What is a “*BSD”?

Considering a *BSD

With the arrival of a certain “init system”, more Linux users have at least dabbled with *BSD derived OS of late. There is a renewed interest as it’s perceived as an “escape route”. I have read comments that some Linux users see *BSD as their “last resort” to escaping systemd if it become unavoidable in their Linux distribution. So far as I can tell, it still seems entirely possible to avoid systemd in Linux, so it is my view that some of this sentiment is kneejerk and as a result of fearmongering.

I decided to write this to dispel some myths and help prospective users manage their expectations. I am a ‘BSD user who migrated away from Linux long before the arrival of systemd in notable Linux distributions such as RHEL and Debian.

What is a “*BSD”?

Several distinct, full and complete operating systems derived from Berkeley UNIX (not just a kernel), which in itself is a descendant of AT&T UNIX. All of the projects have different goals and focus – which is in fact why they are separate projects. To summarise: FreeBSD and NetBSD are the original forks of 386BSD, you can read on the web as to why FreeBSD and NetBSD forked from 386BSD. OpenBSD was an early fork of NetBSD and DragonFly BSD is a fork of FreeBSD. All of these have diverged and today, the four major *BSD derived projects are very different OS, but of course at the same time have similarities, which make them “BSD” as opposed to Linux or anything sysv based (such as Solaris).

Some further reading:

http://bsd.org/
https://www.netbsd.org/about/
https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.IS…k/history.html
https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq1.html#WhatIs
https://www.dragonflybsd.org/history/

What isn’t “BSD”?

“BSD” is not Linux, not GNU, not a GNU/Linux distribution, nor is it based on Linux, neither is “BSD” from a single source or just a kernel. “BSD”, doesn’t really exist anymore. Operating systems descended from BSD (4.4BSD-lite 2, etc) do still exist (often referred to collectively as “*BSD” or “BSD”), but the term “BSD” is just and umbrella term and is often about as meaningful as “*nix”.

They are not platforms for ideological or political pontificating/rants. In fact the OpenBSD project in particular strongly discourages this and you will probably be asked to leave their mailing lists if you start “advocating”, etc.

The *BSDs are not binary compatible, so the term “BSD distribution” as an analog to “Linux distribution”, which you will often see bandied around in Linux circles, is also meaningless.

The *BSDs are much older than Linux, indeed, the *BSDs could have been “Linux” if it weren’t for certain corporations and lawsuits. Linus Torvalds once famously stated that he would probably not have started Linux if the FreeBSD kernel had been available and unencumbered at the time. Linux came about as a necessity – because the GNU/Hurd kernel was simply not ready (and still isn’t).

Who should / should not consider using a *BSD?

Those prepared to read about the various OS at least some of the above links, as well as man pages and documentation might want to proceed further, those who just want a “works out of the box” system should move on. Those wanting a “just like Linux” system should move on. Those wanting to complain that *BSD isn’t ready yet or is “too difficult”, or “years behind” Linux, should just move on. I could equally claim that Linux is “years behind” Windows or macOS – and in some respects I’d be right. That’s it.

Those who dabble with a *BSD because they ‘hate’ something else – e.g. Linux or systemd, etc should also move on.

The various *BSDs have been built by UNIX professionals for UNIX professionals. We are “along for the ride”, we get to use the free stuff, we don’t really need to complain about it.

We can, if we have skills or the funds contribute something in order to get what we want, or make strides in that direction. We can sit about and complain and annoy people on the official mailing lists, but it won’t change a thing – and you will find next to no developer willing to take heed. If you’re a developer working for a small project for free, why would you listen to complaints to the effect that your software doesn’t provide this or that, or that you need to be more like Linux/Windows/whatever?

So, if you want the wifi driver for the “Made UP Name Athercomtel WXS20005ZXL” to work, you will need to do something: i.e. send working hardware to the developer or do some research or learn C and see if you can improve the driver / write or port a driver. That’s how it works in ‘BSD land. No one will do it for you.

Where can one get support for the *BSD stuff?

Look no further:

  • % man man
  • % man
  • Refer to the operating system’s online handbook
  • Search the web
  • Search mailing list archives
  • Search the operating system’s official forums (if applicable)
  • Search the unofficial *BSD forums and as a last resort, *BSD subsections of Linux forums (the latter are of limited use).
  • Register an account at a *BSD official or unofficial forum and ask a properly constructed question, including all relevant details.
  • Post to the official mailing list, ensuring you post to the correct mailing list, with a full description of the problem, how to reproduce the problem, what you have tried and dmesg(8).

Ports

Software apart from the base system (the OS and userland), is referred to as “port”. Ports are typically made up of much of the software you also find available for Linux, with various copy left and non copy left licences, ported to any given *BSD derived OS. All of the various *BSDs have their own ports systems, but the original ports system was from FreeBSD.

For some Linux users, it’s often surprising to learn that much of the software they use was not originally written for Linux or is not specifically for Linux, but was coded to be roughly POSIX compliant and/or portable to any *nix like OS. An example would be X.org – much older than Linux and released under a permissive licence (not GPL). So if one has any objection to permissive licences – don’t run an X server!

A ports system is essentially a source tree, by which the user can build software from source and dependencies are resolved. A pre-built port is called a package and is obtained either by a “Linux like” package manager (such as FreeBSD’s pkg) or by the “legacy” package tools (still used by OpenBSD). Dependencies are resolved in both cases. The ports system is not regarded as part of the OS.

So while packages are binary – they are still ports, as there built, usually with the default compile flags, from the same ports source tree.

init system?

No *BSD uses sysvinit. So an “escapee” from systemd will still find themselves in unfamiliar territory. The simple “BSD style” init does not have System V style runlevels nor the familiar /etc/init.d schema. In Linux land, the rc system used in Slackware Linux and one or two more, is probably the most comparable to that used by the *BSDs. There are small differences in this system as implemented bet

Forging ahead, giving it a go and learning

So long as you understand the basics of how these projects are developed, that they’re free, that no one owes you anything that “works out of the box” is hardly ever a project goal, then you are always encouraged to try it out.

Which one is the best?

An impossible one and recipe for many flamewars, to the extent that discussing other OS has been pretty much disallowed at a certain official *BSD forum… but forums are forums, usually have a high fanboi population and there will always be certain characters who make a career out of slating one OS while building up another – one can only try them and see which works best for you.

The only advice I can give is – forget VMs. Try to get some kind of bare metal for an install – find an extra HDD and throw it in and install on that. Knowing if a *BSD works on some crap virtualised x86 is not really that useful, knowing if your hardware is supported and if everything works is very useful to know. This may ultimately come to define which of the *BSDs you use, if any and not which is perceived as “the best”.

I could recommend all four of the major *BSD derived OS, for various reasons, but it’s still “horses for courses” and my recommendation doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things as it really depends on what the individual wants to do with the OS.

Don’t expect “out of the box” dual boot with other OS. Install the *BSD on it’s own hard disk or better yet it’s own computer. Then set up your other OS’ bootloader, if applicable, to chainload it. This is simple (how you’d do it for windows) and once you’ve got the knack it’s a 5 minute job. No *BSD developer on any mailing list is going to be interested in someone trying to multiple boot Windows, Linux and FreeBSD on the same x86 PC.

*BSD is not for everyone

That may indeed be the case, or it may be that you will revisit at some point.

There is another common sentiment I have come across from time to time:

“I’m hesitant because RMS has said bad things about the BSD style licences”

I hesitate to use the term, but “FUD”. Ideological differences – with much of the ideology coming from the GNU side and the average user being mislead by propaganda.

The BSD licence is extremely simple and unrestricted, in that sense it’s the very essence of “free”. The GNU GPL “copyleft” licences tend to be “militantly free” and v3 in particular is a lengthy and complex legal document which puts far more limits and controls on what can and can’t be done with the software.

https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause

https://opensource.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html

There is no simple “divide” here. While most of the *BSD based operating systems usually do not contain GPL code (or strive not to add any more), the sysadmin/user has the facility to install 3rd party software, “ports”, which does usually include a lot of GPL’d code. And with regard to Linux distributions, BSD style permissive licences are commonly found there as well.

There are indeed arguments for both licences. The reality is, we have this present situation – many different free software licences, some copyleft., some not. We have to live with it, but neither licence type is a reason for an end user to exclude anything.

In terms of the “corporate” aspect – if “Fortune 500 Company Inc” takes NetBSD and wraps it up as a proprietary offering and sells it as some kind of network appliance – and gives nothing back to NetBSD, (or maybe throws a donation of < $5k at them), that doesn’t affect the project or a user of NetBSD, it doesn’t make NetBSD “less free”.

If that same company takes over a GPL v3 licenced project, employs and pays the developers, funds the project, decides the direction it will now take – decided ultimately who they will sell that subsidiary onto when it no longer serves a purpose – I’ll leave the reader to decide which is the “freer” .

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “What is a “*BSD”?

  1. I think the question many “linux only users” (users who only have linux experience out of the whole of uinix family) would have after reading the article is this:

    What can BSDs do that linux can’t?

    A few other LOUs may have the following question:

    can BSD be installed on an ext* or btrfs partition?

    Because the filesystems for most BSDs seem incompatible with linux related filesystems. I suppose the “kernel” of each can take advantage of the filesystem developed in parallel with each. I suspect a can of security worms will open up from such discussion. But it can be as simple as how can I mount and read data from ufs partition in linux and vice versa with BSDs and ext4 (which seems much easier). Or file-system encryption, does Luks apply to BSD file systems?

      ___  . .  ___
    

    Dragonfly, this rings a bell, I can’t remember why but after installing it I thought this is nice, and kept the installation to play with for a long while, then needed the space and scraped it. Probably because by that time I had forgotten why I kept it, if this makes sense. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I will not get into the “what can this OS do that another OS can’t”. For example I can think of many things that MS Windows can do which Linux and other *nix can’t, not because Windows is “better” but because developers have chosen to support that functionality/software/hardware, etc…

    The *BSD’s have their own filesystem. Usually a variant of the UNIX FFS/UFS.

    FreeBSD in particular has support for ZFS – which is superior to Btrfs in most respects if not all.

    DragonFly BSD is notable for the HAMMER and HAMMER2 filesystems.

    I see no real benefits in ext2/3/4 or Btrfs. The FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and DragonFly BSD developers seem to concur… it is highly unlikely there will ever be support for installing on these FS in any of the *BSD projects. As I recall, FreeBSD even moved NTFS support into userland (FUSE) – and even NTFS support is arguably more useful than ext2/3/4 support.

    ext4’s principal developer declared it as a stopgap solution around 10 years ago and favoured Btrfs. The latter has never matured and there are better alternatives (i.e. where you don’t lose your data…). As far as I know only SUSE and Oracle are using Btrfs in production – and that says it all really… it was removed from RHEL last year. SGI’s XFS seems more favourable for Red Hat.

    The *BSDs also have their own partition types – either some form of BSD disk labels or GPT. Whereas Linux was always very entrenched in (re)using the MSDOS MBR on x86. With an MSDOS type partition table, the BSD disklabel lives within one of the 4 primary DOS partitions.

    The nuts and bolts of it is that it’s a different OS and if you want ext2/3/4 – a Linux file system – you should install and use Linux.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I thought this was interesting/funny. Someone run a question of a search engine:
    “why does OpenBSD have systemd”

    The funny answer would have been “because it can not”?

    Like

  4. You’d be surprised, or perhaps not, at how easily “viral” misinformation can spread and who precisely was spreading it. Someone entered that search pattern, because a few years ago, certain people were peddling a mixture of half truths and utter B/S:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20140922183227/http://boycottsystemd.org/
    The response from Theo de Raadt at the time was resoundingly clear:

    https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=141135403820631&w=2

    This is the danger I’ve spoken to yourself and others of before. The real danger that ideological or political lines of reasoning can easily blind one to technical facts and leave one susceptible to fearmongering. In these times of “social media” B/S can spread very easily. Linux fans, often with little technical ability are especially vulnerable to this.

    “Anti” movements are unfortunate in that the attract all manner of charlatans, peddling their “solution”, their particular brand of snake oil, putting a logo on it and trying to attract as many willing dupes as possible to the new “product”… they often use the above methods and some lap it up as they know no better – an OS like OpenBSD is uncharted waters for most Linux fans, so a site like that could make numerous claims and the average Linux user would be ill equipped to state otherwise,

    In fact it’s stunning how little Linux fans know about the software, the licences, the origins and the people and companies involved in it’s development. That’s not a problem in itself – but spewing pseudo facts, if not some made up babble, is. I see this on Linux fora, it’s why I’ve chosen not to participate on all Linux fora except one. You see it especially on Linux distribution specific fan site fora.

    Like

  5. You have a point or two or three but let’s go back up the surface of things. People since their youth not knowing anything other than Win (95,98,xp,mil,7,8,.,10) jumped to linux bandwagon as they “heard” over the grapevine that there is 1 alternative. Maybe the 1 alternative was not even linux, it was ubuntu. Only rich kids considered an apple, the rest all got lemons.

    Very few were old kids enough to have been in the right place at the right time to have experienced unix in some very expensive enterprise machines. Some only through remote terminal logins.

    The leap from win-xp/7 etc. to “linux” came by substituting an MS-de with xfce, lxde, cinnabon, kde, gnome, something.. This is one poor substitute for something “bad” non-open non-free. They substituted wrtite (wordpad) for mousepad, explorer with mozilla, ms-office with libreoffice, paint with krita, etc..

    Now here comes cynwulf1 saying OpenBSD rocks, Mint is for sissies. They boot “finally” some OpenBSD on their 2999×1666 curvy monitor and get 800×600 resolution graphics. They look for X11-gui-……xyz and can’t find it. Look for the other, not there. Look for this and that and it doesn’t exist. They are ensured they can compile anything from scratch and make it work, it is just that OpenBSD will not provide it ready for them or have adequate resources to write an 90 page dissertation on they XYZ…gui. They are on their own.

    Well crap, if they wanted that they would have gone to Gentoo. …. which is so far away from the “action” of linux it is almost non-linux territory. It is almost like the house of rising sun built half way between the two towns. ” what do you mean my drives and partitions are not automounted and why can’t I have a desktop to click on them ?” When I clean a new linux installation the first searches I do is “gv…” “wifi..” “wirel ..” “nvidi…” “puls….”, it is like cleaning up the table before I start doing work. Others can’t live with out crap on the table.

    There is a red pill and a blue pill, not everyone wants to try the red, “they can’t handle the truth”, BLUE!!
    This is why I begged and asked for your insight here.

    Did I tell you about this old machine that I can also boot Win7? It runs the printer software for which there is a hack (called the maintenance secret backdoor) that can reset the chips on laser head cartridges for that brand. It saves a bundle. You can’t do that on BSD, unless you can read and edit chips by using aligator clips on their contacts …. yaaa daaahhh yaahhh daa and turning 1s into 0s again.

    For fun, a while ago, I would take full blown DE installations with systemd and replace it with openrc, runit, s6, etc. Things like Antergos (RIP), Manjaro, Arco, etc. I hadn’t done this for a while and tried it with new S6/66 and I thought I could do it blind-folded and write down the procedure. Surprise, it is getting harder. It is like reaping weeds away from a plant without uprooting the plant itself. It is reaching deeper and deeper with more claws and strings attached.

    I couldn’t care less what they speak of in SocMedia, I waste little time in reddit (if that could be conceived as social) and more on bicycles than on systems, or politics and philosophy. The bicycle is a system that maximizes human ability on its own energy to go further and faster, it beats walking, swimming, sailing, kayaking, rowing, and crawling. Other than materials little has changed in this system for nearly 1 and a half centuries. I didn’t mention paragliding, and hand-gliding because it takes a truck to go up the hill. Enough at this age of inhaling burned castor oil fumes.

    Like

  6. I think your first three paragraphs of speculation as to why some “kids” migrated from Windows to Linux in the 90’s / 00’s is a bit of a tangent to say the least… it comes from the flawed perspective that free software based OS has to be a drop in Windows replacement for mass consumption.

    Paragraph four is misleading rhetoric…! Hyperbole at best. I suggest you give one of the *BSDs a try to dispel some of the myths – you may be surprised at how easy it is to set up OpenBSD and you may be surprised that X.org is in fact integrated into OpenBSD as standard and “works out of the box” without any configuration. I haven’t had to set up an xorg.conf in so many years. Rather than 800×600 resolution, I seem to be getting native screen resolution both in console and X.org…? I also rarely compile anything – in fact OpenBSD recommends that you install packages rather than build ports from source. FreeBSD also seems to be doing ok with a binary package manager. With all that said, it’s not for everyone. For “the masses”, it’s inescapable that a proprietary or “proprietary style” OS from MS, Apple of google, etc is still the best option and Linux desktops are a poor imitation.

    As to your hypothetical users who don’t want to configure anything – not exactly sure why we should care about them or their requirements / expectations. They are after all part and parcel of why we’re all living in the age of $PROPRIETARY_DESKTOP_OS reinvention… what do you think inspired stuff like systemd, avahi, dbus, consolekit, pulseaudio, mono – even the gnome desktop… almost all the relevant people behind these projects are on the payroll of fortune 500 companies, so how can hobby projects expect to “compete”?

    “Did I tell you about this old machine that I can also boot Win7? It runs the printer software for which there is a hack (called the maintenance secret backdoor) that can reset the chips on laser head cartridges for that brand. It saves a bundle. You can’t do that on BSD…”

    Can you do it on Linux…?

    “For fun, a while ago, I would take full blown DE installations with systemd and replace it with openrc, runit, s6, etc. […] it is getting harder”

    Unless you state which desktop this is, then this is just anecdotal at best. If you’re talking about gnome, then this was always a pointless exercise – gnome have very clear Red Hat affiliation, have made it clear that they’re embracing systemd, so unless someone wants to fork gnome and take it in a different direction, there is really no point. There are a lot of problems with gnome besides systemd, always have been. The project have made it clear that they are invested in the creation of a consumer product, with a “brand” and that users need to be restricted to use gnome as the gnome project intend it and that customisation gets in the way of this.

    Whether we care about “social media” or not, it comes in various forms and all are a channel for the dissemination of myths, misinformation and propaganda – and by it’s sheer force of inertia that spreads to other channels. What we’ve seen over the years is the discussion of “Linux” migrating from mailing lists, to forums and finally to more social media like mediums, as the user base has become more of a “consumer base” and the gulf between developers and end users has widened.

    Like

  7. it comes from the flawed perspective that free software based OS has to be a drop in Windows replacement for mass consumption.

    I agree, that is a flawed perspective, and it may very well be induced by social-myths, but it is out there. It is the most common response by those who did try it and went back to ms-w disappointed. It is also the wrong reason to do try a change. Expecting an open/free system to be just like the “other” but be free as in not paying for it. I also had a professional telling me that his audio and video editing sw, that he paid a fortune for, was way better than what is available in unix/linux. I asked him if it was due to function, outcome, ease of use, …. I didn’t get a clear answer but had little interest in pursuing it.

    O..Bsd

    From those I have tried, and due to your recommendations, I am still working on the OpenBSD. There is a learning curve issue, when you don’t instantly even recognize if.names designation or disks and partition naming scheme, it takes some time, to adjust at least. With FreeBSD and clones, I am sorry. It was futile to having to relearn things I shouldn’t be relearning at this age. There comes a time when you know your eyes have so many hours a day of effective ability to read and think. It got to a point when mine became watery and itchy and I still hadn’t gotten anywhere with light promised at the other end.

    As to your hypothetical users who don’t want to configure anything – not exactly sure why we should care about them or their requirements / expectations.

    Take a fresh look at forums, and see for yourself. The vast majority asking a question is about “why aren’t things preconfigured” and when the answer to their problem is editing a script the response is usually “on Mint I never had to do this, or in Ubuntu I never had a problem”. There was someone the other day, on a list, who hasn’t tried installing anything yet, but wanted reassurance that his Arch based desktop would work the same way without systemd and it would autologin … almost like putting conditions to be promised something to even try to install it. I may agree, just saying hello and welcome to some people is the wrong message. I have suffered from this spending hours to help someone through the tough parts, and nearly being cursed because at the end that was not what they were used to.

    state which desktop this is, then this is just anecdotal at best. If you’re talking about gnome,

    Even if gnome would work I wouldn’t bother with it. The first questions I received when I started this blog was whether plasma would work without systemd. I had spend 5′ with plasma and knew there was nothing there for me. Same with Qt and all other KDE stuff. For myself I like the clean area of a wm, a friendly terminal, a browser (mozilla derived usually). So I tried Bluestar, a notorious distro with plasma. Just recently Obarun issued a dev’s effort to make a plasma iso, and someone on Artix did the same too. They say it is all working. With Manjaro I tried xfce and lxde, it worked. I can’t say if everything that is commonly found on these DE is workable to be working. I made sure that after the transition of cleaning systemd out, it rebooted and the desktop was functional.

    social media

    I am more concerned on what they do in the physical life of people, their communication, their isolation from true friends to virtual friends, the fascist principle of blocking out anyone advocating ideas you don’t like. You get in a bus or a metro these days and unless there are two people who came together nobody talks to anybody. If one tries to start a conversation is avoided like a weirdo, even see 2-3 young people come together they are playing with a screen and comment to each other what someone has said in some channel. People actually talk and say LoL now, even in non english speaking countries and communities. I am not worried on the propaganda against linux, I am worried about the room they all belong to called the 4th Reich.

    Is propaganda a bad thing, but no-content, no intellectual value what so ever, avoiding those like the plague is a good thing. No, I will blast you with propaganda and if you don’t like it you better have some rational argument against it. If you don’t you will hear it. I’ll smack you in the face with it, the same way religion, state mandated propaganda, nationalism, patriotism, racism, obedience to law and authority, is smacked on the faces of little kids from day 1 to day N+1. How else do ideas travel through society? Have we lifted all borders for products but ideas and people are being blocked left and right? Social media is shaping our physical reality. This means that the dynamics introduced by 4-5 private corporations globally are mandating the agenda that people are communicating on. The UK, the world’s first and most complete welfare state, has now over 300,000 homeless. If you scan social media to UK channels, you might get the idea that graffiti has become a big problem in the UK. People are really “concerned” about it.

    Can you imagine what would have happened if Germany had won the war? You haven’t been to Europe recently, have you?

    Social media is not “public domain”, they are little cages trapping the majority within the walls of a corporation. People with no email, or one they look at frequently, at best a gmail or yahoo, shops without real webpages, just a facebook page, politicians that don’t speak in public, they tweet instead, and artists who only publish on youtube or that i-crap-tunes.

    I am beginning to wonder if those who don’t have active social media accounts are beginning to be listed in a database by anti-terrorist agencies.

    The gap of developers to users may still grow, when the so called devs are linking their guis to systemd functions more and more. Do you have a rtkit in OpenBSD? Try porting this late one over and see what errors you get. I tried to force an arch installation off of systemd the other day and before getting everything cleaned, netctl kept crawling back. Six months ago this wasn’t an issue. I guess devs don’t look at LinQuest poles to see that 2/3 voted for OpenRC, SysV, Runit, and S6 this year. If they were marketing they are losing this base. I am sure on facebook the same pole would have been very different.
    What about small projects, underfunded projects, who can’t barely make ends meet, like money for certificates, server bandwidth, etc. Should they do a little marketing in hope to gain a few hundreds of their costs paid? Did you know that void, for as long as it had been around, doesn’t have a legal entity to receive donations?

    Sorry for expanding and drawing tangents from the main topic. It is my nature trying to connect more things together rather than isolate them.

    Like

  8. “From those I have tried, and due to your recommendations”

    To be clear I don’t make recommendations or suggestions nor do I advocate for any BSD derived OS. I have only attempted to address/correct some of your factually incorrect comments.

    “Take a fresh look at forums, and see for yourself…”

    I’ve seen more than enough, over a period of about 15 years or so. I wrote a multi-part blog series over a few years on the subject…

    We can bemoan “traditional” forums forever, the fact is that for the most part they haven’t really gone anywhere, but they have been overshadowed by all of the extra “consumers” and their preference for more social media like channels. They have been flooded with such a huge amount of “noise” that the signal is barely perceptible… I see things posted on certain forums, which were done and dusted, addressed 10 times over, by the user base a decade ago. Sadly that user base moves on and the void they leave is never filled. It’s a vicious cycle…

    “You haven’t been to Europe recently, have you?”

    It may surprise you to learn that I’m European, living in Europe and well aware of all these issues. A sad state of affairs.

    “Do you have a rtkit in OpenBSD”

    Irrelevant to OpenBSD, which still has the “giant lock” on the kernel and no real-time scheduling support regardless. I believe NetBSD has support for RTC.

    Like

  9. Pingback: BSD Link Roundup 6.13 - FreeBSDNews.com

If your comment is considered off-topic a new topic will be created with your comment to continue a different discussion. This community is based on open and free communication, meaning we must all respect all in minimizing the exercise of freedom to disrupt such communication. Feel free to post what you think but keep in mind the subject matter discussed. It is just as easy to start a new topic as it is to dilute the content of an existing discussion.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.