[PC-BSD Testing] Rolling release criticism

Arthur Koziol a-koziol at neiu.edu
Tue Dec 17 07:05:10 PST 2013

On 12/17/2013 7:12 AM, Claudio L. wrote:
> On 12/17/2013 06:13, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
>> The FreeBSD ecosystem needs MORE people running HEAD/CURRENT as well 
>> as the VERY top of the ports tree, this is how you attract developers 
>> and power users... and these people are the ones that will help 
>> improve FreeBSD/PC-BSD for the general population.
> Precisely, but the only way you get more people to use it, is if it 
> actually works. What I mean is the basic system should always work. 
> Then you can test individual features that you **want** to install and 
> test, but you probably shouldn't be testing all at the same time and 
> without your consent:
> * The package manager
> * Hardware drivers
> * Basic web browsers
> * Basic services like Virtualbox
> These are basic things that should always work fine, then I agree with 
> the testing of individual features.
> Imagine you are trying to test a new feature in 10.0, but you can't 
> because you are wasting time fixing your browser, your packages, etc. 
> You should have everything else working and out of your way so you can 
> focus on testing PCI-PASS THROUGH on bhyve, not more, not less.
> If things break too much, you'll alienate users and they will leave to 
> other more stable OSes.
> For example, we could have other packages updated fast, but the 
> package manager only changed once or twice a year, for example. Just 
> to make sure it works, and when the update gets pushed, it HAS to work 
> for everybody.
> Claudio

While it is great that the BSD's have gotten much needed attention the 
past 5-10 years, it was originally designed to be a stable and secure 
*server* OS and nothing more. It's not supposed to be bleeding edge and 
work with all hardware that came out 5 minutes ago. That's it has been 
able to be made usable at the desktop level is nothing short of a 
miracle. You have to understand that BSD is never going to be like 
Linux, OS X, or Windows in terms of near *perfect* usability at the 
desktop level. It just wasn't designed that way so to some degree you 
have to have lowered expectations of its capabilities. The stewards and 
developers aren't trying to make it like Linux so that's why these 
gotchas tend to happen at the level you are experiencing them. Any hacks 
or bolt-ons that are being thrown into it are outside of the scope so 
it's no surprise they occasionally break or experience horkage. There 
are not nearly the amount of people working on BSD that there are for 
Linux or the other popular OSes. If you want it fixed, learn to code and 
fix it yourself instead of complaining or making absurd demands with 
respect to the fitness of the product.


More information about the Testing mailing list