What is the archlinux of bsd distros? I want something that will

>>56481774
FreeBSD I suppose.
Then there's inherent shit security with BSD and FreeBSD's portsnap vulnerability that could not be fixed for months now.

Use a distro that let's you work, not makes you work

>>56482004
/thread

Also, majority of BSD flavors come as minimal installs. They don't require as much setup as Arch but are pretty close. So, any really.

but Like the man said, just don't do it. Go with something that works i.e. Linux

>>56481774
ArchBSD.

>>56481774
>BSD
>Lots of packages

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>56481774
PacBSD is literally the ArchLinux of BSDs.

>>56482394
I thought archbsd or pacbsd was dead?

>>56482004
>inherent shit security with !OpenBSD
ftfy

If you use FreeBSD over OpenBSD you're actually a fucked up retard dipshit. FreeBSD is worse than blowing raw eggs into your asshole with a straw

File: 1473288122138.png (849KB, 1092x5108px) Image search: [Google]

849KB, 1092x5108px

>>56482458
BTFO

Install arch linux.
It's the arch linux of linuxs

>>56482458
OpenBSD has no drivers

>>56482411
ArchBSD has rebranded to PacBSD.

>>56482496
Or... ORRRR, just use a real distro like Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, OpenSuse and actually do some real work. If the only work you are doing is installing a system you're just a glorified home IT guy.

>>56482567
What makes you think Arch will not let you do ""real work""? What's with this wincuck mentality

>>56482567
Tell me 1 (ONE) thing that Ubuntu/Fedora/Debian can do while Arch can't

>>56482474
>posting the worst fucking troll blog
Here we... here we... here we fucking go
>OpenBSD was not designed with security in mind
Utter fucking bullshit. For the record FreeBSD has seemingly never had security taken into consideration, that's why there have been far more vulnerabilities and stupid fuckups in FreeBSD.
>No MAC
Complexity is the enemy of security
>Ports aren't audited
Neither are FreeBSD ports. Do you actually expect all the fucking pieces of software to be individually inspected? Fuck off. Don't use shitty insecure software and put in the time to lock it down.
>sendmail and BIND in base
Incorrect! Your bait is seriously out of date as replacements for these daemons have been written long ago.
In conclusion, it is evident that you are a low effort low energy fanboy shill for a shit operating system and you should fucking neck yourself. Get a trip while you're at it so I can filter your faggot ass.

>>56482587
>>56482620
It's not about it not being able to do work. It's about setup time and wasting time customizing the system. I've used Arch off and on. I have nothing against it. It is just a waste of time once everything you can learn from it you have. It's a janky system made for those who want to learn. Not for those that want to do.

>>56482655
>Anything that points out how shit OpenBSD is becomes a troll
I love to think how autists look like when they are in full damage control

>Complexity is the enemy of security
>Turns on aggressive mitigations

Furthermore
Ports is what makes BSD systems inherently insecure

>>56482655
So you don't place flaws in a system on the makers of that system?

interesting

Take all this shitposting and misinfornation to the BSD general, please. >>56470526