nevermind, parabola is a great distro (with openrc version), but hyperbola will not draw dev-power from pb, because it will be a completly own breed. Yes the existing BSD’s are great, but none of them are fsf conform.

The effort of the hb-bsd will produce OSS that can synergize with all the projects you named.

made me smile, have an upvote 😉

More information: roadmap

https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:manual:contrib:hyperbola_roadmap

That is true. There are linux distros around with musl/busybox (alpine) and some distros without systemd. But i would really appreciate a fsf-conform distro with a fsf-conform BSD-kernel and the bsd userland - it’s just a nice addition to the existing oss-os world. It is not about “this OR that” - why not have both?

p.s. both runit and openrc are close enough to the unix philosophy

p.s.s. yes, macos derived from openBSD and is using a sytemd-like init, but - as said - macos mainly targets end-user system… it’s o’right for that - i think power users prefer os-designs closer to the unix philosophy.

BSD based systems (with the according userland) have a very clean and more minimalistic code base. In the last years Gnu/Linux systems drifted away from the ideals of the unix-style (e.g. systemd…). For an end-user-system this may be ok, but the general design of the bsd-systems is better imho.

I think it is a very good thing to have TWO options when choosing a FSF conform distro. Yes, for a laptop linux may be the more versatile option (for now…) but on a server a BSD-distro will be pure gold.

p.s. i have no problems using bsd on a laptop right now - it’s a very clean and well made system and the hardware support is sufficient.

The community-manager (forum: throgh) is very competent, just register in the forums and post smt.