Is this right?

I was looking into moving to bsd. I love openbox/tint as an many year user of crunchbang.
But I found this description on distrowatch,
"
But then, it is impossible to update or upgrade the system, or add software, which suggests that it is no more than a static FreeBSD with a very nice GUI. The OctoPkg application is essentially useless, because it can do nothing more than read the package lists. Even running ‘sudo freebsd-update fetch’ in the terminal does nothing more. It’s not even possible to add the Linux compatible repositories, in spite of what the NomadBSD handbook instructs.

So NomadBSD is not really what it claims to be.

It lacks the genuine persistence of a live (Linux) system in which software can actually be added and removed, and it lacks even the capabilities of a genuine frugal install that can do the same (e.g. Puppy, EasyOS, or Slax), so it is not truly a ‘live’ system.
"
Is this correct?

Hi @bobhund,

no, it’s not true, and I’m quite stunned by this comment/description.

as per my user experience (Windows, Linux, FreeBSD), NomadBSD is the best live/persistant distribution on a removable volume, it completely behaves as a configured/installed system. Also has the simplest installation method handled by GUI ever found among all others.
It needs improve on software-upgrading side although I’m actually using Octopackage as well to install new software.
Anyhow, the issues found in upgrading activity are addressed and mostly solved in the Errata section before the final solution on the next distribution.

1 Like