the next step. is demonstrably different from one that says, Now it's time to partition your disk. Would you like me to use these displayed defaults? Or would you like to make your own decisions? Then, once you've selected option 2 it says, What would you like to name this partition? (note, you MUST have a root partition, represented by /. The former is not user friendly. The latter is more so. Yes, you can go to the Handbook and read about partitions, and you can google about them and learn more, but the first time you install FreeBSD and you're staring at that screen, it's daunting for some folks. It might even be useful to have an initial screen that offers options such as Experienced User, Minimal Prompts, Familiar User, Additional Prompts and First Time User, Walk me through it step by step. -- Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer. *** It is as useless to argue with those who have renounced the use of reason as to administer medication to the dead. Thomas Jefferson There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them. George Orwell ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue 29 Mar 2011 at 13:59:44 PDT Jerry McAllister wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:45:27PM -0500, Jason Hsu wrote: I want to learn BSD. I find that the best way to familiarize myself with a distro is to adopt it as my main distro (for web browsing, email, word processing, etc.). But the challenge of BSD have so far proven too much for me. It would take too long to configure FreeBSD to my liking. I couldn't figure out what to enter in GRUB to multi-boot Linux and BSD. I tried PC-BSD, GhostBSD, and DragonflyBSD in VirtualBox. I've found PC-BSD agonizingly slow to install and operate, and KDE didn't even boot up when I logged in. GhostBSD has too many things that don't work, such as the keyboard on my laptop and my Internet connection on my desktop. DragonflyBSD didn't boot up in Virtualbox. I recommend Linux Mint as a first Linux distro. It's user-friendly, well-established, widely used, includes codecs/drivers that Ubuntu doesn't, and has a Windows-like user interface. For those with older computers, I recommend Puppy Linux or antiX Linux as a first distro. I'm looking for the analogous choice in the BSD world. So what do you recommend as my first desktop BSD distro? What desktop BSD distro is so easy to use that even Paris Hilton or Jessica Chicken of the Sea Simpson can handle it? Please keep in mind that I have a slow Internet connection, and these BSD distros are ENORMOUS. It took some 12-14 hours to download PC-BSD. FreeBSD is just one OS. There are some other BSD's such as PC-BSD, but it is not like Lunix with many different candy coatings over the same chewy carmel center. In BSD, each is its own OS, although there are definite similarities. If you really mean to learn BSD, then download the latest FreeBSD RELEASE (which is 8.2 at the moment) installation ISO, burn it, install it, configure it and use it. Everything goes on it easily from /usr/ports/... Just follow the handbook. In FreeBSD, the handbook is your friend followed by the man pages and Google. They are very good compared to what you find elsewhere on other systems. If you are not willing to do that, then really you are not that interested in learning it, so why bother. To put what Jerry said in another way, if what you mean by configuring FreeBSD to my liking is making it look, feel and behave as much as possible like the Linux and Windows systems you're familiar with, you aren't really learning FreeBSD at all. To really learn any operating system, you have to approach it on its own terms and be willing to accept that it has its own way of doing things. Its own idioms and paradigms. It has its own history of design decisions, unforeseen consequences and problem resolutions. Some problems that arise on one OS never come up on another, because they approach things from entirely different angles. There are also some rather significant differences in the goals and tastes of the user communities associated with different OSes. BSD folk don't necessarily have the same interests as Linux folk, just as Mac people are different from Windows people, and Windows people are different from anyone in the world of Unix-like operatings systems. And Plan 9 people are different from all the rest of them put together. ;) The whole point of learning more than one OS, in my opinion, is to explore the strengths and weaknesses of different designs, development philosophies and ways of using computers. Otherwise, you're just being a software dilettante. So, just whack on FreeBSD and learn it. Once you know it pretty well you can play around with dual booting Lunix if you still want to or maybe you will discover the cleaner and more straightforward BSD system more to your liking and just stick with it. Who knows. It should only take a few days. jerry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:43:47 -0500, Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote: It might even be useful to have an initial screen that offers options such as Experienced User, Minimal Prompts, Familiar User, Additional Prompts and First Time User, Walk me through it step by step. Even GeoWorks Ensemble had that back in the early 90s: New user, average user, experienced user. Depending on the setting, more or less options where shown, and less or more defaults have been set. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:16:37 -0700, Charlie Kester corky1...@comcast.net wrote: To really learn any operating system, you have to approach it on its own terms and be willing to accept that it has its own way of doing things. Its own idioms and paradigms. It has its own history of design decisions, unforeseen consequences and problem resolutions. Some problems that arise on one OS never come up on another, because they approach things from entirely different angles. A very well formed statement. The whole point of learning more than one OS, in my opinion, is to explore the strengths and weaknesses of different designs, development philosophies and ways of using computers. Otherwise, you're just being a software dilettante. You basically also learn thinking approaches, to conclude things and to estimate facts. This of course requires the OS and programs to act in a deterministic way. When learning things about UNIX, you learn POSTABLE things. Even if something is differently named or done on various UNIXes, you *KNOW* that they actually are the same (or utilizing the same service, the same principles, the same ideas). Which this kind of knowledge, you can find your way around in ANY UNIX operating system (and often even in Linux) because those share imporant ideas, and don't abandon them just to look new and shiny. If you know those basic stuff, you're even able to locate it deep inside software that claims to be all new and all different. This enables you to adopt to many variations of the same old thing as you do know what's inside it. ONLY THIS KIND of essential basic knowledge makes you a real professional - in opposite to dilletantic artists in IT. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 00:00:07 +0200 Polytropon free...@edvax.de articulated: On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:39:36 -0400, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote: Just a nit here -- I would think of BSD as less cluttered rather than simpler. The definition of simple is individual, it depends on present knowledge and the ability of thinking (concluding, deriving, understanding). Simple things SIMPLE, complex things POSSIBLE. FreeBSD utilizes this approach by providing small units that fulfill a certain purpose and that can be combined to do something more complex, instead of trying to build a one size fits all complex that denies the simplest choices. Sadly, such things are more common in software than you want them to be... Those that have all the extra built-ins with no thinking required tend to be more complicated, not simpler. They just cover it up by allowing fewer choices -- as you imply above. A good preconfiguration does help. If common tasks are already well prepared, built-ins can be very helpful. Instead, you often find a pile of garbage in software that you're forced to pick what you intend to use, always hoping it will work as intended. If problems occur and you want to diagnose what's wrong - well, big problem. As nobody thought of doing so, you don't have the option to diagnose anything. Is THAT simple? I don't think so. ++ || | An error occured! | || | (Yes) (No) (All) | || ++ :-) The often called attribute simple does take the opportunity to LEARN. As it has been initially mentioned, the OP wants to learn BSD. So how can anybody learn if there is no way to do so, because the simple concept states: You'll do it THAT way. You can't do it differently. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Period. Reboot and try again. There's also the belief (as in church) that certain systems or programs are simple because WHEN problems occur, they are ignored, or solving them is delegated to somebody else who has the knowledge and experience to do so. For the user, the mystic It's so simple, it does anything on its own! prevails and gets communicated to others, although it's just wrong. Aggressive advertising also uses this approach. After all, I'll repeat my statement: PCs are not simple. Face it, it's a fact. :-) Your approach to the problem neglects to factor in each individual's own level of expertise and desires. Example: there are millions of cars and drivers in the world. Now, how many of those drivers truly want to do more than drive their vehicle from point A to point B unencumbered by the nuances of their vehicle? Now, if an individual wants to learn to be a class 1 mechanic, that is fine; however, requiring it to just operate a vehicle is absurd. When I was a kid, I use to tear down motors and rebuild them for competition racing. Today, I won't even waste my time changing the oil on my own car. I don't have the time to waste and I can easily afford to have others who want to do that for a living attend to it. -- Jerry ✌ freebsd.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 19:23:19 -0400, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote: Your approach to the problem neglects to factor in each individual's own level of expertise and desires. I can just speak from my individual point of view. I do NOT claim that my experiences and knowledge are universal. Therefore, my view is limited, which I honestly can admit. Example: there are millions of cars and drivers in the world. Ah, people LOVE car analogies. :-) Now, how many of those drivers truly want to do more than drive their vehicle from point A to point B unencumbered by the nuances of their vehicle? Now, if an individual wants to learn to be a class 1 mechanic, that is fine; however, requiring it to just operate a vehicle is absurd. Let me use your example and make a computer relation projection into that analogy: People who want to use a car to get from A to be do not have to be class 1 mechanics. However, they need to know the rules of the traffic, all the funny signs and the lights, the round thing in the middle, the 4 round rubber things, the things where you press with feet, and that special magic key that makes the engine start. Denying that those require LEARNING and PRACTICING is just denying reality. Example: Tech: Driver tech support. How may I serve you? Driver: This my car doesn't start. T: I see. What is the car's brand name, model, manufacture year? D: I don't know. I bought it to get to the market, why would I give a damn. T: Alright, alright, relax. Let's try to fix it without this information (sigh). Is there any fuel in the tank? D: Hmm Fuel, you say. How would I know? T: Look at the control panel. Where does the arrow point, E or F? D: Where is the control panel? T: It should be tight behind the steering wheel, if you are sitting in the driver's chair. D: Ah! I see... There are a lot of arrows here, which one should I look at? T: Look at the one which has E or F written near it. There might be a gas station drawn near it as well. D: Ahhh! I see. The arrow points at zero. T: What do you mean, zero? D: Yes! Right at zero. And there is also x1000 written near the arrow. Is that the model of the car? X-1000? T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. D: Ahhh. I see, I see! The arrow is between E and F. T: Excellent! Then we know at least that you have fuel. Now let's check the battery. Do you see the steering wheel? D: Yeah. T: Press right in the middle of it. D: (a loud beep) Hey! Is it supposed to do that? T: (rolls his eyes) Everything is allright, that's your honk. If it works, then the battery is fine. Now let's try to start the car. D: Well, damn, I'm telling you it doesn't start. That s why I'm calling, moron. T: (grits his teeth) Still, let s try again! Press the clutch pedal, press the brakes, and turn the key. D: Hey-hey! From the beginning. Where is this catch pedal? T: CLUTCH under the steering wheel on the left. Did you find it? D: Found it. T: Press it down as far as it goes. Good. Now, do you see two pedals under the steering wheel to the right? D: Yeah. T: The one on the left is the brake. Press it. Did you? D: Done. T: Now turn the key in the ignition. D: How would I do that, if I have both hands busy? T: Excuse me? D: I am pressing with the left hand on the catch, the right hand on the brake, how the hell am I supposed to turn the key? T: (chokes from laughter) Allright, let s try again, but this time, press the pedals with your feet. D: Feet? Is that possible? T: (still chokes from laughter) Yes, it is. D: Let's try. Hey, that's much easier! Why didn't you tell me right away? ... (some fuss is heard) Allright, I pressed it. T: Now turn the key in the ignition. D: Where is the ignition? T: In the base of the steering wheel, to the right. D: Hmmm. I have the hole, but there is no key there. T: Well, put it in. D: What? T: (loses his patience) The ignition key! D: How would I know which one is the ignition key? T: (grabs his head) It is usually the biggest key in the bunch. D: The bunch. T: Yes, where you keep the rest of the keys. D: Ahhh! Well, I lost it two days ago. So what, I need a key? T: (throws down the receiver) Bep... D: Hello??? *** Original source here: http://www.techtales.com/tftechs.php?m=200905#9322 I hope it's okay that I put the full text on-list. I have added some punctuation. So you see, even in the easy world of cars, there definitely IS something you need to know. It's the same with computers. No matter what you want to do with it, there IS something you need to learn, either BEFORE you use it, or WHILE you're using it. With some simple means, i. e. using the brain, reading,
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
Quoth Polytropon on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. And on a VW, it doesn't say E and F -- it says 0/1 and 1/1. -- .o. | Sterling (Chip) Camden | http://camdensoftware.com ..o | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | http://chipsquips.com ooo | 2048R/D6DBAF91 | http://chipstips.com pgpjhHYrRMDB7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
It's the same with computers. No matter what you want to do with it, there IS something you need to learn, either BEFORE you use it, or WHILE you're using it. With some simple means, i. e. using the brain, reading, concluding, understanding, THINKING, you're fine in this regards - because it's all what is needed to advance to the required point. I will add my $0.02 to this thread. Polytropon others here, what they have suggested to OP, is that if he wants to succeed with FreeBSD, he will need to put some work into it. As with most things in life, this is very much true. There is not much handholding like Ubuntu/Mint/name-of-some-version-of-linux here, but in all of them, you have to invest a bit in them too! I am not an expert and I have run into some problems myself, but I can't blame the OS for not being easy or idiot proof. I have sometimes gotten into trouble but the folks here on the list have been very helpful and have answered most of time. Exceptions do exist when I was trying to update through ports system as I am not ***all there when it comes to updating FreeBSD with ports/cvsup/portmaster, ..., etc***, I have more experience from the Linux variants, Slackware/Fedora/Slax-now-Porteus/ etc, but that does not detract me from having two machines running FreeBSD one with XFCE as the desktop and one with KDE. I have not messed with the updates though :(, I can trash the machine easily and that is something one can easily do. The good thing is that there is plenty of documentation i.e, FAQ, handbook, and the expertise of this list is also a great thing to have. Also, I could say that some folks want to know if there is an easy way to Math like Geometry and some brillant mathematician said ``there is no royal path to geometry``. We can conclude the same for FreeBSD or other BSD that is out there :) Hope that you and other users out there don't give up and give it a shot. It is a great OS, just that one needs to invest some time and learn to work with it :) Regards, Antonio ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Easiest desktop BSD distro
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:56:14 -0700, Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote: Quoth Polytropon on Wednesday, 30 March 2011: T: (a deep sigh while rolling his eyes) No, that's not the fuel, that's the tachometer. It is supposed to point at zero if the car is not started. The fuel indicator is usually to the left and smaller that the tachometer, and it should have E written upon it, then a semicircle, then F. And on a VW, it doesn't say E and F -- it says 0/1 and 1/1. That's okay - as long as it doesn't say 1/0 which would cause the operating system of the car to crash, and you have to send the onboard computer unit to VW Germany in order to get it replaced. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
