News: 1653045911

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

FreeBSD 13.1 is out for everything from PowerPC to x86-64

(2022/05/20)


The latest version of FreeBSD, 13.1, was released this week for both 32 and 64-bit forms of x86, Arm, POWER – and 64-bit RISC-V.

FreeBSD is one of the oldest open-source Unixes that's still actively maintained and is directly descended from the original BSD Unix developed at the University of California at Berkeley in the 1970s: the Berkeley System Distribution.

[1]Version 13.1 includes OpenZFS 2.1.4, OpenSSH 8.8p1, OpenSSL 1.1.1, support for newer Intel Wi-Fi chipsets, and defaults to UEFI in Amazon EC2.

[2]

FreeBSD 13.1 with Xfce, but you can have KDE or GNOME or almost whatever you like

This version supports multiple processor architectures. It supports both x86-32 and x86-64 so can run on older PCs that are rapidly losing support from most Linux distros. It supports various flavors of ARM, both 32-bit and 64-bit, plus special versions for various ARM SBCs including several different models of Raspberry Pi. It also supports multiple POWER and PowerPC platforms, including 32-bit PowerPC and 64-bit POWER in both little-endian and big-endian iterations. Finally, there are pre-built virtual hard disk images for various hypervisors, on both types of x86 and 64-bit ARM and RISC-V.

There are three relatively mainstream descendants of BSD: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD (plus some even more niche, experimental versions, such as DragonflyBSD). Surveys suggest that about 75 percent of BSD users run FreeBSD. NetBSD focuses on being portable and supporting as many types of computer as it feasibly can. OpenBSD focuses on security and correctness.

[3]

FreeBSD just tries to be a capable, modern OS. It targets only reasonably modern hardware, and of all the BSDs, FreeBSD has the best support for modern PCs and the biggest selection of apps and drivers. There are native FreeBSD versions of many well-known FOSS tools, as well as some proprietary components such as Nvidia graphics drivers. If what you need isn't FOSS or can't be ported for some reason, FreeBSD can emulate Linux and run Linux binaries directly.

[4]

[5]

So it's a mature, stable, modern OS. Do you consider yourself a dab hand with various hues of Unix? Are you less than enthusiastic about the way modern Linux is evolving, with systemd and Wayland and Flatpak and containers everywhere? Then this could be the OS for you.

But saying that, get ready for a surprise. Installing FreeBSD is a little bit like installing Linux was in the 1990s. The installation process is text-based, and when it's done, you should have a computer that can boot from its own hard disk, connect to the internet (preferably over a wired Ethernet connection), and give you a command prompt. And that's it. After that, you're on your own.

[6]

This is why The Reg FOSS desk was so [7]pleasantly surprised by OpenBSD 7.1 recently . The default installation left us with a GUI, which is pretty high-tech in BSD terms.

Even the newest FreeBSD is still a bit more basic than that. You had better be happy at a shell prompt and using vi to create a few config files because even after the installation program has finished, most things are done from the command line. We Googled how to install Xfce, one of our favorite FOSS desktops and one that doesn't require fancy 3D acceleration or anything. We found a [8]how to and got Xfce up and running in just a few steps and a mere half an hour or so.

[9]The new generation of CentOS replacements – plus the daddy of them all: RHEL 8.6

[10]GNU Compiler Collection adds support for China's LoongArch CPU family

[11]The sad state of Linux desktop diversity: 21 environments, just 2 designs

[12]Workstation, server, IoT? No worries. Fedora 36 is out – all 13 editions of it

The other thing to point out is a more subtle difference, and one we've found that BSD types don't really get. Linux is a native PC OS: it was first developed on x86 PCs, and only later ported to other architectures. It feels at home on a PC. It uses standard PC partition types, it happily co-exists with other OSes, it uses native screen resolutions and control keys and other things as a matter of course.

FreeBSD, like the other BSDs, is different. It is not native to the PC, and while it runs fine, it expects a substantial primary partition to itself, inside which it builds its own partitioning system. Its console runs in plain VGA mode, and simple things like Ctrl-left and Ctrl-right don't work to edit the command line.

When you run Linux on a non-PC machine, such as a Raspberry Pi, it makes the computer act a bit like a PC. When you run FreeBSD on a PC, it makes a PC act a bit more like a Sun workstation or a DEC minicomputer.

[13]

There are perfectly valid reasons for this. FreeBSD is descended from 386BSD, the first FOSS x86 version of BSD, released in March 1992 – just after its rival commercial product, BSD/386 from BSDI, in January. 386BSD was developed by William Jolitz (who died from cancer at only 65 last [14]March ) and his wife Lynne. So, yes, the year after the start of Linux, but 386BSD was based on 4.3BSD-Net2. 1BSD was released in March 1978, so this was already a mature 14-year-old OS before it was first ported to the PC. It has its own way of doing things and only reluctantly deals with PC ways.

For example, once FreeBSD is installed, you can mount Windows and Linux partitions if you wish, no problem. What you can't do is put FreeBSD's root file system in one PC partition, its home file system in a different PC partition and so on, as you can with virtually every normal Linux distro. FreeBSD does things its own way. If you want to put it on bare metal, our recommendations are: use a desktop, not a laptop; have a wired internet connection, not Wi-Fi; and dedicate the entire PC to FreeBSD, don't try to dual-boot it with anything else. And as always, update the PC's firmware before you start.

Saying that, FreeBSD is a long-established OS and it has distros of its own, such as [15]GhostBSD and [16]MidnightBSD . They will catch up with version 13.1 soon and they may make the experience a little easier… but don't expect miracles. We also have high hopes for [17]the Hello System, which we've looked at before .

The easiest graphical FreeBSD distro, PC-BSD, was swallowed up by [18]TrueNAS creators iXsystems a few years ago and later discontinued, which is a shame. iXsystems is a remote descendant of BSDi, creators of BSD/386, and FreeBSD is the basis of the TrueNAS CORE and Enterprise NAS OSes. It's also the basis of the Sony Playstation OS, and quite a lot of it is inside Apple's macOS and iOS as well.

In our testing, in a VirtualBox VM, trying to install onto ZFS failed, and we had to start over with a blank disk and old-fashioned UFS, which worked fine. For all that it's a mature OS, it has a lot of rough edges, far more than any modern Linux.

Even so, it was easier to get 13.1 up and running than any previous version of FreeBSD we've tried. As such, we're impressed. The wholesale modernization that is occurring in the Linux world recently is driving some Linux gurus away, and FreeBSD is the obvious destination. The future looks promising for this OS with its roots in the early 1970s. ®

Get our [19]Tech Resources



[1] https://www.freebsd.org/releases/13.1R/announce/

[2] https://regmedia.co.uk/2022/05/19/freebsd-131.jpg

[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Yoe7Iyjp5D4rfJuCWGMghwAAAEg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0

[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yoe7Iyjp5D4rfJuCWGMghwAAAEg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Yoe7Iyjp5D4rfJuCWGMghwAAAEg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yoe7Iyjp5D4rfJuCWGMghwAAAEg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[7] https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/22/openbsd_71_released_including_apple/

[8] https://unixcop.com/how-to-install-xfce-in-freebsd-13/

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/18/rhel_86_and_rocky_and_alma/

[10] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/18/loongarch_gcc_12_1/

[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/17/linux_desktop_feature/

[12] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/12/fedora_36_released/

[13] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Yoe7Iyjp5D4rfJuCWGMghwAAAEg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[14] https://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/2022-April/025643.html

[15] https://ghostbsd.org/

[16] https://www.midnightbsd.org/

[17] https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/16/hellosystem_maclike_freebsd_project_05/

[18] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/11/truenas_13_released/

[19] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/



Ace2

Berkeley *Standard* Distribution?

Charlie Clark

No, software . Software, including things like TCP/IP, that was developed at Berkeley to work with the then AT&T Unix™. Over time this became so extensive that effectively replaced the original OS, though it took years of going through the courts for this to be establised.

Ace2

The article says Berkeley System Distribution. Wikipedia says Software or Standard.

VoiceOfTruth

If I look at the source code for 386BSD in /usr/doc/vmunix/blurb.t I see 'The Third Berkeley Software Distribution'.

I don't think that I have never seen Berkeley System Distribution. I have seen Software and Standard, and even a couple of times Source (but I think this is a later idea).

Might be my next print server

Charlie Clark

I'm looking for something to run on an RPi so that I can move my printer from the desktop. This should be possible in theory with Linux on an RPi but, unfortunately, the printer drivers (Samsung FWIW, it was free at the time works fine with MacOS) can't be installed on the Pi and the quality without them isn't acceptable. It looks like the BSD drivers are in a better state.

BSD is a server OS, which is why it likes to own the partition (it has its own volume manager which has meant flexible volumes for years).

No licence flim-flam, stable as a rock. What's not to like?

F. Frederick Skitty

"FreeBSD is the oldest open-source Unix that's still actively maintained"

Incorrect. NetBSD was founded before FreeBSD, and also made its first release before FreeBSD.

FreeBSD is the best all round UNIX today

VoiceOfTruth

-> What you can't do is put FreeBSD's root file system in one PC partition, its home file system in a different PC partition and so on, as you can with virtually every normal Linux distro.

Not sure about that or what you did or what you are trying to achieve. I would like to see some clarification.

-> In our testing, in a VirtualBox VM, trying to install onto ZFS failed

Again, not sure what you are doing here. I tested FreeBSD + ZFS in VB and it works fine.

-> dedicate the entire PC to FreeBSD

Agree.

-> don't try to dual-boot it with anything else.

If you are new to FreeBSD, I agree. But you can dual boot FreeBSD. If you know what you are doing it is straightforward, otherwise it is more involved.

-> For all that it's a mature OS, it has a lot of rough edges, far more than any modern Linux.

I disagree. It is a very clean and tidy OS for people who know what they are doing. In comparison, systemd on Linux is more confusing that the whole of FreeBSD.

Re: FreeBSD is the best all round UNIX today

Rich 2

“ For all that it's a mature OS, it has a lot of rough edges, far more than any modern Linux.”

I also disagree. I used OpenBSD for a long time and configuring and administering it was massively simpler than Linux. And it just works. No rough edges at all

Rough Edges

An_Old_Dog

I love OpenBSD, but neither it nor FreeBSD is completely smooth. OpenBSD/i386 v7.0 does not boot on my Eee PC 900 (Celeron M), though v6.9 and 7.1 do. Installing OpenBSD requires you to manually create disc device entries.

FreeBSD's installer can become confused if you don't do things "just so", and you can get into a place where it won't let you fix things. Further, as good, and as well-illustrated as the FreeBSD installation process is, the semantics of using the partitioner are not documented, nor easily discoverable by me, though that might now be fixed.

My Eee PC 1000H netbook dual-boots OpenBSD and FreeBSD.

werdsmith

FreeBSD. Where I get time I will be looking at this as a possible escape from the toxicity of Linux. I’m not talking about the usability or functionality, I mean the stigma of the Linux world.

VoiceOfTruth

Can you explain what you mean by stigma? My criticisms of Linux are mostly concerned with duplication of effort, and (sometimes) making things unnecessarily complicated. I have one or two other criticisms, but I don't have a stigma about Linux.

werdsmith

Imagine yourself being lectured in a condescending and sanctimonious fashion by Jeff Albertson.

"standard pc?"

DougMac

So, I've only used PCs since the 286 days, I ignored the original PC.

But what does ctrl-left arrow and ctrl-right arrow do?

Can't be that standard, if I've never used them?

Seems there's some bias about, FreeBSD is weird because it doesn't do things this one way the author is used to.

I've had too much horror with multi-boot OS that I would never attempt it, windows, linux, BeOS, whatever strange thing you wanted to do.

I'd always would devote a hard drive to a different OS no-matter-what. Its not a big deal that FreeBSD partitioning wants to take over the disk instead of try to cooperate with windows, which is just going to blast it away at Microsoft's next whim next upgrade.

Re: "standard pc?"

DarkwavePunk

I have no idea what that - etc thing means either. In most KSH derivatives beginning of line and end of line are -a or -e, or word at a time forward/backward -f or .

*edit (before I've even posted* - looks like the latter. Never knew. Then again I'm the type that uses -p instinctively instead of the up arrow.

For the young people born in the 21st century

Anonymous Coward

...When you run Linux on a non-PC machine, such as a Raspberry Pi, it makes the computer act a bit like a PC. When you run FreeBSD on a PC, it makes a PC act a bit more like a Sun workstation or a DEC minicomputer...

We, the grey bearded ones, know that Linux was created by PC people who wanted to play with Unix while FreeBSD was created by Unix people who wanted to play with a PC. Those were the days!

Question

ColonelClaw

Do Apple still use bits of FreeBSD in OSX? If so, what sort of things?

Re: Question

Rich 2

As far as I know, Mac OS X is basically BSD so I would think it uses quite a bit of it

Re: Question

VoiceOfTruth

A lot of the tools under /usr. A couple of examples:

strings /bin/ls

$FreeBSD: src/bin/ls/ls.c,v 1.66 2002/09/21 01:28:36 wollman Exp $

strings /usr/bin/compress

$FreeBSD: src/usr.bin/compress/zopen.c,v 1.17 2011/09/28 08:47:17 bz Exp $

/etc/services

# $FreeBSD: src/etc/services,v 1.89 2002/12/17 23:59:10 eric Exp $

There's quite a lot of FreeBSD goodies if you look around.

Re: Question

Len

MacOS is not BSD, it’s mainly userland that was originally lifted from BSD. That means that superficially the interfaces show some resemblance (to people like me who use FreeBSD on the server and macOS on the desktop) and both are POSIX compliant.

Under the hood, however, BSD and macOS are wildly different. The kernel is different (the XNU Kernel in macOS is hybrid whereas the FreeBSD kernel is monolithic), the whole hardware layer is different (unfortunately, otherwise macOS drivers could be used on BSD) and many newer developments were developed separately in macOS and BSD. You could not take a FreeBSD binary and run it on macOS, though it would probably be a lot easier to recompile a FreeBSD application for macOS than it would be for Windows.

Probably most famously copied from FreeBSD is the network stack. Nearly every OS (including Windows) was at some point heavily leaning on the TCP/IP network code from the BSDs as they were the first to have serious IPv4+IPv6 dual stack network support. That was the result of [1]the KAME project and the code was released under a BSD license in 2006 so world+dog could include with just an attribution.

[1] https://www.kame.net/

standbythree

It was news to me too, but apparently some shells come configured to use ctrl-left and crtl-right to do the same as ctrl-a and ctrl-e. Who knew. But every shell that can be run in Linux can also be run on FreeBSD so it seems like a weird point to use as a criticism of the whole OS.

If you flaunt it, expect to have it trashed.