It is yes! It's great. What I like about FreeBSD is the decoupling of packages and OS. You can have a stable OS version but still have rolling packages. Somehow most Linux distros can't manage that.
I also like that I don't constantly have to learn new stuff like the new ip commands or systemd. It just works. Oh and ZFS on root as a first class citizen is amazing of course.
> What I like about FreeBSD is the decoupling of packages and OS. You can have a stable OS version but still have rolling packages. Somehow most Linux distros can't manage that.
This! I didn't realize how much I wanted this. FreeBSD release base packages are stable but all the regular packages are super up to date. Plasma looks very updated and stable.
I've tried rolling distros like Opensuse Tumble and Manjaro but eventually if you don't update them regularly you get a huge change and often many things change/break. Had your bluetooth speakers working finally? Now that's gone!
On the other hand stable releases in linux distros also seem to fail. Didn't update your random Ubuntu server in the corner of the office for the last year? Well now the apt links are broken and down for the release so you can't update the current release so you can upgrade.
> I also like that I don't constantly have to learn new stuff like the new ip commands or systemd. It just works. Oh and ZFS on root as a first class citizen is amazing of course.
It's nice, many of the same basics I learned on freebsd 6 years ago all still magically work. ifconfig works even with ipv6. You learn two files and you can do most anything.
I'm definitely gonna consider Freebsd for embedded devices if I can as well. You dint need buildroot or yocto as it's already part of the BSDs.
I said 'most' :) and it goes for most of the mainstream distros. I wouldn't consider nix that, due to the complex configuration. As a corporate admin I do like declarative management at work but for home no. Even though FreeBSD has some aspects of it (you can turn stuff on and off in rc.conf)
And I got a 504 error (served by CloudFront) on that status page earlier. The error message suggested there may have been a great increase in traffic that caused it.
Compilation Performance
Small files (<100 lines): <1 second
Medium projects (1K-10K lines): 5-30 seconds
Large projects (100K+ lines): 30-300 seconds with incremental compilation
Love that there's an upper limit on compilation time. No matter how large your project gets, it will never take more than five minutes to compile (incrementally).
Because it's a stepping stone to other kinds of safety. Memory safety isn't the be-all and end-all, but it gets us to where we can focus other important things.
And turns out in this particular case we don't even have to pay much for it in terms of performance.
> The real underlying comparison statement here is far more subjective. It's along the lines of: "I find it easier to write solid code in rust than in zig".
Agreed! But also how about "We can get pretty close to memory safety with the tools we provide! Mostly at runtime! If you opt-in!" ~~ signed, people (Zig compiler itself, Bun, Ghostty, etc) who ship binaries built with -Doptimize=ReleaseFast
I've seen the amount of effort Mitchell &co put into ensuring memory safety of Ghostty in the 1.2 release notes, but after upgrading I am still afraid to open a new pane while there's streaming output in the current one because in 1.1.3 that meant a crash more often than not.
