
Two Weeks of FreeBSD – Current Impressions - eatonphil
http://blog.eatonphil.com/2015-11-18/two-weeks-of-freebsd---current-impressions
======
NuSkooler
I _love_ FreeBSD as a server, and I too have forced into a desktop before...
but probably should not have.

If you want FreeBSD + desktop, try out PC-BSD
([http://www.pcbsd.org/](http://www.pcbsd.org/))

~~~
eatonphil
One reason I decided against going with PC-BSD is because apparently the
package management system is a mess. I cannot remember the exact location I
read that, but this thread might be a start [0]. Overall, I just got the
impression that it isn't worth it.

[0] [https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/does-a-gui-package-
manage...](https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/does-a-gui-package-manager-
exist.51364/#post-288002)

~~~
Albright
That's odd. Dead simple package management is one of PC-BSD's biggest wins.
That thread seems to be about running PC-BSD's package managers on vanilla
FreeBSD, which… yeah, I don't know if that's going to work very well. It
doesn't quite apply to running PC-BSD itself.

Did you find Cooltrainer's page about FreeBSD desktops? [1] It may have come
in handy during your exploration.

1: [https://cooltrainer.org/a-freebsd-desktop-
howto/](https://cooltrainer.org/a-freebsd-desktop-howto/)

~~~
eatonphil
To clarify, I think there was mention that PC-BSD had a tendency to be behind
the FreeBSD ports releases because it required the extra wrapping. But I am
totally hazy on this so I guess I should just defer.

I did stumble upon Cooltrainer, yes. But I think ultimately I did not find it
useful other than just nice reading material.

One of the "problems" is that there a ten ways to configure every setup and no
one has the same setup. Sticking with the manpages and official guide were
ultimately the most helpful things to me personally.

~~~
Albright
> To clarify, I think there was mention that PC-BSD had a tendency to be
> behind the FreeBSD ports releases because it required the extra wrapping.

Okay, that's true - if the maintainer doesn't put in the work or there's no
maintainer in the first place, the work won't get done. I find that's true
with no matter what ports/package manager you choose to use, though, and at
any rate, at least back when I experimented with PC-BSD, nothing's stopping
you from ignoring PC-BSD's package manager altogether and just using the
vanilla FreeBSD ones.

Well, I still think you should give PC-BSD a try some day, though I totally
understand if you want to take a break from tinkering and use whatever's
currently working for you for a while. We've all been there. :)

~~~
eatonphil
I guess I'll have to give it a go then! Probably in VirtualBox though. I am
loathe to repeat this process.

Also, any reason you'd recommend this over GhostBSD? I don't really know the
difference. They seem to be offering similar things.

~~~
Albright
Back when I first tried PC-BSD, I don't think GhostBSD existed yet. I've tried
it once or twice since then, though. GhostBSD is definitely more lightweight
and simple in what it provides (no graphical package manager, for example),
whereas PC-BSD is more kitchen sink; I guess whichever one works for you
depends on what you're looking for.

By all means, feel free to give both a try.

