Slashdot Mirror

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, whose OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog /msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, un der "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.

Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
He's back to writing BSD code, just for a different project.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"

$ strings /C:/FTP.EXE | grep Calif
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.

Mike Smith also works for apple now.
There's an article on daemonnews about it, under "BSD at Apple"

Thanks for the post,

3) BSDRTS and LinuxRTS are almost identical in every way.
2) BSD actually uses less mem and is smaller especially picoBSD
1) You are absolutely right about the MMU I did not realise that Linux had been ported to non MMU systems (though I should have if I had really thought about it from that side.

Your comment lead me to take a look see and find this comparison between BSD and RTOSs and so I think you again.

Do you know what the fsck you're talking about, or are you just blowing sh*t out your rectum?

Ingres began life in 1977, and was taken commercial in 1985, so it's probably older than you are.

If they get Linux they'll use that as precedent for *BSD, OS-X and anything else they can get a hold of.

Successfully suing IBM or others re Linux is not a precedent for suing any 4.4BSD derivative. However, a successful lawsuit against a company using a 4.4BSD derivative might be a precedent for a successful Linux lawsuit where BSD code has been used in Linux.

Of course that's not really what the issue is at all. SCO is unlikely to sue a BSD user or a company selling a BSD derivative. They may try and claim that some of the proprietary code in BSD which was removed in the AT&T settlement made its way into Linux, or that copyright notices on BSD code were removed. You should have a look at this article which cleared the matter up for me.

How nice, NetBSD 1.6.2 has been available for several hours and not one mention. Of course don't worry, in the meantime there's plenty of room to post the same story three or four times. Maybe that's why all the BSD folks have left slashdot and gone to daemonnews instead.

Losing JKH from -core was to say the least, unsavory, yet you think FreeBSD is dependant on 1 or 2 members of the -core team? I mean... come on, seriously? If FreeBSD is "dead" because of a 'decline in market share' or due to losing a member or two of the core team, you're just sadly mistaken. To play devil's advocate: Let's assume you're correct, and we lose half our user base. What a pity! /*sarcasm*/ Regardless, we'll continue to hack away, we really don't care - and our success is NOT measured by how many use our "Product." If that were the case around the board, Linux might as well be refered to as "dead", since Microsoft reigns supreme, still.
I quote:

Seven of the top nine sites run on FreeBSD. The exceptions are Datapipe, which is doing a fine job of promoting the reliability of Windows 2003, and German hosting company komplex.net which runs on Linux.

Posted by mhp at 08:54 AM UTC on Jan 11, 2004 in Hosting, Performance.
Reference: news.netcraft.com

FreeBSD seems to have been whooping ass in the hosting field for a while now according to NetCraft surveys. (Long before this article's 6 month window as well.)
.. I think I might know why *BSD trolling has seen a sharp increase in the last 6+ months or so, Hmm, gee..

This NetCraft article proves nothing about say, Linux vs. FreeBSD or FreeBSD vs. Win2k3, to me it says, FreeBSD isn't dying off, and if it is, it sure is a pain riddled, horrifcally slow death. (if less people are running FreeBSD, good, less morons to have to help , I'm sick of being asked how to update the locate database after all these years..)

Before you put words in JKH's mouth: See JKH's resignation
Why did Apple hire JKH? Not because he looks good in a push-up bra, I can promise you that.
If JKH thinks FreeBSD is no longer viable code, why does Apple continue to develop a branch off FreeBSD, and why is Panther based from FreeBSD 5.x? OS X Panther(features column)

FreeBSD isn't a "clique" of elites, we didn't all install FreeBSD because it's "Cool". So many Linux zealots have called FreeBSD users out, saying we're trying to "fit in." Which is ironic, since many of them installed it because their buddies said, "Oh l00k, itz 31337 d00d."

I've run Linux since kernel 0.99, there was a time I prefered Linux(0.99 - 2.0.34) over any BSD, those days are long passed. However, I DO NOT look down my nose at Linux users, and I certainly don't troll any Linux "forums", yet why is this occuring vice versa? It's unfortunate, the Linux community is also very plagued by the '14 year old zit-faced kids who just installed RedHat, and want to "hax teh g1bs0n."' (I've taken enough abuse from the Linux crowd, talking about "Fat, unwashed, Star Trek watching *BSD nerds" to justify that last comment.) Which is one reason I don't ever want them crossing over to the FreeBSD crowd, thus if we have less 'market share', in that respect it's a VERY GOOD THING(tm).

Many of my sysadmin friends run purely Linux based networks(server-side), and when I ask why they don't even try a *BSD, the common answer I've received is, "It's too hard." Which in turn makes me chuckle to myself because they're really missing out on something great. I don't make fun of them and/or their networks, nor try to say they're running an antiquated or conviluted system. (To say FreeBSD is either of these, is to deny the facts.) To each his own, and if they choose to live in ignorance, MORE POWER TO THEM, it's their prerogative.

We were around in 1992, and we'll continue to be, regardless what the slashdot trolls attentively (or not so attentively..) splurge in digital form.

-mpf

P.S. I wonder how long Yahoo!(tm) will run a dead operating system (FreeBSD) across it's server pools?
( Next time don't post out of date,

Interesting indeed, for they have hinted at the possibility of suing BSD users earlier.

Daemon News

FreeBSD Diary

BSDvault

FreeBSDAddicts

FreeBSD Tips

This is not their first brush with open source. After acquiring BSDi, they encouraged BSD/OS users to move to FreeBSD, than dropped support entirely (or rather. they transferred FreeBSD sponsorship to FreeBSD MALL). Anyway, the point is, that back then, when this announcement was made, I saw the usual argument of BSD licence being more "liberal" than GPL. It seems that this might not be the case after all.

I don't want to bash BSD - in fact I use it both as a desktop and on a server, and I love it. I like it better than linux, while I like the licence of Linux better than BSD. The moment a company adopts a software under the BSD licence, it has too choices. It can keep it open source (in which case it would use it almost as if it were GPL) or make it closed source (relinquishing the advantages of the Open Source development model). I believe the two balance each other out, but the BSD licence makes code exchange between linux development and BSD development (both excellent and cutting edge softwares) a one way road, which is not a good thing in the long run imho.

Anyhow, this news confirms that the favorite claims of BSD users, that is to say, the BSD licence is more corporate friendly, is not necessarily true. Wind River was known to be a BSD company (they still sell BSDi 5.0) but they are on the way of becoming a linux company (well, not a linux company per se, but a company that supports - and favors - linux instead of BSD, despite the licence.) It seems that the embedded BSD project (link) is not quite flourishing.

Some do, including Ralph Nader.

Ugh.

It has been said thousands of times by now I'm sure.


Running Mac OS X does not mean running FreeBSD Mac OS X is a system of frameworks running on top of a Mach Kernel. The only thing that relates Mac OS X to FreeBSD is the userland. In addition to the userland you have: Cocoa, Carbon, Aqua, Java, etc. The FreeBSD portion is minimal.

And yes, if you want you can run this lower level unix without the rest of Mac OS X. It is called Darwin. It runs on Intel and PPC if you're wondering. No, this doesn't mean that Mac OS X runs on both or ever will.

Here is a short description of the BSD families.

OpenBsd could probably summed up more accurately as emphasising stability and security. Not so sure about ease of use.

Couldn't one use an automount daemon and an entry in one's fstab to automatically mount the memory card to a drive and at that point launch a script that does an rsync, scp or CIFS file transfer to the destination server?

There is an article on Daemon News that can help with running a script using the pccard support in FreeBSD to initiate a script to copy files from a Compact Flash card to the system... but it doesn't cover using an automount daemon.

Should work for other major open source projects.

And then the damn head marketing weenie (whom we hired from *SCO* of all places... think big red horns on her head, and that was long before this current fiasco...

(snicker)

Well, you told me to think big red horns on her head.

...and whilst that was a nice informative article, it was also noticeably linux specific (of course, you couldn't be trolling - not with a closing line like that).
This being the BSD area of /., I think a few BSD targetted articles on configuring WAPs
might be more apt.

That said, this WiFiBSD thing looks like a nice little development. Could well come in handy.

I searched for and eventually found some relevant history. It turns out that gets() was part of the "portable C library" written by Mike Lesk and released with version 6 of Unix. fgets() is part of stdio, which was written by Dennis Ritchie and released with version 7. Most of the "portable C library" seems to have been changed or discarded, but gets() lives on.

Wrong link to the review, you pointed to the review of the pocket-sized edition. The review of the full book is here.

Essential System administration by Aeleen Frisch. Covers Solaris, Aix, Linux, HPUX, SCO etc. Alas no OS X.

ThereÂs a review here.

The old GMT (Greenwich Mean Time) has effectively been replaced with UTC (Universal Coordinated Time).

GMT was the time recorded by an atomic clock kept at Greenwich, England. UTC is based on another time standard called TAI which is derived from hundreds of atomic clocks in the national standards laboratories of many countries. TAI is slightly different from UTC: UTC is corrected roughly every eighteen months with a 'leap second' to agree with TAI.

Still, GMT and UTC seem to be used interchangeably in the literature, except by hard core time geeks.

Yes. FreeBSD's driver configuration and stacking model goes beyond what NetBSD's does. While FreeBSD picked up bus_space and busdma from NetBSD, it has its own configuration and driver interface (dubbed 'newbus'). It is tree structured, and the bus layer at each node controls device identification and runs the 'auction' of an identified device to all the possible drivers. The pci bus stack happily runs under acpi enumeration or via direct configuration registers - the drivers themselves have no knowledge of where they are. For all they know, they could be on an emulated pci bus on the wrong side of a very creative usb bridge. :) All the driver cares about is 'give me my resources'.

A light overview is here (The article has some inaccuracies though, new-bus was designed by Doug Rabson, not obtained from NetBSD).

If you dont have a FreeBSD system, you can follow the cross references here and here.

http://ezine.daemonnews.org/200301/esa3.html

ah my dreams are foiled.. pf in a bsd distro that people "support"

Soon maybe

The various CD's you buy are generally identical to the ISOs you download. If you want to support the project, it is recommended you buy from one of the vendors who supports the project. I have subscriptions with both FreeBSD Mall and BSD Mall (Part of Daemonnews).

Other options are listed in the Handbook.

I definatly recommend downloading rather then buying from people like cheapbytes.

-- Brooks

I know FreeBSD now has support for that RFC. ;)

In my opinion, a transparent firewall is an even better choice:

I've never gotten a chance to implement one of these (my firewalls have to do other things too), but the thought of a stealthy firewall (which is nearly invisible) is so cool.

I think that OpenBSD's pf is more featureful and easier to use than anything on Linux.

JDK 1.4.1 patchset 3 on FreeBSD (daemonnews.org)

points to:

JDK 1.4.1 patchset 3 on FreeBSD (at freebsdforums.org)

the patches:

http://www.eyesbeyond.com/freebsddom/java/jdk14.ht ml

Note they are ALPHA! But this is good news for native jdk on freebsd.

BSD != GPL.

This is exactly the kind of hostile chest-thumping that Greg Lehey was warning about in this month's Daemon's Advocate. And we can see the extention of the behavior he was pointing out. Potentially worthwhile contributors have been chased off simply because they made some not-maliciously-intended mistakes in their [b]beta[/b] releases.

If this kind of hostile enviroment continues; the "BSD is dying" trolls may just be proven right!

i think it's because they bought NeXT (steve job's old company), makers of nextstep/openstep os which was based on bsd... (source)

So if it is, then why can't the separate-but-equal approach be applied to BusyBox, why haven't the developers chosen a less monolithic solution? Seriously, I fail to realize how one large file can be effectively different than dozens of small, efficiently-optimized binutils. Heck, if I wasn't so busy cybering I'd put in some #defines in the GNU binutils and fileutils packages to allow a less-saturated-fat version to be compiled, all directly from the same source.

On a similiar note, has anyone taken up the project of transcoding BusyBox into Unix or Linux assembly language? GCC can do a damn good job of optimizing out loops, but you can't beat hand-coded assembly in terms of space.

First of all, great work. FreeBSD (and the others) will benefit greatly from this!

The only problem I have is that you're only searching "major FreeBSD search engines." Now, I know it's a beta, but there is quite a lot of other sites that, while not being a search engine, have contributed to the advancement of FreeBSD. Examples: Daemonnews's Search Page FreeBSDDiary, BSDToday, and of course Slashdot!. You might also think about adding newgroups, discussions, etc. Don't forget that the other BSD sites can also provide information that covers FreeBSD. Don't think they're "not worthy."

Keep up the good work!

The machine doesn't spin down it's hard drive or throttle the processor speed, but it's power draw while idle is probably within the 50-65W range as the power supply can provide a max of 90W. You can probably find quite a few of the first or second gen machines on eBay or other used hardware sites.

I also have an older Gateway 2000 machine (P5-200 MMX) with 160MB of RAM and a 10GB hard drive running FreeBSD as my firewall at home. It's a bit overkill, but hey... it was given to me... the only thing I had to do was to clean it up, pull out the floppy drive (with the drive in, there was only a 2mm gap between the drive and the CPU's fan... not good!). Doing a make world on the machine is slow, but I'm able to pump around 40Mbps through the machine without any problems.

Another option is to check out some of the older IBM desktops that IBM is selling as refurbished machines. The specs on some of them are P2-300/350, 64MB of RAM and a basic hard drive. In most cases, you can slap in at least another hard drive, more SDRAM, and keep the processor as-is and have a fairly decent, small and fairly low power machine.

Other options include looking at the Mini-ITX machines or the VIA Eden platform as other have mentioned. Check out the Seagate ATA hard drives if you are looking for quiet hard drives. I have two Seagate Barracuda IV 40GB hard drives in a machine at work... all I have to say is that the power supply fan is louder than the drive. I can barely hear the drive seeking. I wish I could say the same for this 10K RPM SCSI hard drive I have at home :)

IOATAPICDDrive: Using DMA transfers
IOCDDrive drive: MATSHITA, CD-ROM CR-175, rev 5AAE [ATAPI].
IOATAHDDrive: Using DMA transfers
IOHDDrive drive: , TOSHIBA MK3211MAT, rev J1.03 G [ATA].
IOHDDrive media: 6354432 blocks, 512 bytes each, write-enabled.

There is a little bit of theory behind it because the firewall has to work "backwards." You almost have to accept all packets in, and then enforce security as they are forwarded outbound. This is not a problem with most firewalls that can be coaxed into bridge mode as they allow you to either specify direction (pf, ipf) or enforce the policy on all interfaces in either and/or only in user specified direction anyway (firewall-1)

OpenBSD and whichever firewall you wish to run on it support it reasonably well. I am pretty sure you could follow an approximation of those instructions for Linux.

Try here at daemonnews.org for a link on how to do it with openbsd.

There are also commercial firewalls that support it, including Sun Sunscreen and Check Point Firewall-1 NG (only on their new Linux platform at the moment, but their other platforms may support it soon as well).

I posted this in some other discussion the other day but.........

Why not just use IPSec? My co worker and I have been trying to figure out how to securely deploy 802.11b around the office and I came up with the idea of using IPSec. I'm the lone Macintosh island in a sea of Windows desktops and laptops at the office so I'm waiting for next week(when I get my copy of Jaguar and hence IPSec support) to really get to hack on this but the current plan is use an IPSec VPN(and throw WEP out the f'ing window) to secure the line of communication. I will set up either an OpenBSD, FreeBSD or Linux(preference in that order, yeah I know I've got a BSD partiality) firewall between the AP and the wired LAN and only allow traffic over the IPSec VPN. From my initial research I found some docs on doing wired IPSec communication but in theory that should apply to the wireless as well.

here's some useful links. I hope to be able to adapt some of the information to suit using OS X.
OpenBSD IPSec
FreeBSD IPSec
Windows 2000 to FreeBSD
DaemonNews Article
FreebsdDiary Article

After pondering the "secureness" of using IPSec in lieu of WEP I've come up with one weakness and one side affect since clients get DHCP addresses in the clear and any communication to the wired LAN is encrypted. Say jane sales chick shows up with her personal laptop and tries to use the wireless network in the office she gets a IP address but can't get into the wired net because she can't establish a IPSec VPN. Joe cust service has his laptop in the office too. he get an IP but gets blocked by the IPSec Firewall. as a side affect there is nothing stopping Joe and Jane from swapping music, warez or pr0n. The only weakness I can think of is that Johnny hacker could try to exploit one of the wireless clients(if there are any) and use that as a jumping off point to the LAN or to his/her credentials. Another thing I've given some thought to is depending on the overhead of IPSec you could take the onion skin approach making the side effect a little more difficult to non tech type(we all know how secure WEP is) by also using 64 or 128 bit wep in addition to IPSec.

Since this is all theory until next week when I get Jaguar, feel free to point out any stupid lines off thought, inaccuracies, etc. I've got going on here. If I'm successful I'll probably document it and post on the Web.

...because other (former) Linux users are doing the job for them. Between Tim O'Reilly, plenty of folks here on / and various others, it would be difficult for geeks not to know that OS X is "Unix Inside (tm)".

• Jordan Hubbard (pre-employment): "it was impressive just how much "Unix stuff" did work exactly as I'd expected."
• David Coursey: "if all I wanted was a Unix (or Unix-ish) OS I could actually use, I'd choose Mac OS X"
• Chris Coleman: "I didn't have to dual boot. I could use my Unix applications on the same screen"

IPSec is really the big thing that got me excited about 10.2(and Windows network browsing and Quartz Extreme and CUPS and PAM blah blah.) My co worker and I were trying to figure out how to securely deploy 802.11b. I'm waiting for next week to really get to hack on this but the current plan is use an IPSec VPN(and throw WEP out the f'ing window) to secure the line of communication. I will set up either an OpenBSD, FreeBSD or Linux(preference in that order, yeah I know I've got a BSD partiality) firewall and only allow traffic over the IPSec VPN. From my inital research I found some docs on doing hardwired IPSec communication but in theory that should apply to the wireless as well.

here's some useful links. I hope to be able to adapt some of the information to suit using OS X.
OpenBSD IPSec
FreeBSD IPSec
Windows 2000 to FreeBSD
DaemonNews Article
FreebsdDiary Article

After pondering the "secureness" of using IPSec in lieu of WEP I've come up with one weakness and one side affect since clients get DHCP addresses in the clear and any communication to the wired LAN is encrypted. Say jane sales chick shows up with her personal laptop and tries to use the wireless network in the office she gets a IP address but can get into the wired net because she can't esablish a IPSec VPN. Joe cust service has his laptop in the office too. he get an IP but gets blocked by the IPSec Firewall. as a side affect there is nothing stopping Joe and Jane from swapping music, warez or pr0n. The only weakness I can think of is that Johnny hacker could try to exploit one of the wireless clients(if there are any) and use that as a jumping off point to the LAN or to his credentials. Another thing I've given some thought to is depending on the overhead of IPSec you could take the onion skin approach making the side effect a little more difficult to non tech type(we all know how secure WEP is) by also using 64 or 128 bit wep in addition to IPSec.

Since this is all theory until next week when I get Jaguar. Feel free to point out any stupid lines off thought I've got going on here. If I'm successful I'll probably document it and post on the Web.
--

The complement to SMPng for FreeBSD (v5) is Kernel Scheduled Entities (KSE). The third milestone was just recently added to CURRENT: KSE-MIII Merged Into Current (5.0).

FreeBSD v5 will be a speed daemon. :)