What's the debian of *BSD?

free

>>61499969
In terms of what is trying to be which is stable, solid, and secure: openbsd. In terms of community: freebsd.

>>61499969
Maybe the version of debian that actually uses the freebsd kernel.

>>61499969
isn't it kfreebsd/debian?

also, check out dysonOS. debian with illumos kernel.

>>61499969
All of them are 10 years behind GNU/Linux. Even stuff that claims to be user friendly just doesn't work. TrueOS crashes in VirtualBox and on all standard Intel hardware like Core2 laptops. Then you have GhostBSD which at least boots to the desktop but the installer crashes half way though the base system install. Everything else comes with an installer straight out of 1995 and is text based. You have to install desktops from their servers that are slow as fuck, and even if you follow all of the docs exactly XFCE just fucking breaks.

BSD is hipster shit that you have to tinker with for hours to get a working GUI on when I can download a Fedora or Ubuntu image, write it to a flash drive, and have a fully functioning, ready to use desktop in under 5 minutes. Fuck BSD and their incompetent SJW devs.

debian/freebsd

>>61500367
not everyone uses computers as a desktop. how long does it take you to configure a minimal firewall or container platform? how often does that shit fail under load, etc?

>>61500367
>shitting on *BSD
>only using the fringe OSs that nobody cares about nor uses
Nice cherrypicking.

>>61500367
BSD is so shit it can't even run video games, lmao.

>>61500863
we're video gaymers

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD
Idiot

>>61500863
Dude shut the fuck up. Leave the gaming to real men.

>>61499969
FreeBSD.

>>61500936
rude

>>61500863
PS3, PS4, Vita, and Switch all use FreeBSD-based operating systems. There's a big difference between not being able to run games and game developers not supporting the OSs.

>>61499969
FreeBSD
Both are retardedly insecure.

>>61502998
wow you're a bit dense aren't you?

>>61503014
Are you? Both Debian and FreeBSD have had their share of catastrophic security failures.
Like when a certain Debian package maintainer patched openSSL without understanding what he's doing and absolutely crippled it. The resolution required re-generating a fuckload of keys among other things.
FreeBSD had a huge vulnerability in its update mechanism which made it rather trivial to exploit a large number of systems. The response from their "security" team? They played dead until the problem got too serious and publicly known to ignore it any more.

>>61503133
>Debian package maintainer patched openSSL
9 years ago. Basically every OS with enough time has had serious security issues. Sometimes shite breaks down. Sometimes someone is careless. Fuckups are not unique to Debian or FreeBSD.

I can't comment on FreeBSD security team's attitude since I'm not familiar with that case, but for Debian your comment is misleading and shows lack of understanding security as a wider concept.

>>61499969
https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/

>>61500367
>Implying that a hipster would be smart enough to run a *nix OS

>>61503481
Last I checked, OS X was pretty common among the hipster crowd.

>>61503487
I know what you are saying, but I draw the line between MAC OS and the rest of the *nix population of OSs

>>61503496
Nobody gives a shit about your retarded arbitrary line.

>>61503502
Fuck off, you wanna argue like a child, go elsewhere

>>61503512
I'm not arguing like a child, I'm telling you that the arbitrary line you've drawn is meaningless. Because it is.