My blog post about GhostBSD future.

ericbsd · 2026-02-16T03:48:33+00:00

I had a couple of requests, and I decided to make it a blog post here: https://ericbsd.com/addressing-xlibre-change-and-ghostbsd-future.html

ericbsd

SteveM I prefer it mostly for the look and CSS.

ericbsd

codytherudeguy if lxde was on BSD i'd suggest

It is available, but it is not a viable DE since it is not actively developed. It uses Openbox, which has not received any updates since 2015.

codytherudeguy

ericbsd That's because openbox is feature complete it don't need updates it does what the developer wanted it to do and it does it well but if you need something equally as lightweight yet maintained you can always use iceWM

XFCE is becoming a bloated mess and is only going to get worse once they finish porting over to rust

Mate while great is setup to automatically use 1gb of ram by default openbox with lxde on the other hand i got as low as 250mb of ram on the desktop while idle the highest i've got it was 3gb of ram and that was under extreme load iceWM is a tiny bit higher but still close enough

Lxde gets occasional updates but mostly bugfixes and maintaining compatibility

Sometimes the latest and greatest thing is not always the best thing as we are learning with modern software vibe coded in rust

tsesani

GhostBSD is a great OS without any of the Desktops. Two of my systems are stripped of Mate, Xfce and Gershwin.
I have always flavored X11 without GTK or QT. I am using Icewm now and Window Maker from time to time. I use Xfe and Midnight Commander for file managers. Xterm just beats all the terminals hands down. I have been re-learning CoolEdit after many years have passed since I last worked with it. I am used to Geany for my programming but I have ne "The Nice Editor" setup up with the syntax files I care about. . Gnumeric is great Spread Sheet software. I have hopes that Agar will have some nice software ported to it. I use Gramps but also use Lifelines. I have done many documents in Tex in the past and have lately done some of my family history with just plain old groff.

All in All, GhostBSD is just well done. I get an simple and fast install. Easy updates. Most packages are the latest I can get. ZFS has saved me more than once in last couple years.

Charade

If GhostBSD would have only one Desktop - Gershwin - and FreeBSD would let it be their „native“ Desktop, it would make it a big seperation from Linux. Linux with its fragmented ecosystem (Tons of Desktops, Several Package Managers, Tons of Distributions, ….) would have big disadvantage against FreeBSD, if they decide to Go one straight way.
Would be easier for Software developers, wouldn‘t? And easier for Users as they can identify with the OS and the Desktop. They will Like or Not Like it, but usually the App Ecosystem plays a big role, too.

So come on! FreeBSD, GhostBSD! You Are not Linux!!

ericbsd

Charade We are not Linux, but everyone coming to GHostBSD expects what Linux has.

Charade

ericbsd But tell, me, why should people prefer Free- or Ghost- over Linux? ZFS? Today?

I still think FreeBSD should not try to copy Linux, as it will never succeed. Instead it should avoid the Linux „Ecosystem“ disadvantages. I have really big respect for your work, and of course for the work of the FreeBSD Team. But Even when FreeBSD gets better Hardware support, there are very if any reasons to prefer it over linux.

I had to manage some laptops in my Company (for free, just install os and software and support customers using it.). I woul like to choose FreeBsD over Linux, but I was sure, it would be much more effort to support the Desktops.

Sorry, but that is the wrong way. If people want to make FreeBsD growing they have to Go a different way.

Edward1978

SonicDE is KDE based right? So when KDE goes wayland only, that will be true for SonicDE also.

vimanuelt

Edward1978
What happens when people tire of the Wayland ecosystem and KDE? They will either adopt something else or build an alternative. Eric is creating a system that suits his own needs. Those whose requirements differ may choose to do the same.

Much of the movement between desktop environments stems from users seeking a closer match to their preferences and requirements. Some eventually decide to build or maintain their own solutions rather than rely on those created by others.

Robin

Sonic was created to preserve X-11 when KDE officially abandons it. If you like KDE, Sonic is a good alternative.

Edward1978

Robin Good, I use KDE in Manjaro. So I will be fine hopefully. I asked did they even look at Xlibre on their forum, opened up a b*tch fest & it was closed. I did not start it though.

frogprince

I'm a user, not a programmer. I've tried multiple Linux distros and desktops (MATE, KDE, Cinnamon, XFCE, LXQT, etc.), and MacOS as much out of curiousity as anything. My own biggest issue regardless of DE is customizability. With enough of that, anything will work. Wayland vrs. XLibre is only an issue for people like me if certain pieces of software are unavailable with the newer compositors/display drivers. I could live with Gershwin, I'm sure. The choices that need to be made must be made in light of support load over feature set. BSD is a lighter solution with any DE than Linux, Windows, or MacOS, and is also more stable and secure. My one feature plea is better control of trackpad behavior.

Edward1978

@ frogprince After all this time (15 years!!) Wayland is still missing things it should have. I have tried to find a good Wayland vrs. XLibre vid. or article, but can't. Wayland cannot do (or do well) tons of things: VNC server, remote desktop, SSH X forwarding, custom keyboard bindings, numerous accessibility options, legacy software, absolute desktop positioning, screen sharing and recording, CAD/EDA tools, performance, and then some. All of these are critical use cases, but they don’t seem to matter in the shiny happy new future that Wayland brings.

miscreant

Edward1978

I don't use all those features but tons of others do, so one would hope that with Wayland taking over, it's now go time after 15 years, and time to get those things fixed or added asap.

ericbsd

Charade But tell, me, why should people prefer Free- or Ghost- over Linux? ZFS? Today?

In my opinion, there is no reason to prefer it to Linux. I might get some flak for it, but when FreeBSD was really interesting, it started to get behind in all areas. I was a hardcore BSD guy before, but now I believe in using the right tool for the right workload.

Charade I had to manage some laptops in my Company (for free, just install os and software and support customers using it.). I woul like to choose FreeBsD over Linux, but I was sure, it would be much more effort to support the Desktops.

I used to use GhostBSD for work, and I use Linux now. I got tired of getting WiFi not working at full speed, and the software I needed to use at one point was barely usable on GhostBSD. I just want things to work and not fight for it when I work, not that it can't be fixed, but I am not paid for that.

So I do understand that it is too much effort to maintain. I have experience with that. I tried to make things easier, but there is always more to do.

Charade I still think FreeBSD should not try to copy Linux

It seems to be what FreeBSD is going heads on right now. On the other hand, most open-source softwares right now are built on Linux and for Linux. Remove all of them, and FreeBSD is stock with not much software.

Charade But Even when FreeBSD gets better Hardware support, there are very if any reasons to prefer it over linux.

True, and again, there is not much FreeBSD, and GhostBSD can offer to people who look at everything through the lens of Linux.

Charade If people want to make FreeBsD growing they have to Go a different way.

And what would that be in your opinion?

Edward1978

Robin I am not saying what that animated shot of that women looks like.... 😃

I still think FreeBSD should not try to copy Linux, as it will never succeed. Instead it should avoid the Linux „Ecosystem“ disadvantages. I have really big respect for your work, and of course for the work of the FreeBSD Team. But Even when FreeBSD gets better Hardware support, there are very if any reasons to prefer it over linux.

Yes, it should go for user friendly, but Linux is still linux, they became easier over the years, but besides DE UI didn't copy Windows. I would love Steam on xBSD, but I wish Valve would do a BSD version. Why are there 3 BSDs Free/Open/Net. Linux isn't sure who it wants to be even 600+ distros...

Charade

ericbsd And what would that be in your opinion?

Gershwin is the right approach, as MATE becomes more and more linux-burdended. I would drop KDE, Gnome, XFCe and the other linux Desktops, for reason, that you have to put more and more effort to make them work in FreeBSD and due to fragmenting Desktops and Desktop runtimes/libraries.

Why Not a Open Source System with its only and one Desktop? chromeOS has its own Desktop. Android has its own mobile UI (but customized UIs differ from vanilla android, that is also negative aspect).

It would be far less effort to Write Software for BSD and to maintain it. Also customers / people are not overwhelmed with tons of Desktops, Package Managers… To be a real ALTERNATIVE you have to Go an alternate path and not try to copy a System (what is difficult, or nearly imposaible, as Linux ecosystem has too much manpower).
Imho with less manpower and different approach FreeBSD can be successfull.

Why choose FreeBSD over linux?

one System
one Desktop (like macOS , Windows , chromeOS)
OS and userland from one hand, not just the kernel like in linux
Advantage? You lern the System and no fear you have to re-learn because of Switch to: different Desktop, different Package Manager, different commands.

With better Hardware Support in FreeBSD 15.1 the base for success is set! Of course Hardware support is also very important.

Of course especially the FreeBSD Team should consider this.

Its just what I think. I May be wrong, but what could be a better way?

vimanuelt

It was never about the tools. It was always about the work you want to do. Choose the option that helps you do it. If no operating system can meet your needs, build one that can.

An operating system designed for one user is much easier to build. If others find it useful, all the better. If not, they are free to build their own.

Edward1978

codytherudeguy 16ish years back, I tried to install PC-BSD. Never worked out & I hoped it would. I don't even think it is still around. I thought for sure I read the Linux Mint team was thinking of doing a BSD, but I guess not. Nothing anywhere about it. Anyway,, it is nice having a user friendly none Windows or OS X. Most of the Linux world & maybe BSD too are like go back to Widows stupid... Mint has no BSD plans, so Ghost is it. Linux is to fragmented & most are "Shiney new thing" to play with, like why jump to Wayland when XLibra is there. Wayland is still missing basic feature after 15 years!!! Linux guys are like proud of hit being hard. You know comoncore, sometimes you wonder WHY, math was fine before... Why show how we got the answer, if it is right, it is still right the old way

Edward1978

I vote for SonicDE, but is that written for Linux too & it will need work for xBSD? KDE has a nice control center, so Sonic prob. does too (It is just Xlibre KDE right?). I mean the other mentoined here something win, is st in heavy dev right?

callmetango

Edward1978 One of the declared goals of SonicDE is "to support the BSDs." That's a quote from their homepage. And I know they'll do since I'm one of the authors. 😉

The Sonic Login Manager and everything SonicDE around it already runs on GhostBSD. Proof:

« Previous Page Next Page »