HyperForum — Questions about Hyperbola

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-27T10:53:24Z

I hope that I do not look too strict or even unfriendly. Problem is: Text is always a medium for interpretations. As Hyperbola was and is always a small system-project with sure tough perspectives and also plannings the so-called "corridor" for further enhancements and especially wishes is not that big. The best would be and is: Invite people to get deep into topics, research and perhaps also sharing their insights and experiences done here. The original idea of free, libre software in its roots.

Therefore you are right on behalf of HyperbolaBSD especially.

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-27T05:44:01Z

You are quiet polite Throgh
I guess the beginnings of NetBSD and FreeBSD led to many questions, also the movements of Theo De Raadt and Matt Dillon to start OpenBSD and
DragonflyBSD. The beginnings of HyperbolaBSD should not be different.

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T20:45:59Z

There is no way to use pmount with such devices. As you have noted: You will still need to encrypt this first. But this is the way intended. Otherwise you would need to look out for projects having a different approach. Also the encryption on BSD-systems works complete different as there is no dm-crypt. So we are talking here about very GNU/Linux-specific parts. If you find a solution for automount an encrypted USB-device, please tell us here.

But this is not part of this thread, so please keep this on-topic. Thanks!

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T18:55:39Z

Hello Throgh . Please tell me, if I have an encrypted USB or SSD, how can I use pmount?
It turns out that the user will still have to use the terminal to decrypt the disk, even if he has Spacefm installed

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T13:47:14Z

No we have not considered replacing filezilla so far, but thanks for mentioning this project.

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T13:24:47Z

Have you considered replacing filezilla with gFTP, or does it have something proprietary or bloated?

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T12:32:04Z

ra.anima wrote:

spacefm, I thought it was in the udevil bundle that mounts and unmounts removable devices.
Will there be some kind of replacement for mounting and unmounting removable devices?

spacefm is independent from udevil as both are separate projects. So you can use also pmount, which will and is within Hyperbola at this moment. Please have a look at the package:

https://www.hyperbola.info/packages/ext … 4/spacefm/
https://www.hyperbola.info/packages/extra/i686/spacefm/

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T12:30:42Z

ra.anima wrote:

Another curious question, off topic.
I am interested in your opinion, which is better from your point of view of these three, which of these is closer to the philosophy of HyperbolaBSD:
Void linux
Alpine linux
or
FreeBSD ?

Personal I respect every project you have mentioned, same for the rest of the team. So every project has its own flavor. Surely also including compromises as Hyperbola is doing the same likewise with eudev. We will try to reduce and solve this as much as possible. Nevertheless it depends on what you personal want to reach!

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T11:47:13Z

spacefm, I thought it was in the udevil bundle that mounts and unmounts removable devices.
Will there be some kind of replacement for mounting and unmounting removable devices?

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T11:42:40Z

Another curious question, off topic.
I am interested in your opinion, which is better from your point of view of these three, which of these is closer to the philosophy of HyperbolaBSD:
Void linux
Alpine linux
or
FreeBSD ?

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T11:39:15Z

For the file-manager we have the following in our listing planned to stay:

lumina-fm
mc
rox
spacefm
worker
xfe

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T11:32:33Z

Regarding the kernel and user space, I get it. Thank you for your patience and explanation.

Regarding the file manager, I just did not understand which one is planned to be left out of the whole to leave.
Or will you make your own?
Or will only console file managers remain?

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T10:44:01Z

You are asking about functionalities within HyperbolaBSD: Please take into perspective that the first and foremost important functionality is to finish the pre-alpha booting into a running environment, simple said "terminal-emulation". The planned pre-alpha for HyperbolaBSD is the first step on the roadmap to do the further needed parts:

1. Create new code, replace already established code
2. Start with porting hyperman and hypertools
3. Start with porting the build-server
4. When finished porting the essential parts: Packaging

While point 2 - 4: On-going development and enhancement for HyperbolaBSD, kernel and userspace

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T10:38:36Z

ra.anima wrote:

And one more question about the file manager. Did I see that you are going to delete zzzfm, but will spacefm and udevil?
If not, which file manager will be in priority and which one's will be in general?
Or will you create your own?

udevil is also no longer part of Hyperbola. We plan to remove eudev / udev in version 0.4.6. Furthermore we stay at our plans to have a minimalistic system and so offer no bloated frameworks with Linux-only focus. That surely exclude many file-managers.

Re: Questions about Hyperbola

2024-03-26T10:35:29Z

There was and is a big problem within the communication going outside about Hyperbola and HyperbolaBSD. So best is to correct this: HyperbolaBSD is a complete own development using surely the kernel of OpenBSD as ground base hard fork. As you can see within the notes and the roadmap we are NOT only doing another migration towards "OpenBSD" as base.

The usage of FreeBSD bmake has the reasoning to create Makefiles more fitting on our purpose. To explain this in more detail: The hard fork of the code for kernel and userspace is one part, but another is to remove all non-free defined data. Likewise code licensed incompatible and surely also blobs included. Also we need to rewrite assembler-code included. We use bmake, but compile with GCC 8.4.