Ghostbsd is Really Good, Forum Search, bxpkg deprecated?

Share your ideas, questions or suggestions with us here.
Prince
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:08 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Ghostbsd is Really Good, Forum Search, bxpkg deprecated?

Post by Prince » Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:09 am

Hi, Eric, you helped with the overall picture.
Pkgng is clearly the wise choice.
I traveled around the forum a bit. There isn't any hurdle to receive any requested software.
I realized that simplicity isn't a bad thing. Functionality is paramount.
GhostBSD is a mature design. It is sensible not to complicate things at this stage.
The ports do have software aplenty. A rolling release is ideal, modern, and definitely more secure.

GhostBSD is the most forward moving FreeBSD out there, by far.

The rolling release will make me drop DesktopBSD as an all time favorite.
PC-BSD messed up with the ZFS only package. ZFS is too slow for most desktops, lack recovery tools, and despite it's improvements, is a resource hog.
Their network manager is unreliable and invites confusion.

They shot themselves in the ankles by not keeping it simple.
I mean, really, the sever enabled by default on a desktop?

Being a BSD based system, it , already, started out ahead of the game.
Must be careful for what one wish for, for it can upset reality.

I look forward to Pkgng.

I'm confident, now, that GhostBSD is headed down the right path.

Pkgng is ,clearly, the wise choice.
Last edited by Prince on Wed Aug 20, 2014 3:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
bsdkeith
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:36 pm
Location: Surrey/Hants Border, England
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Ghostbsd is Really Good, Forum Search, bxpkg deprecated?

Post by bsdkeith » Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:01 am

I use PC-BSD as one of my OS'es and quite agree about zfs; it is too complicated for a normal user system.
I too do not like having services started 'straight out of the box', this creates vulnerabilities, if not very careful.

One thing they have is a choice of WM or DE on installation, this I think is sensible; but services automatically started appear to be the same whichever environment you choose (?!).
They do offer the ufs filesystem, but only to experienced users; not good to my way of thinking, I think it should be as straight forward as installing with zfs.

My other gripe is the lack of a 32 bit system, BSD is just as good as Linux on older hardware.
Linux user since 1999; & now a BSD user.

Post Reply