Distrowatch: First look at DragonflyBSD 1.4

[n0cmonkey]

Link.

It's supposed to be rough, but not inaccurate.

I haven't read it yet, but I'll post a comment or two after I do.

EDIT: Ok, I didn't realize distrowatch specialized in desktop systems...

It looks like the DragonflyBSD pkgsrc documentation is pretty similar to the stuff the pkgsrc people provide, so I'm not sure why that was difficult.

In fact, using DragonFly BSD made me feel as if I was back in the mid-nineties, with every single aspect of the desktop needed to be configured manually. In the end, I did get KDE up and running, but not before I spent quite a bit of time configuring the X Window System and USB mouse, and, in the absence of any useful documentation, searching for answers on Google.

Shouldn't that be as easy as running X --configure or whatever? Setting up X doesn't really take any time...

nfortunately, without it [Documentation], the project will never become the 4th major BSD OS, especially while we are witnessing an interesting trend of building user-friendly BSDs by the DesktopBSD and PC-BSD projects.

DesktopBSD and PC-BSD are FreeBSD, with different installers. I don't think they count as operating systems.

The documentation will come. The prettiness will come. With all of the other interesting work being done on the system, I don't think it needs to come immediately.

 

[Nothinman]

DesktopBSD and PC-BSD are FreeBSD, with different installers. I don't think they count as operating systems.

The same could be said of Linux distributions, they all install pretty much the same set of software. It's the installation, configuration and package management that set them apart.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

DesktopBSD and PC-BSD are FreeBSD, with different installers. I don't think they count as operating systems.

The same could be said of Linux distributions, they all install pretty much the same set of software. It's the installation, configuration and package management that set them apart.

But Dragonfly isn't a distribution, it's an OS seperate from FreeBSD. PC-BSD and DesktopBSD are distributions of FreeBSD.

 

[Nothinman]

But Dragonfly isn't a distribution, it's an OS seperate from FreeBSD. PC-BSD and DesktopBSD are distributions of FreeBSD.

So? If Dragonfly is to be a desktop/workstation OS it's going to have to compete with the core FreeBSD release as well as any distributions based on FreeBSD.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

But Dragonfly isn't a distribution, it's an OS seperate from FreeBSD. PC-BSD and DesktopBSD are distributions of FreeBSD.

So? If Dragonfly is to be a desktop/workstation OS it's going to have to compete with the core FreeBSD release as well as any distributions based on FreeBSD.

The part I quoted mentioned "BSD OS" specifically, not "BSD OS/distribution. " PC-BSD and DesktopBSD can't become the big fourth BSD OS, they're just FreeBSD.

Besides a couple of commercial branches, BSD's never been about competing for users. 😉

 

[Nothinman]

The part I quoted mentioned "BSD OS" specifically, not "BSD OS/distribution. " PC-BSD and DesktopBSD can't become the big fourth BSD OS, they're just FreeBSD.

In that context he meant BSD OS as "an OS based on BSD" not the commercial BSD/OS.

Besides a couple of commercial branches, BSD's never been about competing for users.

That's an understatement =)

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

The part I quoted mentioned "BSD OS" specifically, not "BSD OS/distribution. " PC-BSD and DesktopBSD can't become the big fourth BSD OS, they're just FreeBSD.

In that context he meant BSD OS as "an OS based on BSD" not the commercial BSD/OS.

I knew he didn't mean the commercial and dead BSD/OS; but while Open, Net, Free, and Dragonfly are OSes DesktopBSD and PC-BSD are distributions. Yes, there is a distinction.

Besides a couple of commercial branches, BSD's never been about competing for users.

That's an understatement =)

Just an OS by the developers for the developers. 🙂

 

[Nothinman]

I knew he didn't mean the commercial and dead BSD/OS; but while Open, Net, Free, and Dragonfly are OSes DesktopBSD and PC-BSD are distributions. Yes, there is a distinction.

But from a Linux standpoint where the distributions are the OSes, the distinction seems like pure semantics.

 

[n0cmonkey]

I come close to considering certain distributions to be OSes (Redhat, Debian, Suse) instead of just distributions. They do a lot more than the general distribution.

DragonflyBSD no longer uses the FreeBSD kernel. It's long since passed the "distribution" label.

 

[rmrf]

:Q

attack of the devil avatar!

that is all, I don't have any real input to this thread.