Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Operating Systems Software BSD

FreeSBIE 1.1 Screenshot Tour 40

Posted by timothy from the cuteness-and-light dept.
linuxbeta writes "FreeSBIE is a FreeBSD LiveCD, or an operating system that is able to load directly from a bootable CD, without any installation process, without any hard disk. It's possible to use the BSDInstaller to install FreeSBIE on your hard drive, and then turn it into FreeBSD 5.3-STABLE by means of cvsup. At OSDir we installed FreeSBIE 1.1 and grabbed a series of great screenshots of this slick FreeBSD OS."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FreeSBIE 1.1 Screenshot Tour More

FreeSBIE 1.1 Screenshot Tour

Comments Filter:

  • Uh-huh (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Rie Beam ( 632299 ) on Monday December 20, 2004 @11:51PM (#11144356) Journal

    "LiveCD, or an operating system that is able to load directly from a bootable CD, without any installation process, without any hard disk."

    I'm sad to report that the above statement was half the summary.

  • xfce4....as heavy? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by endx7 ( 706884 ) on Tuesday December 21, 2004 @02:07AM (#11144983) Homepage Journal
    Wow, FreeSBIE must be trying for lightweight if they consider xfce4 to be heavy.

    I mean, if you are going to talk about heavy you have to talk about gnome or kde :P

    • Re:xfce4....as heavy? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by setagllib ( 753300 ) on Tuesday December 21, 2004 @02:46AM (#11145109)
      It's pretty heavy given its lack of functionality. For most uses, Fluxbox with a pager and use of ~/.gtkrc[-2.0] is enough, but at less than a tenth the size. A large part of its size is its image-based themes though.

      I tried GNOME 2.8 before and was heftily disappointed. It has about a third of the functionality of KDE but with about ~30MiB extra compressed source to download. If it wasn't for its less-evil-than-Qt license it would have no merit at all.
      • And Qt is evil because ...
        • You either need a special license or a legal copy of MSVC++ to use it. In this sense it is even more restrictive than MFC, though admittedly more useful.

          GTK is GPL (or LGPL? anyway..) and hence can be used safely for most things, provided you don't use the code itself in a way that would conflict with the GPL. That's okay though.

          • I need a legal copy of MSVC++?? How they dare...

            Seriously, you're free to develop [trolltech.com] open source software with Qt on MacOS X and UNIX/UNIX-like OSes. So, no, you don't need a special license nor a copy of MSVC++ to use Qt

            If you want to develop proprietary software or develop software for Windows you have to buy a commercial license [trolltech.com] of course. And that is not more evil than you wanting to write proprietary software/for Windows.

            • Re:xfce4....as heavy? (Score:1, Informative)

              by Anonymous Coward
              If you want to develop proprietary software or develop software for Windows you have to buy a commercial license of course. And that is not more evil than you wanting to write proprietary software/for Windows.

              I believe setagllib's point is that you can write software for Windows without paying Microsoft to use their Windows API. It doesn't matter what license you license your software under.

              But you can't write software for KDE unless you 1) GPL it or 2) buy a license from QT. Stop. Period. No third choi

    • It's a fair warning, though---you never know when your LiveCD is going to be used to resurrect a crashed Pentium II that's being used as a print server. My primary computer is a PII/300 laptop with 64MB; the first time I booted Debian/Woody, the system was thrashing so hard that booting back into Windows 98 was something of a relief...

    • Wow, FreeSBIE must be trying for lightweight if they consider xfce4 to be heavy.

      No, xfce4 just simply is heavy, I'm afraid. The fact that there are elephant-sized window managers out there doesn't make a horse lightweight.

      If you've been using XFce for long, you know that it used-to be FAR lighter. Before the switch to GTK-2, the panel + window manager used up about 6MBs of RAM, and was incredibly fast. Some of it is the fault of XFce4 including many more eye-candy features, but it's mostly GTK-2.

    • I mean, if you are going to talk about heavy you have to talk about gnome or kde :P

      • twm => Heavy
      • xfce4 => Elephantine
      • kde => Degenerate
      • gnome => Singularity

  • Why screenshots from an OS? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jotaeleemeese ( 303437 ) on Tuesday December 21, 2004 @04:21AM (#11145442) Homepage Journal
    That is rubish. Most likely they are screenshoots of the window manager.

    If one is talking about the advantages and disadvantages of an OS one should talk about what the OS does better and what the OS has still to achieve.

    I am sick and tired of the fanboys of eye candy "reviewing" an OS based on how "nice" the window manager looks (who cares if the window manager itself is a PITA to configure).

    • Re:Why screenshots from an OS? (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      this wasnt a review of an OS, but of the packaging of an OS and how it looked and what was included. the screenshots were very relivant and they accomplished exactly what they set out to do.

      as far as the superiority of FreeBSD... well if you dont know its because you havent used it. you know that whole "build it and they will come" thing? they werent talking about you i guess. :D

      p.s. just for the record, it IS superior. ;|;;
    • That is rubish. Most likely they are screenshoots of the window manager.

      Screenshots 1-5 are of the bootloader and subsequent setup - no WM to be found. Admittedley, from that point forward it's all X+WM.
      1. That is rubish. Most likely they are screenshoots of the window manager.

      Look at the *other* screenshots listed on the osdir.com site. [osdir.com] Most of them are also of the WM & or WM+desktop.

      If you don't like that, you can take them up on the offer of replacing them with other shots; " We love screenshots! Got a new release to show us? Ping us where to pick them up!".

      Either way, I *DO* like the screenshot previews...they are SCREENSHOTS not detailed OS comparisons.

  • What is that? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by numbski ( 515011 ) * <numbskiNO@SPAMhksilver.net> on Tuesday December 21, 2004 @11:19AM (#11148066) Homepage Journal
    In the upper right hand corner of the desktop?

    I've been looking for something similar to Mac OS X's GeekTool [tynsoe.org] for X11, but hadn't found anything yet. That looks like what I'm looking for.

    Anyone know?

    • Re:What is that? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by 0racle ( 667029 )
      I have xrootconsole displaying the contents of the syslog, but it doesn't handle a log swtich over well. If you use KDE there is superkaramba, for Gnome I assume gDesklets can do the same thing.

      I would also like to know what that thing in the top right was aswell though.

  • Different? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by cuteseal ( 794590 )
    How is this different to the hundreds (ok I exaggerate) of other "boot off a usb keydrive / cd rom" distros out there?

Slashdot Top Deals

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Close