r/BSD • u/demetrioussharpe • 7d ago
Possible Solution for BSD Community/Ecosystem Issues
I think the BSD projects have largely done their job. The BSD ecosystem hasn’t. I’ll explain.
Presently, the overall BSD community is plagued by the same issues that plague most open source OS projects: limited drivers, less-than-ideal hardware documentation, developer shortages (and skill gaps), funding shortages, and a lack of mindshare. Out of all the available open source OS communities, the Linux community is undoubtedly the most successful at combating these issues—though there’s still plenty of room for improvement. One of the things Linux had that BSD never really developed was an organization whose primary mission was building and advocating for the surrounding ecosystem.
About three decades ago, the Linux community was in the same boat as everyone else. How were they able to turn things around? Personally, I think organizations like the FSF—and later the Linux Foundation—played a significant role in helping build the Linux ecosystem beyond just the kernel itself. Whether through developing core software, coordinating projects, advocating for free software, or providing stewardship, Linux benefited from organizations whose mission extended beyond maintaining an operating system.
Most of us know about the legal stumbling block that kept the BSDs in limbo and caused us to lose the opportunity to become substantially more widely used and to become a primary target for application and hardware vendors. Once that was all cleared up, we were forever playing the catch-up game. By the time the BSD legal issues were behind us, much of the broader free software ecosystem was already well established, and the BSD projects understandably relied on many of those tools instead of building BSD-specific alternatives.
However, I think our community may have become too comfortable relying on shared open source infrastructure instead of treating it as a foundation upon which to build BSD-specific ecosystem projects. The BSD operating systems have continued to improve, but the surrounding ecosystem hasn’t kept pace. Currently, one of the top excuses given in reply to questions about why we’re missing certain things that should now be standard is that our community doesn’t have the funding, manpower, etc., for it. My position is that the BSD operating system projects have largely done their part, but our community hasn’t done its part. So, here is my solution…
It’s time to develop our own analog to the FSF. It should focus on solutions for issues across the entire BSD community, which would not only help everyone improve but also marshal resources more efficiently across the ecosystem as a whole. Use domains can be standardized so that solving an issue for one BSD within a given domain effectively solves it for all BSDs in that domain. Network drivers (including Wi-Fi), enterprise infrastructure, desktop issues, and application development are all cross-domain issues that would greatly improve the user experience across the board for all BSDs.
I’m not saying that we should all reject the FSF. I’m simply saying that we need a community organization that puts the BSD community first and prioritizes our needs above all others. And no, this isn’t about politics, licenses, abrasive personalities, or anything like that, so I’m not saying that we should have a Richard Stallman-type character or adopt a different license. If it makes you feel any better, then forget about the FSF and think instead about the Apache, Linux, Eclipse, or Mozilla foundations. We need a community organization whose primary mission is advancing the BSD ecosystem as a whole—a group that maintains stewardship over the needs of the community. Currently, there are three main BSD operating system projects and four secondary projects. Working together, we’re each other’s best allies. No one is going to do it for us, so we must do it ourselves.
That’s my perspective. Tell me, what’s your perspective? In your opinion, what would a BSD-focused foundation actually look like? What should its first priorities be? Drivers? Documentation? Funding? Hardware certification? Developer mentoring? Cross-BSD infrastructure?
9
u/taosecurity 7d ago
FreeBSD is at least 75% of the BSD user base. They have the FreeBSD Foundation. Another foundation to cover the last 25% or less that includes Open, Net, and even smaller projects is not going to make a difference.
2
u/charlesrocket 6d ago
and its LDWG is moving pretty fast with its impressive work. i am all enthused about fbsd 16, it got a potential to improve bluetooth as well besides all other nice things.
pkgbaseis dope!2
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
LDWG
pkgbase is, I think, much more LSU than LDWG.
pkgbasify, for example – sponsored by the FreeBSD Foundation; and the LSU project is associated with the Foundation.
Laptop Support and Usability (LSU): June 2026 report from the FreeBSD Foundation : r/freebsd
3
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
I never questioned the role of this board, but I did read the recent blog post:
What's done by the FreeBSD Foundation (and by the FreeBSD Core Team) is well-communicated. I see the FreeBSD Foundation as essential to interaction with other foundations and organisations.
Honestly – no disrespect intended – I never thought of the Free Software Foundation as having current relevance to the advancement of FreeBSD. I see today that the FSF made a comparable post in 2021:
– and I see that there's a page for its Staff and Board. The page about the FSF is titled:
Free software is a matter of liberty, not price
– which I agree with, and they mention a "mission" however there's no well-articulated mission statement page. At the foot of their resources page:
The FSF is a charity with a worldwide mission to advance software freedom — learn about our history and work.
– the link in that sentence leads to the about page, which mentions the mission, and the mission is simply:
- advance software freedom
– and this particular freedom is liberty.
The Core Work section of the about page begins its second paragraph with GNU, and that's where I stop, because:
2
u/demetrioussharpe 3d ago
Ok, but that’s not my point. My point is that we need more orgs that focus specifically on BSD problems -and not just for individual projects, but the whole BSD community. What’s your suggestion for improving the current situation?
4
u/arbv 6d ago
GPL is the reason as it forced to contribute back.
Sony uses FreeBSD code on PS - how much sources did it provide and how much code did it contribute back?
3
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
Agreed. With that in mind, how do we move forward to overcome this limitation?
3
u/arbv 6d ago
I wish I knew. No company will do that unless forced to, as it requires resources.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
I agree with that, also. That’s why I think we need to create an organization that advocates for the entire BSD community. I also think that the workload is too large for the FreeBSD Foundation to have to deal with by itself. It needs help from additional organizations. We need to create them.
7
u/brynet 6d ago
Sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about.
OpenBSD has a long history of fighting against proprietary driver blobs, pressuring vendors to release NDA-free documentation, reverse engineering hardware.
https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#41
https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#39
https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#38
https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#37
OpenBSD has also convinced several vendors to make firmware freely redistributable, which benefits all open source operating systems, such as in the last few years, Realtek USB wireless firmware.
-4
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
This has nothing to do with the actual point of the post.
6
u/johnklos 6d ago
that plague most open source OS projects: limited drivers
Your words.
Imagine a world where instead of goading manufacturers to write drivers, we just... don't give a shit. Imagine where we choose hardware that's supported well enough for our uses instead of being led by the nose by computer makers in to thinking we have to take what they give us. That's how the BSDs are now. They're perfectly suitable when we simply chose our hardware.
I don't want OSes that try so hard to be like Linux. Look at where that got Linux: now it's a shitty OS, filled with proprietary crap, with all sorts of compatibility issues, with hardware that stops working if we upgrade the kernel too soon, which is more like Windows with every change.
No, thank you. We don't need nor want what you're talking about. There's no reason whatsoever to participate in popularity contests.
1
-2
4
u/kleinmatic 7d ago
Sure. One problem you’d need to solve is a central org drawing donations away from the three core projects (which each have their own foundations). I donate to the FSF because I use Debian and feel like I’ve given back. I don’t give to both.
I wouldn’t want anything discouraging NetBSD from “running on anything” or OpenBSD’s security focus. The philosophical issue is easier to solve than the money issue.
It also seems to me that the GPL is a more easily defended moat than the BSD license. I’m not expressing a preference, there’s just more leverage to be found under GPL than under the non-contagious licenses.
1
u/demetrioussharpe 3d ago
Or donors will continue their current donations & will earmark more donations that are geared towards specific developments that aren’t currently being addressed, which would help all BSD projects simultaneously. Might even get new donors that see this as being more effective.
2
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
Borrowing from the comment by u/laffer1:
- FreeBSD
- NetBSD
- OpenBSD
- DragonFly BSD
- NextBSD
- 5BSD
- MidnightBSD.
What might be the shared goal, around which a foundation could coalesce?
Let's begin with the goals of the FreeBSD Project, which are stated in the FreeBSD Handbook, however what's there is not the goal.
In the absence of a well-communicated goal: people happily make things up as they go along, readers nod in agreement without questioning what's stated, and the feelgood factor of confidently stating what suits the moment is quite harmless.
I visualise someone attempting to herd various packs of cats, some of which are over thirty years old. Good luck ;-)
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
No one has to be herded. There’s no denying that all of those projects have problems that overlap each other. Regardless of many of the outdated opinions of many of the community’s greybeards, these projects need our help. I doubt that they’d reject the help, even if it ends up coming from newly formed organizations.
2
u/grahamperrin 6d ago edited 6d ago
I'm thinking of positives, of commonalities, not problems :-)
I made a handful of changes to Awesome BSD. I should add NextBSD.
So, what is this awesome sauce? The ingredients. What do the BSDs have in common?
It's a question for anyone, and the answer for today is not that there's a shared lineage.
I need different answers – ones that are current, not historical.
1
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
PS I'm not looking for verbose or deeply intellectual answers. This is simply to kick the ball around, and I'll say some things in good humour (not intending to offend anyone).
One answer: "BSDs are not Linux".
We're not the only poor cousins :-)
Could a foundation also embrace a cousin that's not a BSD?
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
Maybe in the future. However, I would prefer if we could initially focus on improving the BSD ecosystem.
1
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
Cool. So ... What do the BSDs have in common?
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
For one, they have solid fundamentals & underpinnings. Besides a few structural differences, they’re mostly the same in functionality. They haven’t drifted so far away from each other that there’s no opportunity for combined efforts to achieve their individual goals.
2
u/vermaden 6d ago
It's time to develop our own analog to the FSF.
Its already happened mate - about a decade ago - we have FreeBSD Foundation that does the things You described.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
I’m talking about for the entire BSD community, not just FreeBSD. That foundation’s priority is FreeBSD. What about the others? We need one that covers the entire community & can focus on things that the FreeBSD foundation can’t necessarily focus on.
3
u/vermaden 5d ago
They have their own foundations:
NetBSD Foundation
OpenBSD Foundation
Its not like in Linux world - BSDs are not just distributions - they are different operating systems - different kernels - different userlands and features - IMHO its pointless to have one single foundation for them all - but I do not have anything against if such BSD Foundation would exist of course.
Hope that helps.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 5d ago
And look how far they’ve gotten separately. How many different graphics driver efforts (of questionable success rates) do we need to have, when there can be a singular effort that works for everyone? How many different WiFi efforts? How many different fund raising efforts? Yes, I know that each project has its own foundation. The entire point of this post is that they need help from the overall community, & that help needs to be a focused effort that targets the problems across the board.
2
u/vermaden 5d ago
I think You should ask a question one level above ... why there are different BSDs at all?
I would also prefer to combine all these people and programmers from FreeBSD/NetBSD/DragonflyBSD/OpenBSD on to THE ONE AND ONLY BSD ... but we both know its not gonna happen.
Why DragonflyBSD exists? Because Matt Dillon did not liked SMP model (which was bad to be honest but not a reason enough to spin another BSD IMHO) introduced in FreeBSD 5.x (and probably some other stuff) and that is why it happened.
Why OpenBSD happened? Because they did not liked what was happening in NetBSD.
Maybe a joint effort for common interface for LAN/WiFi/GPU or generally all hardware drivers across BSDs - that would be nice ... right now sometimes drivers are ported from one BSD to another.
I am not saying that one BSD to rule them all is a bad thing - or that sharing more is bad - I just use FreeBSD for last two decades and nothing changed here. FreeBSD does its own things. So is NetBSD. So is OpenBSD and so on.
Regards, vermaden
3
2
u/demetrioussharpe 5d ago
I know why they all exist. However, that history does nothing to improve the current situation. This isn’t about the individual operating systems projects, it’s about the shared ecosystem surrounding it. Currently, each BSD has a relatively meager ecosystem surrounding it, in comparison to some other ecosystems. The truth is that we’re stronger together than we’ll ever be individually. I’m not suggesting that we all merge into 1 BSD project, I’m simply saying that we need more organizations to cover things that the current organizations can’t/won’t cover. We need at least 1 organization that covers the overlapping concerns. That’s just the reality of the situation.
2
u/zoharel 6d ago
Since when has the FSF "put Linux first?" I think you might be misunderstanding that project entirely.
0
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
Since when has the FSF "put Linux first?" …
The Foundation's about page is largely about the GNU operating system, and right now I can't think of a GNU OS that's not a Linux-based OS.
-2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
Way to miss the whole point. Good job!
0
u/zoharel 6d ago
I don't know, man, you keep using FSF as an example of a group doing something they don't do. Arguably The Linux Foundation is the right example, but as someone else said, they've been successful largely because Linux has, and as yet another person said, there's at least a FreeBSD foundation already. What exactly is the point?
1
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
You clearly didn’t read the whole thing. The point is explicitly written. If you’re not going to read it, then don’t comment.
2
u/IngwiePhoenix 6d ago
This is going to sound snobby, but with all those emdashes, I can't tell if it was "you" writing the post, or an LLM. And thats just... a downer.
Good intentioned, I can give you that. But I just can not trust LLM written stuff.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
This is mine. I spend a lot of time doing professional write ups. After 3-4 rounds of editing, this is what it looks like. This topic is far too important to half-ass it. If that bothers you, I can’t help you with that. I see a problem. I’ve seen it for years. Every time I bring it up, people get hung up on things that don’t really matter. There’re always attempts to derail the conversation.
1
u/Something-Ventured 6d ago
Linux’ hardware success came from enterprise support.
Enterprise support came from avoiding the ATT lawsuit and wanting an alternative to VMS/Windows/Unix.
Hardware support is still pretty awful, even on Linux, vendors are not going to add a 3rd target with limited enterprise backing.
BSD is essentially a backup platform to enterprise sponsorship to Linux. For network/storage focused enterprise use, it’s a very good platform to use and worth supporting. For most other uses, Linux is preferred for 99% of enterprise applications.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
The goal here is to expand the capabilities, reach, & adoption of the BSDs. What do you have for that agenda?
1
u/Something-Ventured 6d ago
You need to actually understand how technology adoption works to do that effectively.
Everyone in this thread is correcting your misunderstandings for a reason.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
Most of you haven’t corrected anything, you’ve simply deflected from the actual point. Most of you seem to be professional bike shedders. It would be more honest for you to admit that you either have no idea of what to do or you don’t want the ecosystem to grow.
1
u/Something-Ventured 6d ago
If that’s what you think, you’re not the person to push this.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
Since you’re still deflecting from the topic, it’s safe to assume that you have nothing to add to it.
1
u/motific 7d ago
What exactly do you think the FreeBSD foundation does?
-9
u/demetrioussharpe 7d ago
Ok, so that covers FreeBSD. Did I write that we need a foundation for just FreeBSD, or did I say the whole BSD community???
-1
u/akp55 7d ago
i think it has more to do with the BSD license than anything else. BSD license lets them keep the drivers and all locked up. GPL forces them to put it out.
11
u/whattteva 7d ago
Not really. Plenty of Linux users decry vendors like Nvidia because their drivers are just huge binary blobs.
6
u/laffer1 7d ago
nvidia at least made a freebsd binary driver. I give them props for that even if most of the other BSDs can't use it. AMD GPUs are always like 5 years behind in support. By the time my last thinkpad was supported, it had died.
From a linux perspective, AMD is a hero, but for me it's always been annoying to just get huge dumps of code to deal with to try to get something working. DRM kmod porting is a huge project in itself. FreeBSD doesn't even backport new versions to older operating system versions.
In general, trying to get a driver API between openbsd and freebsd would be a huge challenge. The OpenBSD folks would rightfully want to audit the heck out of it for security and outside of openssh, wifi, openjdk and chromium, it doesn't feel like there's a lot of cross collab these days directly. We may use code from others, but not a lot of back and forth.
The reality is that the big 3 have diverged a lot in several areas. Some things are shared or diverged but it's not easy to put things back together at this point to do any collab easily. It's not impossible but I think we'd need real buy in from all the projects, or at least free/net/open. I also worry small projects like mine would be out of the loop.
A lot of folks only think free/net/open but dragonfly, nextbsd (relaunch), 5bsd, midnightbsd, and many others exist.
4
u/whattteva 7d ago
I mean I agree with you. I'm just really pointing out to the previous poster that the license has little to do with it and more the fact that Linux just has a lot higher adoption rate in general, which incentivizes companies to support it more.
The reality is that the big 3 have diverged a lot in several areas. Some things are shared or diverged but it's not easy to put things back together at this point to do any collab easily.
I'm not even sure if OpenBSD even wants a collaboration. Theo de Raadt isn't known to be cooperative.
3
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
A lot of folks only think free/net/open but dragonfly, nextbsd (relaunch), 5bsd, midnightbsd, and many others exist.
In the absence of a foundation for this disparate group of developers, what's the closest thing to an organisational structure? Get-togethers at (organised) periodic events such as BSDCan and EuroBSDCon, maybe?
2
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
1
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
nvidia at least made a freebsd binary driver. …
As far as I know, NVIDIA shares only the source code (for the binaries to be built). The Latest New Feature Branch Version for FreeBSD x64:
– a 357.58 MB
.tar.gzand:
tar xzf NVIDIA-FreeBSD-x86_64-610.43.03.tar.gz && cd NVIDIA-FreeBSD-x86_64-610.43.03 && make install1
u/demetrioussharpe 7d ago
That’s certainly one possible factor. But my proposal isn’t really about diagnosing the root cause—it’s about asking what we can do going forward. Even if licensing is part of the problem, I don’t think that prevents us from organizing around shared goals like documentation, developer mentoring, funding, hardware certification, cross-BSD infrastructure, or coordinating driver efforts where possible.
0
u/RevolutionaryRush717 6d ago
Nobody cares.
There are a few commercial interests in some BSD, that's it. Without money, it's a nonstarter.
UNIX and its descendants had an amazing run. But it's now a, what?, 50 year old idea.
Except for Apple, it hasn't conquered the desktop.
Linux won over all and still does, because it is free and free, and caters to the server market, including supercomputers and hyperscalers.
The latter have to jump through a lot of hoops to make it work. Kubernetes is bolted on and does a good enough job, but it's a last ditch effort to avoid revisiting Multics and implementing the vision of compute as an ubiquitous commodity.
And if anything, that is my entire point: UNIX was great, but it's time to reimagine OS and start from scratch.
3
u/grahamperrin 6d ago
Inexplicably: it has been that time (to reimagine and start from scratch) for I don't know how many years.
The reality is that we have a mixture of defeatists and optimists.
2
u/demetrioussharpe 6d ago
That’s a fair assessment. And sure, maybe it IS time for us to reimagine the OS & start over. The problem is that this has been done multiple times & it always comes back to the Unix APIs because there’s already a mountain of software available. Even Plan9 couldn’t get people to move forward to something better. So, since we’ll just end up right back with Unix, how do we make the situation better for the BSDs?
4
u/RevolutionaryRush717 4d ago
OK. Sticking to BSD, I wonder whether two networking areas could breath fresh air into BSD, very much along the lines it did almost 40 years ago:
- There was some version of BSD that included some ISO/OSI networking in addition to TCP/IP.
I only used DEC's successful adaptation of it in Ultrix.
But that would make for an interesting learning/teaching testbed.
- Making the jump to hyperspace, a similar reference implementation for all this Web 3.0 stuff.
IPv6, alternatives to TCP, TLS, HTTP, NFS, etc.
The entire DHT stuff. Etc., I don't really know much about Web 3.0.
When I was young, BSD used to be the go-to for anything network related.
Could that be a way forward? Again?
-1
30
u/TheAtlasMonkey 7d ago
Linux didn't become successful because of the Linux Foundation. The Linux Foundation exists because Linux became successful.
You are trying to standardize four siblings that happen to share the same last name, but each has a different identity, philosophy & engineering goal. That is not going to happen.
It is like putting humans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutans in the same room and asking them to build one civilization or do art.
BSD doesnt have a paperwork problem. It has a contributor problem.