Submitted by Just in time for the new year, the PC-BSD team is pleased to announce the immediate availability of PC-BSD version 1.3 for public download. You may download this release and view the change log. The team is also launching a web design contest for the new web site of 2007.
PC-BSD did what Linux could not: recognize all the devices from my old P III from the start and connect automatically to the internet.
Now, if they only listened to my whining and implemented auto-mount on USB external hard drives and other devices…
FreeBSD 6.2 is implementing auto mounting features that are quite similar to most Linux distros using HAL, DBus and other technologies. Since PC-BSD is a FreeBSD distribution, you will probably get these features in the near future.
Edited 2006-12-31 17:48
I totally agree! While I’m not really xyzBSD guy ( I’m actually Linux enthousiast ) I found PCBSD much easyer to install and maintain than any of Linux distros I had ( at least 50 different distributions).
What I like most is almost brilliant PBI concept ( one click installer) on apr if not better than rpm, apt-get ,
slapt-get, pkg an so on. At least that’s tru for BSD/Unix novices.
It was eight/nine monts ago when I came across PCBSD and have installed PCBSD 1.2 on my Pentium II 450 MHz Compaq Deskpro Small Form Factor (low-end PC ). It is my most trusted extremely stable (not really fastest but most reliable) workstation. The level of customisation is on par with my PCLinuxOS 0.92b I’m running on exact same hardware thanks to the KDE 3.5.5
Control Center ( I do not touch PSD CLI tools since , again, I’m not a BSD guy ).
Since I have all but latest hardware PCBSD 1.3 is the best thing happend to me in the Year 2006 besides
great snappy Vector Linux 5.8
I’m sure PCBSD will most likely be the project gaining in popularity over next couple years since it’s , to my best knowledge, most user-friendly UNIX (I can’t talk about Nexenta, Desktop BSD is not to my taste and TrueBSD is still in experimental stage of development).
Best wishes to all OS-junkies !
A quick glance at the changelog shows that they added support for HAL to user mount disks. Your wish may have been granted.
I am using FreeBSD, which is quite similar. There is a daemon called ‘amd’ that deals with automounting. I have CD and stick automounted on all my machines. If you want you can contact me via email (trenchsol_at_yahoo.com), and I can probably help you.
DG
The kdebase port for KDE 3.5.5 includes an option to use the HAL and DBus for auto-detecting/mounting USB devices.
So, whenever the PC-BSD guys get around to updating their PBI-thingy for KDE 3.5.5, and if they enable this option, you’ll get it.
Alternatively, using KDE 3.5.5 on standard FreeBSD 6.0+ will get you this. Works great on my laptop (6.1-RELEASE).
You can download the Flash Plugin 7 and your favorite browser on the PBI directory (http://www.pbidir.com) to enjoy Flash content instantly on PC-BSD.
PC-BSD also has volunteer positions (http://www.pcbsd.org/?p=team). May 2007 be as busy as 2006 for PC-BSD
Happy New Year to you all!
I installed pcbsd 1.3 and i liked it. is there a chance i can use freebsd’s ports or netbsd’s pkgsrc in pcbsd?
Edited 2006-12-31 23:12
you can use ports but not pkgsrc, pkgsrc is a NetBSD thing.
pcbsd is essentially freebsd 6.2 with a nice package manager and some special utilities.
ports works fine on pcbsd.
Thanks, I will checkout the freebsd ports. I thought netbsd’s pkgsrc would also work on pcbsd since pkgsrc works on different Operating systems.
1.3 Updates (December 2006)
System Installer – Prompt for settings before install
System Installer – Set Timezone for system
System Installer – Upgrade / Repair option
System Installer – Graphical Overhaul (Clean up look-n-feel)
System Installer – Monitor Refresh Selection
System Installer – Detect Laptop / Desktop (For setting Numlock)
System Installer – Detect SMP Motherboard
System Installer – Soft RAID Support
System Installer – Encrypted Swap Support
System Installer – Select default shell for users
System Installer – Customize network settings during install
System Installer – Enable Encrypted Swap Space
Control Panel – Services Manager
1.4 Updates (2007)
Control Panel – PPPOE Setup Wizard
Control Panel – Firewall GUI
Control Panel – Merge PBI Manager and Updater
Control Panel – Use RCS to store changes to config files
Control Panel – New Network GUI with Wireless support
KDE Context Menu Enhancements
Trim PC-BSD non-essential files
FreeBSD 6.2?
1.5 Updates
Control Panel – Backup Utility
System Installer – Restore from Backup
2.0 and Beyond!
KDE 4.0?
FreeBSD 6.3 / 7.0?
Any news of when the GL-accelerated desktop will be packaged with PCBSD?
Probably when FreeBSD decides to update their xorg ports to the latest versions, they’re still at 6.9.
http://wikitest.freebsd.org/ModularXorg
Edited 2006-12-31 22:25
…I used it for work for several months on an old IBM all-in-one computer (I forget what model) in favor of my Mac. I ended up selling it to a friend (for peanuts) who was in desperate need of a computer and I miss it.
Someday, if Gigabyte ever releases their mini board for the via C7, I will build a system and perhaps run PC-BSD again!
It’s a real pleasure to use, the combination of easy-to-install PBIs and the fact that I have access to all the FreeBSD ports is GREAT!
The only thing I ever found to be flaky was the PC-BSD/KDE start menu which was easy to break when you install software via ports then add menu options manually.
Edited 2006-12-31 18:18
I’ve found PCBSD to run great on old hardware and be the easiest to use OS for noobs.
I don’t personally run it (except in VM), but there are a half dozen folks whose computers I’ve installed it on.
Old hardware which I thought to be relegated to firewall/router status have been resurrected and put to good use by PCBSD.
Excellent job by the developers! May their good work continue.
Ah right. I’ve currently got a sad old PIII that’s I’m using as a footstool, so I might give PC-BSD a try myself.
Edited 2006-12-31 19:15
Boy, those PC-BSD guys really have their act together. Thanks guys. I’ll have one PC-BSD 1.3 on the rocks.
No Sodapop jokes, please.
Errr…
take into account we were forced to use HAL and look at the system without taking into account HAL’s bugs (four or five but significant in my opinion)and you will have a very good feeling from 1.3…
Give it some more time before a lot of people really use PC-BSD. It’s 10x better than Ubuntu or openSUSE. It’s damn fast, and the pbi system to install software is a breeze. I love it, I hope PC-BSD gets more promotion among the opensource community.
Would you care to elaborate on the “10X better than Ubuntu” statement?
My experience with any BSD as a desktop is that it is several years behind Linux because of the commercial support that Linux enjoys.
For example, does PC-BSD provide an accelerated 3D desktop like Ubuntu does? Is the packaging system as easy and robust as Apt?
I’m with you. PC-BSD looks promising, but one of the most refreshing aspects of GNU/Linux distro usage compared to MS Windows or Apple is the powerful package management. I will never again use a system which does not have a fully integrated package system, but forces me to scout around on the web to find the latest versions of apps. Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade”, or a database search like “apt-cache search XYZ”? If not, I’ll pass, for now.
yes it can
Goodie! I could not find any info on that on their web. Guess I should check it out myself then.
“Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade”, or a database search like “apt-cache search XYZ”? If not, I’ll pass, for now.”
As mentioned before, the PBI system is for application programs, not for the system itself. As mentioned before as well, you can use the FreeBSD ports collection along with the PBI system.
To upgrade the system, you would do something like this:
# cd /usr/src
# make update
# make buildworld buildkernel
# make installkernel
…
(You can add KERNCONF=MYKERNELNAME to buildkernel / installkernel for a user defined kernel configuration. More information can be taken from the excellent FreeBSD handbook.)
And for the apps, as long as you want to take them from the ports collection, something like this:
# cd /usr/ports
# make update
# pkgdb -aF
# portupgrade -arpRO
This will update all your installed applications.
As it was also mentioned before, it’s not a good idea to mix things in PC-BSD. You know, you actually can do it, but the use of the PBI system is recommendet. PBI works fine for average users such as Steven Q. Sixpack and Jane Average. For those of us who like to tweak and patch, the ports collection surely is more fun.
And remember: You can still use the older pkg_* commands, such as:
# pkg_add -r xmms
# pkgdb -aF
With PC-BSD, you have 4 (!) choices about how to install software: PBI, portinstall/portupgrade, (classical) make, pkg_add. But if you concentrate on the PBI system, you’ll always be fine.
Back on (main) topic: I’ve downloaded and tested PC-BSD 1.3. First of all, I don’t like KDE very much. Then, the german i18n is not very good (as it always was). Hardware detection works well, mount operations also do. The PC-BSD developers have done a good job. I will surely cdrecord some CD packs and make presents out of them for the many poor people with “Windows” problems I know.
“With PC-BSD, you have 4 (!) choices about how to install software: PBI, portinstall/portupgrade, (classical) make, pkg_add. But if you concentrate on the PBI system, you’ll always be fine. ”
If PC-BSD tries to be a sort of “for-dummies” system, having 4 choices as such is a bug, not a feature.
Though perhaps it can be ignored if just using PBI indeed works. But never never tell a non-BSD user that in order to update the system, you need to run three make commands, and then to upgrade the rest, you need a few more commands. Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command.
Edited 2007-01-01 08:42
Though perhaps it can be ignored if just using PBI indeed works. But never never tell a non-BSD user that in order to update the system, you need to run three make commands, and then to upgrade the rest, you need a few more commands. Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command.
LOL – I had a debate with a FreeBSD user friend of mine about this – I kept on asking him why that method was superior to the Linux single command – after a long, long debate he resorted to the sentence “It just is” :-p
The same guy also told me when I was moaning that there should be a simple “security centre” in Ubuntu where you control firewall/antivirus/antispam etc that people who use OSS software don’t need security products as the code is so superior and that security software is an MS-only plague. Sad to say – he had been using FreeBSD for years!
Edited 2007-01-01 14:26
But never never tell a non-BSD user that in order to update the system, you need to run three make commands, and then to upgrade the rest, you need a few more commands. Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command.
Where did you read that? People are trolling. It’s just not true. To install, say, seamonkey on PC-BSD, you have 3 possibilities:
1. Install the application like on Windows (.pbi file)
2. Install the seamonkey package with: pkg_add -r seamonkey
3. Compile seamonkey from ports: cd /usr/ports/www/seamonkey && make install clean
AFAICT, on Linux you are pretty much limited to apt-get or yum.
one thing that always put me off BSD was the people who use *BSD – they see anyone who uses Linux as an enemy who is just as bad as a Vista user. I think a more accurate statement would be that “BSD fanboi’s are 10x worse than Linux ones”
Ok, one more troll. Please show me on a BSD forum a comment that bashes a Linux user. Most BSD users are also Linux users, so your argument doesn’t make sense. One of the reason some people leave the Linux community for BSD is precisely because the Linux gurus are pedant and treat n00bs as stupid. You don’t see that among the BSD community.
The same guy also told me when I was moaning that there should be a simple “security centre” in Ubuntu where you control firewall/antivirus/antispam etc that people who use OSS software don’t need security products as the code is so superior and that security software is an MS-only plague. Sad to say – he had been using FreeBSD for years!
Was he wrong? I doubt he ever dealt with viruses on his FreeBSD box. I think he was only talking about anti-virus which don’t make sense on FreeBSD unless if you use it as a mail server. Obviously firewall and antispam are different, any system is affected.
First of all, you’re completely right. But I’d like to make a few additions:
“To install, say, seamonkey on PC-BSD, you have 3 possibilities:
1. Install the application like on Windows (.pbi file)
2. Install the seamonkey package with: pkg_add -r seamonkey
3. Compile seamonkey from ports: cd /usr/ports/www/seamonkey && make install clean”
Oh, you have one more, so 4 (!) possibilities, namely portinstall / portupgrade. To be technically exactly, portinstall can do what no. 2 and 3 do, but it also cares about the package database integrity. Looking at no. 2 and 3, you should run
# pkgdb -aF
before and after, just for security.
portinstall can a) compile from source or b) use a precompiled package. It can also create a precompiled package from waht you just compiled from source. (I use this way to compile a bunch of applications once and then having precompiled packages to add on another system.)
This will install seamonkey from source:
# portinstall seamonkey
(You can add -p to have the precompiled package stored in /usr/ports/packages/.)
This will install seamonkey from a precompiled package, which is fetched automatically:
# portinstall -P seamonkey
(You can use -PP instead of -P to use such packages only, especially for dependencies.)
For more information and examples, please refer to “man portinstall”.
And to upgrade to a newer version of seamonkey, you would do this:
# portupgrade seamonkey
(Use additional options as desired.)
But as I said before, the use of the PBI system is recommended. Novice users should always use it until they really know what they do.
So what’s the problem here? Surely, no problem.
As a comment: My neighbour uses PC-BSD for half a year now and he’s happy with it. He has no problems using the PBI system, it works fine for him. He doesn’t even feel the need to install applications with pkg_add, portinstall or make. If I may say it this way, he’s a computer illiterate; the PC-BSD workstation is his first own system – and he loves it. I’ll give him the 1.3 installation discs soon after doing a data backup via LAN.
“AFAICT, on Linux you are pretty much limited to apt-get or yum.”
What about YaST? Or am I mixing up things here? (I have to excuse, I don’t use Linux on a daily basis.)
Most BSD users are also Linux users, so your argument doesn’t make sense. One of the reason some people leave the Linux community for BSD is precisely because the Linux gurus are pedant and treat n00bs as stupid. You don’t see that among the BSD community.”
Can confirm.
“I doubt he ever dealt with viruses on his FreeBSD box. “
Same here.
“I think he was only talking about anti-virus which don’t make sense on FreeBSD unless if you use it as a mail server.”
That’s correct. If you’re running a mail server, you have to be careful about proper administration. If you’re running just a simple workstation, you usually won’t encounter any problems with PC-BSD. The firewall settings (ipfw) are good by default. Spam is a problem in your INBOX where you can apply the proper rules in your favourite mail client. And viruses… I don’t need to say anything.
The firewall settings (ipfw) are good by default.
Correction: PC-BSD got PF (OpenBSD Packet Filter) as default, autogenerated, firewall. We have firewall gui in our roadmap for 1.4 release, so any ideas and feature requests are welcome.
“Correction: PC-BSD got PF (OpenBSD Packet Filter) as default, autogenerated, firewall.”
Ah sorry, my mistake. PC-BSD 1.2 was using ipfw by default. OpenBSD’s pf is avaiable for FreeBSD since version… 5… in… 2001? So it’s great it got integrated in PC-BSD 1.3. Great work!
Yeah there are some really stupid comments and misconceptions about BSD in this thread…
Too bad. I don’t understand why so many Linux users dislike BSD. It’s such a nicely designed system. We should all accept each other and accept each other’s choice, be it Linux, BSD or Windows, and stop lying.
The portupgrade suite of tools is not part of the base OS. Anyone who chooses to use them has taken it upon themselves to use that method. Hence, there are only three official methods to install applications in PC-BSD (2 in standard FreeBSD).
Note also that the “package database” you discuss is a portupgrade-only feature, and is not part of the base OS. The FreeBSD ports tree uses /var/db/pkg/* to store installed app info. *ONLY* portupgrade uses /var/db/pkg/pkgdb and /usr/ports/INDEX.db.
The canonical ways to install applications in FreeBSD are:
– via the ports tree
– via packages (pkg_add)
Any other methods that a user chooses to use is at their discretion and their (possible) peril.
“The portupgrade suite of tools is not part of the base OS. “
That’s right. The port / package “portupgrade” has to be installed, it offers tools such as pkg_deinstall, pkg_fetch, pkg_glob, ports_glob, pkg_sort, pkg_which, portversion, portinstall or pkgdb. In order to combine it with “make update” (also used for ports operations) “cvsup” has to be installed. So one could say, the updating mechanism via cvsup is not part of the base OS as well.
“Note also that the “package database” you discuss is a portupgrade-only feature, and is not part of the base OS. The FreeBSD ports tree uses /var/db/pkg/* to store installed app info. *ONLY* portupgrade uses /var/db/pkg/pkgdb and /usr/ports/INDEX.db.”
That’s correct as well. The INDEX.db mechanism is utilized when doing something like make seach name=”foo”. To build the INDEX.db, it has to be fetched (make fetchindex) or built (make index), if I remember correctly.
So it’s worth to say that incorrect use of both packaging system may cause the system to have multiple instances of one port / package installed. To avoid this, one should be careful and use “pkgdb -aF”. The proper use of pkg_delete and make deinstall is implied hereby; but as I remember, the installing mechanisms have respective warnings to prevent such multiple installations (such as “package is already installed”).
“The canonical ways to install applications in FreeBSD are:
– via the ports tree
– via packages (pkg_add)”
If portinstall is used without the -p switch, it works the first way; if -P or -PP is specified, it goes the second one. So it’s not a “real” third method to install applications. As you noted well, its speciality is the pkgdb.
“Any other methods that a user chooses to use is at their discretion and their (possible) peril.”
Just as I said.
So one could say, the updating mechanism via cvsup is not part of the base OS as well.
Except that portsnap is now part of the base OS (since 6.0) so one does not need csup/cvsup installed to update the ports tree.
That’s correct as well. The INDEX.db mechanism is utilized when doing something like make seach name=”foo”. To build the INDEX.db, it has to be fetched (make fetchindex) or built (make index), if I remember correctly.
That is incorrect. /usr/ports/INDEX[-567] is used when running “make quicksearch name=blah” or “make search name=blah”.
The *only* tools that use /usr/ports/INDEX.db and /var/db/pkg/pkgdb are the portupgrade tools. *NOTHING* in the base OS uses those tools.
In fact, you don’t need any of the extras dbs:
– install csup to update the source tree
– use portsnap to update the ports tree
– install portmaster to make port upgrades easier
No ruby, no m3, no db4 required. Just the ports tree and the tools provided with the ports tree. No need for running “pkgdb -F” all the time to keep /var/db/pkg/pkgdb in sync with /var/db/pkg/*. No need to run “portsdb -u” all the time to keep /usr/ports/INDEX.db in sync with /usr/ports/INDEX[-567].
Once you remove portupgrade from the system, things get a lot simpler to manage.
IMO, of course.
“Except that portsnap is now part of the base OS (since 6.0) so one does not need csup/cvsup installed to update the ports tree.”
This makes things much easier.
“That is incorrect. /usr/ports/INDEX[-567] is used when running “make quicksearch name=blah” or “make search name=blah”.
The *only* tools that use /usr/ports/INDEX.db and /var/db/pkg/pkgdb are the portupgrade tools. *NOTHING* in the base OS uses those tools.”
Yes, I see. Sorry, my mistake.
“In fact, you don’t need any of the extras dbs:
– install csup to update the source tree
– use portsnap to update the ports tree
– install portmaster to make port upgrades easier
No ruby, no m3, no db4 required. Just the ports tree and the tools provided with the ports tree. No need for running “pkgdb -F” all the time to keep /var/db/pkg/pkgdb in sync with /var/db/pkg/*. No need to run “portsdb -u” all the time to keep /usr/ports/INDEX.db in sync with /usr/ports/INDEX[-567].
Once you remove portupgrade from the system, things get a lot simpler to manage.
IMO, of course.”
I’ll surely give it a try when FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE is ready for download and the “new” spare parts for the machine going to run it have arrived. Thank you for your information!
As I am happy to see, things get more easy with the development of FreeBSD. This can only have advantages for PC-BSD which could develop to an alternative to Linux distributions aimed at beginners – if it’s not already the case.
“Where did you read that? People are trolling. It’s just not true. To install, say, seamonkey on PC-BSD, you > have 3 possibilities:
1. Install the application like on Windows (.pbi file)
2. Install the seamonkey package with: pkg_add -r seamonkey
3. Compile seamonkey from ports: cd /usr/ports/www/seamonkey && make install clean ”
You’re installing new software. I was talking about updating the whole system.
The other things you said were not against my comments, and I don’t disagree with them.
“If PC-BSD tries to be a sort of “for-dummies” system, having 4 choices as such is a bug, not a feature. “
You should have read my posting eintirely without picking a sentence out of the context. The PBI system is the one for “dummies” and it is strongly recommended to use. So the “dummy” does not even know about the choice he could have.
The better educated ones may use other ways than PBI (as I have explained), but they should not do it because of possible side effects. If you know what you’re doing and if you are familiar enough with FreeBSD itself, you surely won’t use PC-BSD. You would use a “normal” FreeBSD instead.
It’s just because PC-BSD is FreeBSD you have these choices. Okay?
“Though perhaps it can be ignored if just using PBI indeed works.
It works, and it works well. In order to upgrade the system itself, the use of the installation CDs (e. g. from 1.2 to 1.3) is a good way.
“But never never tell a non-BSD user that in order to update the system, you need to run three make commands, and then to upgrade the rest, you need a few more commands. “
“The rest”? Please be sure to see the difference between the base system and the installed applications.
“Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command. “
Which command is it? Is it available in all existing Linux distributions in the same way? Could you please tell me the command?
‘smart upgrade’
Available for most any distro – although, afaik, not default on any at this time…
Hopefully, one day, will replace RPM in the LSB.
“The rest”? Please be sure to see the difference between the base system and the installed applications.
I know the difference. It’s irrelevant.
“”Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command. ”
Which command is it? Is it available in all existing Linux distributions in the same way? Could you please tell me the command?”
In my distro, it’s pacman -Suy. Why would it matter whether all distributions do it the same way? Some BSD systems have different schemes for doing this as well.
“But never never tell a non-BSD user that in order to update the system, you need to run three make commands, and then to upgrade the rest, you need a few more commands. Linux people are used to doing all that in a single command. ”
Funny how I only have to use one command, “pkg_add -u”, to upgrade all packages on OpenBSD. As fun as it is to make blanket statements it does not reflect the real world.
It’s like if I would say “Linux package management lacks dependency tracking” and basing that “fact” entirely upon my usage of Slackware and extrapolating that to all Linux distros.
“Funny how I only have to use one command, “pkg_add -u”, to upgrade all packages on OpenBSD. As fun as it is to make blanket statements it does not reflect the real world. ”
Funny how people continuously evade the issue.
I was referring to updating the whole system.
“Funny how people continuously evade the issue.
I was referring to updating the whole system.”
Funny how that still isn’t done the same way on the different *BSD’s.
“Funny how that still isn’t done the same way on the different *BSD’s.”
So we agree? Good.
I don’t think anyone can really say that linux or bsd could ever be easy to use “for dummies”. But i think one of the reasons why linux is so popular as a server is because it is the easiest of the desktop unix as well as free. freebsd is of course also free but people want to use the server that they are familiar with from everyday use. Maybe this will change things for bsd server adoption.
With PC-BSD, you have 4 (!) choices about how to install software: PBI, portinstall/portupgrade, (classical) make, pkg_add. But if you concentrate on the PBI system, you’ll always be fine.
There are only two methods to install applications in FreeBSD:
– via the ports tree
– via binary packages (pkg_add)
There are a bunch of tools in the ports tree that try to make installing things via the ports tree easier (portmanager, portmaster, portupgrade, etc). However, these all work via the two methods listed above.
With PC-BSD, you get a third option, using their .pbi packages.
Do not confuse portupgrade with a “new” way of installing apps. It’s just a wrapper app that uses the ports tree for you. If you try to do so, then you will start to believe that there’s more than 2 ways to install apps in Debian (via apt/dpkg, compile from source) — you can’t count dpkg, apt-get, aptitude, synaptic, adept, kpackage, etc as different methods of installing apps — they are just multiple facets of the same thing: installing a .deb.
“Do not confuse portupgrade with a “new” way of installing apps. It’s just a wrapper app that uses the ports tree for you.”
You’re completely right. I stated this in another posting just to avoid this misunderstanding. In a posting much prior to this one, I also stated that tools like portinstall work on the basis of precompiled packages or the FreeBSD ports collection.
The PBI system does not rely on the two mechanisms listed above, so it’s really a third method. In this concern, talking about 4 methods (plus portupgrade) sounds confusing, I agree. It’s just because portinstall has developed to a widely used and comfortable mechanism to handle both ports and packages. It affords a bit of knowledge, but in some cases it’s faster (or at least needs less user interaction) to install software. Just as the classical methods of pkg_add and make install it can run autonomous or even via a cron job. The use of the pkgdb prevents the user from having installed some applications or libraries twice (or more often). So I thought it was worth mentioning it.
But to get back on topic, the PBI system should be the preferred method in PC-BSD to install software, just as the developers of PC-BSD noted.
My experience with any BSD as a desktop is that it is several years behind Linux because of the commercial support that Linux enjoys.
PC-BSD offers commercial support like Red Hat or Novel.
Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade”, or a database search like “apt-cache search XYZ”? If not, I’ll pass, for now.
PC-BSD has 3 ways to install software, the equivalent to apt-get is pkg_add, it manages dependencies the same way. The PBI has an update feature. And ports manages dependencies as well.
Interesting as it may seem, that statement does not have any descriptive, useful or concrete information in it at all.
From what I understand, they mean that you can install software like on Windows.
And I prefer typing “apt-get install XYZ” over finding, downloading and default-clicking XYZ manually any day.
You can do that with pkg_add if you really find it easier.
It seems though that there is more under the surface, but it is not well documented on their homepage.
I read on their site that PC-BSD is based on FreeBSD, so you should know that it has all equivalents to apt-get.
that seems like a clunky and disk-wasting solution to me
There’s little difference. I prefer using a little bit more space, (maybe several tens of megs?) and have better functionality. I could say I don’t like using a desktop environment because it uses RAM. We are in 2007, resources aren’t as expensive as in the 80’s.
Original quote: “My experience with any BSD as a desktop is that it is several years behind Linux because of the commercial support that Linux enjoys.”
Original reply: “PC-BSD offers commercial support like Red Hat or Novel.”
I think the reply missed the point of the original statement.
Though PC-BSD may have commercial support the BSDs in general lag behind Linux in several critical areas–one being hardware drivers–due to the fact that more companies have supported Linux with drivers and such more so than the BSDs. This is the “commercial support” that was being referred to.
This has held the BSDs back for some time now.
And unless the BSDs can generate a killer app or killer system tool, or can somehow strike deals with major companies for drivers and firmware, I do not see how the BSDs will ever be more than an “also ran” or marginally-used system that always lags behind Linux.
Linux has more mind and market share than the BSDs do and I do not see anything changing in 2007 or beyond.
Happy New Year to all…
Edited 2007-01-01 05:23
Would you care to elaborate on the “10X better than Ubuntu” statement?
I quite like PC-BSD when I tried it, but I am an Ubuntu/openSUSE user (desktop/laptops respectively) – one thing that always put me off BSD was the people who use *BSD – they see anyone who uses Linux as an enemy who is just as bad as a Vista user. I think a more accurate statement would be that “BSD fanboi’s are 10x worse than Linux ones”
BSD users treat GNU/Linux users the same way that GNU/Linux folks treat Windows users. If, as a Linux user you are turned off by the treatment, maybe you should think about it…
they see anyone who uses Linux as an enemy who is just as bad as a Vista user
There is nothing inherently wrong with those who choose to use MS products (they are not somehow “bad”), but this sort of contemptuous comment turns a lot of folks off. I can’t imagine that one’s choice of an OS speaks much to their character.
three screensnapshots from my latest PCBSD 1.3 installed on Duron 850 with 512 Mb ECC SDRAM.
http://nedvis.bravehost.com/ss/pcbsd13.html
Would you mind to read this : http://www.pcbsd.org/?p=learnpbi
I know, I know you, you’re having fun in New Years Eve right now.Tomorrow will be OK.
PBIdir is a PCBDS repository of installation files specially crafted for PCBSD.
“Programs under PC-BSD are completely self-extracting and self-installing, in a graphical format. These PBI’s also ship with all the files and libraries necessary for the installed program to function, eliminating much of the hardship of dealing with broken dependencies and file incompatibilities. PBI files also provide developers and packagers with advanced scripting and user interaction in an entirely graphical format, making the entire install procedure similar to what a user would expect from other popular graphical operating systems.”
“Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade”, or a database search like “apt-cache search XYZ”? If not, I’ll pass, for now.”
If that’s the only criteria for operating system/platform selection you’ll miss something very good.
And I don’t think system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade” or whatever distro/platform specific direct upgrade tool/path you’re using on production system is A GOOD PRACTICE !
In about ten years I did many many platform upgrades and every single and each time those were failures.
Would you mind to read this : http://www.pcbsd.org/?p=learnpbi
It surely does not say much about such “large-scale” system admin features that apt, portage, pacman and friends provide.
I know, I know you, you’re having fun in New Years Eve right now.Tomorrow will be OK.
Thanx. Well, actually, I am already back home and have a hang over
PBIdir is a PCBDS repository of installation files specially crafted for PCBSD.
“Programs under PC-BSD are completely self-extracting and self-installing, in a graphical format. These PBI’s also ship with all the files and libraries necessary for the installed program to function, eliminating much of the hardship of dealing with broken dependencies and file incompatibilities.
I think we can take the “self-stuff” for granted nowadays on Linux/BSD systems. About libraries, is this the same as saying that many programs come in statically compiled packages that might have their own private versions of libraries? Although I can see the point in doing that for binary-only programs like Opera, in general that seems like a clunky and disk-wasting solution to me, if I understand it correctly.
PBI files also provide developers and packagers with advanced scripting and user interaction in an entirely graphical format, making the entire install procedure similar to what a user would expect from other popular graphical operating systems.”
Interesting as it may seem, that statement does not have any descriptive, useful or concrete information in it at all.
“Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade”, or a database search like “apt-cache search XYZ”? If not, I’ll pass, for now.”
If that’s the only criteria for operating system/platform selection you’ll miss something very good.
I never said that, but to me comprehensive “automated” package management is certainly one of the “killer apps” in the *nix-scene, and among the most important aspects when I choose among Linux distros. I do not invest time in an OS/distro which can not help me manage/search/update thousands of packages over time if I need to. It is certainly possible on many systems, so why settle for less? And I prefer typing “apt-get install XYZ” over finding, downloading and default-clicking XYZ manually any day. Married with a little cron, grep, or perhaps perl you can for instance make your own update-notifier if you feel like it. I dunno, while package management really is inherently boring anyway, I appreciate efforts that make big tasks smoother so I can focus on other things.
And I don’t think system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade” or whatever distro/platform specific direct upgrade tool/path you’re using on production system is A GOOD PRACTICE !
In about ten years I did many many platform upgrades and every single and each time those were failures.
Well, I actually agree with you here though my experience is different. Unless you know what you are doing and what to expect, you should stay away from it. Mostly, I actually just use “apt-get upgrade” every now and then to get the list of packages that will be upgraded, check if there are any interesting upgrades, cancel the system-wide upgrade and pursuit only the ones I want to do.
If PCBSD is hiding away or ignoring powerful package features to make “a-little-bit-better-than-Windows-pointy-clicky” package system, it may be a very interesting alternative for newbies or inexperienced admins etc, but not for me. It seems though that there is more under the surface, but it is not well documented on their homepage.
“Can the pbi-infrastructure do a system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade”, or a database search like “apt-cache search XYZ”? If not, I’ll pass, for now.”
If that’s the only criteria for operating system/platform selection you’ll miss something very good.
And I don’t think system-wide upgrade like “apt-get upgrade” or whatever distro/platform specific direct upgrade tool/path you’re using on production system is A GOOD PRACTICE !
In about ten years I did many many platform upgrades and every single and each time those were failures.
I can't tell about other distros/package management systems but on Debian and Debian derived distros, it's just a matter of using apt-pinning (I like to upgrade kernels manually if and when needed among some other big and/or important packages so I pin those down) and apt-listbugs to avoid potential critical problems when upgrading.
Debian Sid (unstable) tends to break sometimes because they release updates often but you can use Etch with some packages from Sid using the method above without any problems at all. I have yet to break a working system that way.
“If PCBSD is hiding away or ignoring powerful package features to make “a-little-bit-better-than-Windows-pointy-clicky” package system, it may be a very interesting alternative for newbies or inexperienced admins etc, but not for me..”
Good point but I think PCBSD people are about to please all those nongeeks and/or *nix noobs with their “one-click-install” procedure/technology which in efect may bring easy deployment of the system in small busines and enterprises.
PBI technology only might be the reason iXsystems bought PC-BSD ( http://tinyurl.com/ucwga )
” Although I can see the point in doing that for binary-only programs like Opera, in general that seems like a clunky and disk-wasting solution to me, if I understand it correctly.”
You get it right but , seriously, who cares about couple hundreds of megabytes today when hard-disk storage is so cheap and affordable.
BTW have you ever checked hom many megabytes storage are wasted by unneeded language support packages from Thai to Gaelic (for both Gnome and KDE) in default Ubuntu install?
Keeping application executables and all dependecies and libraries separated from OS files is probably not best thing you can do to make your system reliable and
long lasting solution but PCBSD has found their way around it. I might be wrong I don’t know?
Anyway, I hope you had great fun last night?
And I’m going to have couple large Rhine Wine glasses.
Cheers!
Now I’m
Linux nedvis.fedora 2.6.18-1.2868.fc6 #1 SMP Fri Dec 15 17:31:29 EST 2006 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
In the morning I’ll post my new uname -a from PCBSD 1.3
Yeah!! PC-BSD My first download of the year!!
Another release without 3945abg support – how f*cking depressing
Why don't you just replace the damn card at this point?
Just kidding…
PC-BSD is a fantastic product and I’m very pleased to see regular, on-going development. Thank you PC-BSD team and happy new year to you all!
Folks,
Many people in several sites/forums complain about the support for 3945bg intel wireless chip. There is a driver called wpi and its working on openbsd so it’s not that hard to port it to freebsd.
Unless the users that need this driver take a step front and start asking for it in the official mailing lists this driver won’t show up in a near future. There must be a strong user base with this chip to develop/port something like a wireless driver.
Make yourself available to help in any way, even if it’s just testing, and ask politely if anyone is interested in making some efforts in order to get this chip working.
Happy new year!!
According to this readme:
http://ipw3945.sourceforge.net/README.ipw3945
Copyright (C) 2005 – 2006, Intel Corporation
README.ipw3945
Version: 1.1.3
Date : December 08, 2006
//cut
…………….
//end cut
With the exception of the file ipw3945_daemon.h, all of the files
in this archive are licensed under the terms of version 2 of the GNU
General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation.
The file ipw3945_daemon.h is provided under a dual BSD/GPLv2 license.
When using or redistributing this file, you may do so under either
license.
I hope this latest Intel official driver source can help driver developers a bit.
the first real desktop bsd (expect Desktop-BSD).
has some nice screenshots of this release at http://shots.linuxquestions.org/?linux_distribution_sm=PC-BSD%2…
If PBIs contain all a program’s dependencies, then won’t it waste memory? After all, the run-time advatange to shared libraries is quicker startup and reduced memory consumption.
“If PBIs contain all a program’s dependencies, then won’t it waste memory? After all, the run-time advatange to shared libraries is quicker startup and reduced memory consumption.”
Correct is: Because PBI packages contail all dependencies, they consume more hard disk space than the respective precompiled package without the dependencies would. Files stored on the hard disk do not consume any memory (RAM).
Correct is: If you install a PBI package, it will install all the needed dependencies (i. e. the libraries) unter a certain path that belongs to this special package. This consumes more hard disk space than simply using system wide available application libraries in /usr/local/lib/ and /usr/X11R6/lib/.
And, as far as I can tell, correct is: If the installed application is run, it loads its libraries as shared libraries. Any other program can access them, as long they are loaded and they are of the needed version. Every library is only loaded once.
So, of course PC-BSD uses shared libraries, especially for the system libraries (libc, libm etc.).
I hope I’m not telling you anything wrong, but that’s the way I understood it. Maybe, a more advanced PC-BSD user can tell for sure.
To tell you the truth, I don’t know how the FreeBSD kernel handles duplication of libraries, if it detects they’re similar and loads them on the same page, but on a daily usage, you don’t feel it’s using RAM. My RAM usage has not been bigger than on Ubuntu. Try it yourself.
Thanks for replies. I guess I’ll have to try it myself. I think what would answer the truly-shared or not issue is to run ldd on an application installed from a PBI and determine where its dependecies are. If for example, both program A and program B dependended on libperl.so, but ldd shows that both programs find libperl.so at different locations, then I would think that libperl.so is not actually shared between the two.
Why you have to upgrade with one command? You can break your system and make it unusable. With FreeBSD you can upgrade your applications with one command:
# portupgrade -Na
N stands for “upgrade only applications that got newer equivalent in ports, other stays untouched”.
a mean, you tell portupgrade to look at all installed applications.
Base system stays untouched, that mean if your upgrade process goes awry, you can use your system for other tasks and fix it later (you can reboot your server box from 1000 miles away without worrying about if it’s dead… again- sry Linux guys, I know what you feel then…).
Upgrading base system is another story and I don’t remember any (I mean I got zero problem in five years) broken systems after whole userland+kernel upgrade with FreeBSD.
“Why you have to upgrade with one command? You can break your system and make it unusable.”
As vegai said, that’s irrelevant.
“Base system stays untouched, that mean if your upgrade process goes awry, you can use your system for other tasks and fix it later (you can reboot your server box from 1000 miles away without worrying about if it’s dead… again- sry Linux guys, I know what you feel then…).”
I think it’s a good idea that there’s no “simple command” which can damage your system due to a defective file…
“Upgrading base system is another story and I don’t remember any (I mean I got zero problem in five years) broken systems after whole userland+kernel upgrade with FreeBSD.”
Upgrading the base system is a more complicated process. Let me explain:
First, a functioning base system (let’s say, 6.1) is assumed. In addition, cvsup should be installed to do the update of the source files.
# cd /usr/src
# make update
Now the source files are of the new version (let’s say, 6.2), depending on what branch (-RELEASE, -CURRENT, -STABLE) you want to upgrade to.
The system compiles the new kernel and the world (the system).
# make buildworld buildkernel
If you want another than the default kernel, you can set the KERNCONF variable in order to tell make
# make buildworld buildkernel KERNCONF=MYKERNEL
After that, the kernel has to be installed. The previous kernel is saved so it can be loaded instead of the new kernel if this one is defectiv in any way.
# make installkernel KERNCONF=MYKERNEL
Now, the system has to be rebootet so it uses the new kernel. Then the system is set in single user mode for maintenance operations. Partitions are checked, and if everything is okay the new world (the system) is installed. NB the use of “mergemaster”: It handles changes in files (such as configuration files or system scripts).
> boot -s
…
# fsck -p
# mount -u /
# mount -a -t ufs
# swapon -a
# cd /usr/src
# mergemaster -p
# make installworld
# mergemaster
# reboot
After the reboot, the new kernel and new world are ready for use. The base system is upgraded. No installed application is changed.
Yes, I know, you can read it much better in the FreeBSD handbook.
I won’t reply to vegai’s postings directly in detail because I think everything regarding the discussed problematic has been said. Furthermore, vegai seems to think the differences between the base OS (the system itself) and the applications installed upon it is irrelevant. But as you can see, updating the operating system itself is far different from updating application packages. Therefore you have this division between the OS and the applications.
Maybe, the “upgrade with one command” works fine in Linux, at least in one distribution, but it’s not general for all and surely not designed for Joe Q. Sixpack. Tell me if that’s wrong.
I’ve tried many Linux distro’s and just really had a hard time with them all. The base installs are okay, but anytime you want to add software, I had trouble. Either they were source downloads only, and i didn’t have the build tools installed or there was some dependancy or missing library problem.
I tried PC-BSD and was immediately sold. I really like it. It works great, and there is a certain polish that it just seems to work the way it is supposed to. CD’s and DVD’s automount, movie DVD’s played nicely. Installing new software using the PBI was the easiest. It is different than MacOS X, but the security and ease reminded me of it.
Here’s to future success in 2007 !! Cheers, and good job!
It sounds great, I can’t wait to try it. Your post really puts what I was thinking anyway into words in a great way. I have OpenSuSE 10, it is great, but I would love to download a app. & install with one click.
Edited 2007-01-04 19:26
“[…] I would love to download a app. & install with one click. “
One of the best things worth mentioning is that the PC-BSD developers offer one central access point to the PBI application packages where you can browse and download from the available PBI packages. No need to search half of the web for the applications, selecting the desired OS and so on. It’s really great for beginners who are not familiar with this (old fashioned) method of first searching and then installing software (as you might know it from “Windows”), instead, you only need your favourite browser, download the package you want and install it – simple and up to date.