DesktopBSD: February 2008 Archives

I've been shuttling CDs in and out of my Gateway Solo 1450 laptop, just seeing what works and how well.

I've also been fiddling around with the BIOS settings, trying to get the CPU fan under control in both Linux and the various BSDs. A select few Linux kernels do this automatically ... most don't. I can control the fan with a cron job, but I've never, ever been able to do this with any version of BSD.

Until today. For some reason, I ran DesktopBSD 1.6 as a live CD, and the fan fell silent, turning on at various intervals, then off.

Like it's supposed to do.

I rebooted.

It worked again.

A couple of boots later, it stopped working. I changed nothing between boots. It could've had something to do with going from Debian Lenny to DesktopBSD ...

So while ACPI fan control is possible with FreeBSD -- upon which DesktopBSD is based -- I've got nothing in the bag. And it may never work again.

I tried PC-BSD 1.4 and FreeBSD 6.3 (just booting, not installing) ... and the fan roared as always. I thought I could control it from a console, but that didn't work.

But for two brief, shining moments, I had a FreeBSD-based system running with CPU fan management working perfectly.

If only it would happen again.

After whining over a dozen or so entries about how my VIA C3 Samuel-based test box would boot and install OpenBSD but not NetBSD, FreeBSD, DesktopBSD or PC-BSD, I've had a great time working in OpenBSD, and I was surprised to learn that the NetBSD 4-based live CD boots into a KDE desktop, looks great and runs pretty well, too.

I recently burned the latest DesktopBSD CD, which in its latest version boots as a live CD and will install the system. On my Gateway Solo 1450 laptop, besides the power management not working, there's an unattractive blob that follows the cursor everywhere it goes (it's a cute little program-dependent icon otherwise). But on a fanless desktop (there is a CPU fan, but it doesn't run and hasn't killed the CPU yet)

But my desktop test box has never been able to boot a FreeBSD-based CD until today, when I figured I'd give DesktopBSD 1.6 a try. It booted, configured the monitor for 1280 x 1024 (I prefer 1024 x 768 and will try it that way later) and is now up and running. If I had more time, I'd do a full install on one of my three drives that I rotate in and out of use (they sit atop a CD-RW drive, all outside the main box and connected with extra-long power and IDE cables).

The DesktopBSD KDE environment doesn't look as nice as the one in the NetBSD live CD, and I'm not a big fan of KDE mostly because my old hardware can use all the help and speed it can get, but running both of these live CDs gives me hope that I can do some work with all NetBSD and FreeBSD in addition to OpenBSD to see what fits my hardware and goals for a desktop system.

So I think I'm "discovering" the NetBSD live CD, but I learn that Distrowatch announced the damn thing in 2006. All I can say is that I'm very, very impressed.

It's NetBSD, it boots on my temperamental test box, and not only does it have X, it has a full KDE desktop with tons of applications -- the full KOffice, Konqueror, Firefox, Abiword, K3b, Krita, the GIMP, Inkscape, JuK, XMMS, -- hell, just say it's got a full KDE 3.5.4 setup and then some, and NetBSD autoconfigured for my monitor (with the VESA option) and looks absolutely gorgeous.

If the NetBSD people could someday, someway, make this an installable live CD, they'd really have something here. So far, this looks and works better on my computer than DesktopBSD and PC-BSD. I guess the one thing this version of NetBSD is missing when compared to DesktopBSD and PC-BSD is graphical package managment, but the rest of it looks and works so well ...

While the NetBSD live CD attempts to configure a static IP address for you (ignore this if you use DHCP), it didn't work. To configure a static IP in NetBSD at a terminal -- and it is slightly different than doing the same thing in Linux -- here's how to do it (adapted from my similar tutorial for the FreeBSD-based FreeSBIE live CD):

My Ethernet interface, usually eth0 in Linux, is called rtk0 in NetBSD. If you're unsure, run this command:

$ ifconfig -a

That should output the name of your Ethernet interface.

To set the static IP in NetBSD I either used the same terminal window or opened a terminal window (Konsole in the KDE menu works fine) and became root:

$ su
(When prompted, for a password, the root password is root. If you signed on as root, you don't have to su, since you're already root).

At the # prompt, do the following (substituting your own networking numbers, of course):

# ifconfig rtk0 192.9.200.20 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.9.200.255

# route add default 192.9.200.254
(Note: don’t use route add default gw, like in Linux — gw is not needed. As above, enter your own router/gateway address)

I also set up my name servers in /etc/resolv.conf (I used vi because I knew it would be there. You can also use any of the other KDE text editors in the live CD environment. Use any text editor you wish in its place:

# vi /etc/resolv.conf

once in the file, I added these lines:

domain yourdomain.com
nameserver 192.9.200.4
nameserver 192.9.200.2

(as always, add your own search domain and name server IPs, then save and close the file; you should now be ready to start Firefox and begin browsing the Web. Note: my connection doesn't require use of a domain in /etc/resolv.conf)

And again, if you have a dynamic connection, ignore this completely.

Additional info: Look at this PDF, which looks like a PowerPoint presentation for some background on BSD live CDs.

Why a desktop installation of OpenBSD?

It's a legitimate question. According to Distrowatch, among the three main BSD projects (they don't like to be called "distros"), FreeBSD is way out in front -- and is the base for PC-BSD and DesktopBSD -- followed by OpenBSD and NetBSD.

And even though there are two desktop-focused versions of FreeBSD, and it's possible to turn all three of the major BSD projects into a desktop-worthy system, the question remains: Why not just stick with Linux, with its usually superior hardware detection, vastly larger community of users (who in theory and often in practice can provide all the help you need to get a system up and running) and much larger choice of distributions?

For one thing, Linux isn't alone on the desktop, nor should it be. Apple has a hugely popular desktop operating system based in part on code from BSD. And another operating system derived from Unix -- OpenSolaris -- is also inching onto the desktop with its Indiana project.

I think the competition is enormously healthy for free, open-source software, and I support that competition and choice wholeheartedly.

And using OpenBSD to build up a desktop system is just plain fun. It's more of a challenge, and all the configuration that I've done and am doing just teaches me more about what makes operating systems tick, even in my technologically feeble state.

I'm no coder. I've never programmed anything. I just mess around with hardware and software and then write about it.

I'm pretty much compelled to do all the things I've done over the past year and a half. It hasn't gotten boring.

And while I'm not going to move away from Linux, if the hardware and software cooperate -- as they have on this test machine -- I see no reason not to spend some considerable time running OpenBSD and seeing what I can do with it.

Again, my thanks go to all the people behind OpenBSD as well as the bloggers whose experience has paved the way for me to consider running the operating system and then to install and begin configuring it.

Going forward, I hope all of the major BSD projects -- FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD -- will continue to grow, keeping their documentation of the same ultra-high quality and enabling users to get more and more hardware working to the point where both server and desktop users have a greater number of choices than ever with which to get things done.