Slashdot Mirror

No, unfortunately the only operating system they've been able to port to it is NetBSD.

As usual, when this comes up, let's plug NetBSD's Packages Collection. ``pkgsrc'', as it's known, originally derived from FreeBSD's ports is available for a large number of platforms (Netbsd, of course, and then Darwin, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, Solaris and Irix), thus allowing system administrators who have to take care of more than one OS to take advantage of its strengths. So, uhm, sorry, but I'd also have to add my vote to the ``who needs portage'' camp.

As usual, when this comes up, let's plug NetBSD's Packages Collection. ``pkgsrc'', as it's known, originally derived from FreeBSD's ports is available for a large number of platforms (Netbsd, of course, and then Darwin, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, Solaris and Irix), thus allowing system administrators who have to take care of more than one OS to take advantage of its strengths. So, uhm, sorry, but I'd also have to add my vote to the ``who needs portage'' camp.

I can't imagine they'd start from scratch when there's code lying around to build upon. But that doesn't mean their modified version will be open source. Somehow I don't think the GPL will stand in their way.


Especially when there's code around with an extra 10-20 years of maturity under a more friendly (BSD) license.

Exhibits:

1
2
3

Because in the future it will be running this. Of course, you'd want to ssh in instead.

.cn 554 Access denied. China's a spammer paradise.

If SCO is bound and determined to commit public-relations and corporate suicide, all in one swell foop, I'm sure there are cleaner and quieter ways to go about it.

All this grandstanding (without presenting independently-verifiable proof of their claims, I think that's all they're doing) is only going to do one thing: Create a serious financial drain on the company in terms of court costs.

One interesting side effect to this whole mess may be that BSD-based OS's will get more attention. As far as I know, neither NetBSD, nor FreeBSD, nor OpenBSD have ever been the subject of lawsuits of the type that SCO is pushing.

Whatever happens, I think SCO has gone utterly, irretrievably bonkers if they think this kind of behavior will help them in any way. I feel sorry for the employees...

BSD Family Tree

2.11BSD is from '92 and runs on the pdp11,
The last modification on the 2.11 branch was in '99

As per the FSF recommedations, I only use free software

The beacon of truth awaits you here

Or how about NetBSD/dreamcas?

Is it possible to set up a local portage and ebuild system, on non-Gentoo systems, for packages like Gnome-2.4 without having to build an entire Linux system from scratch?

the netbsd pkgsrc collection works fine on osx...

[netbsd-pkgsrc]

I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but dependencies problems are why I've started using the BSDs. Maintaining one FreeBSD server and two NetBSD servers takes about as long as maintaining one Red Hat 9 Linux server.

Sounds like another platform for NetBSD

While NetBSD is probably not the one referred to as ``that other OS'', it still holds that ``of course it runs [on] NetBSD'': binary packages for blender 2.28 will show up on the mirrors shortly -- pkgsrc has already been updated.

While NetBSD is probably not the one referred to as ``that other OS'', it still holds that ``of course it runs [on] NetBSD'': binary packages for blender 2.28 will show up on the mirrors shortly -- pkgsrc has already been updated.

While NetBSD is probably not the one referred to as ``that other OS'', it still holds that ``of course it runs [on] NetBSD'': binary packages for blender 2.28 will show up on the mirrors shortly -- pkgsrc has already been updated.

While NetBSD is probably not the one referred to as ``that other OS'', it still holds that ``of course it runs [on] NetBSD'': binary packages for blender 2.28 will show up on the mirrors shortly -- pkgsrc has already been updated.

XP Home: http://shop4.outpost.com/product/3063039
XP Pro: http://shop4.outpost.com/product/3063019

Apple doesn't do "upgrade editions". Every time they sell a copy of their OS, they sell it as a full retail purchase. It's a bit of a bummer, but considering that their full retail price is a little over half what XP Pro full retail costs, and less than twice what XP Home Upgrade Edition costs, (XP Home is so neutered! Who'd want it?) it's clear that OS X is a bargain.

And, mais bien sur, Mandrake Linux, a worthy competitor to either one, is available for free download or $54 for the Powerpack Edition 7 CD-ROM set or 1 DVD-ROM set. Red Hat, for those who are conscientiously objecting to anything French, can be had without support in the basic pack for $40. For those who don't like Mandrake but do like KDE, SuSE is at the exact price point.

There is also ample evidence, even without MacOS X's liberal use of the codebase, that BSD isn't dying, exaggerated reports to the contrary.

This might answer your questions (look at section 6):

http://www.netbsd.org/

Short answer:

setenv input-device ttya
setenv output-device ttya

Fortunatelly for me, my wife is an IT professional and can appreciate both the advantages of this setup (our CDs are instantly available throughout the house, we can remotely retrieve caller-id information on last calls, setup customized alarm response scenarios, and so on) and the inevitable bugs (the first friends to ring our doorbell were were greeted by an answering machine message).

However, getting the behavior of the system just right took us more than a year, I am still being very conservative when I tweak something (I am never introducing changes to it before leaving for a vacation), and there were times where we discussed the system's interface over a graphical depiction of state machine diagram. I am sure the /. crowd thinks this is the way to go, but I also think there will be people who might find such a setup a bit bewildering.

Diomidis Spinellis - Code Reading: The Open Source Perspective
#include "/dev/tty"

There are multiple vulnerabilities in the Linux 2.4 kernel.

Get your patch here, here, or here.

BTW, there are no security patches required for OpenBSD 3.3 yet.

I'm not sure where we'd go, though... Maybe BeOS (gasp!) or something...

Or FreeBSD, OpenBSD, or NetBSD would all be options, considering they came from the Berkeley BSD base of code, not the AT&T System Unix code.

the antitrust service pack

For those of you who haven't heard of this, yet, here are places you can get it:

Mirror 1a
Mirror 1b
Mirror 2
Mirror 3
Mirror 4

These mirrors also work well:

Mirror 5
Mirror 6

...I've begun to recognize a pattern in software: when will we see the end?

Well, never.

Software design is unlike most every other discipline in the world. Your job is never finished until the product is dead. There are always bugs to fix, inconsistencies to remedy. Even the action of fixing bugs will create or uncover new ones. The fact is, if you release version 1.0, by definition you will also have to release version x.y for the entire life-cycle of the product. This also implies that versions may not be infinitely forwards- or backwards-compatible. At some point you have to abandon old releases.

Look at netBSD; it isn't dying, it's still working on its number-one goal: security.

According to the netBSD Goals page, security is not paramount. Certainly it take back seat to correctness of code, performance and wide platform support. Perhaps you mean OpenBSD? Either way, if you are going to make security your number one goal, you are compelled to updating and maintaining your code base! Security is a job that is never finished.

What if Linux all-of-a-sudden wanted to become a Micro Kernel? What if Microsoft(R) Windows(TM) all-of-a-sudden wanted to become a Micro Kernel?

Well, one of the early criticisms of Linux was that it wasn't a microkernel design. Some MINIX folks really thought Linus was taking a step backwards, though his intention was just to run a real UNIX on his intel box.

The NT kernel can be considered a microkernel. Very few "pure" microkernel implementations exist, and even fewer exist in the wild. By most definitions the Windows NT kernel is a microkernel.

Anyway, it's a moot point. Yes, redesigning the Linux kernel to be a microkernel would be significant, but this is why they have odd-number releases to shake the biggest bugs out. Architecture changes like this are part of any long-running project. Do I think they should do it? No. Do I think it would be more are less Linux? Again, no. If the only thing we could call linux is 2.4.x then the project is dead for sure.

How Microsoft or the PHP people label their respective products is really not that important. I'm not sure this is any kind of trick. Oh sure, Microsoft wants to make sure that people stay current, so it markets the latest release as The Best Ever, You'll See, but everyone does that. It helps their bottom-end in all sorts of ways, not just in immediate units sold.

Supporting old releases is expensive and painful. Few companies can afford to do so. How old releases are grandfathered is important, but we have to realize that old software must die. Personally, I'm glad Microsoft continued making improvements to Windows over the years (aren't you?). I just don't give a shit what they call it, as it is obviously cut from the same cloth when I fire up my desktop at work.

Does anyone think they should continue calling those products by their initial names AFTER the programming syntax and methodology becomes completly different or non-compatible than they were first designed?

I certainly do not agree.

The fact is that PHP 3, PHP 4 and PHP 5 all do the same sorts of jobs. The language will continue to run blogs and forums, process forms and maintain accounts for porn sites. That will not change. Eventually, as 5 matures it will replace 4 as the dominant release in current use. PHP is right for bumping the major version number when major architectural changed have been made. Whether or not syntax changes all that much (and from my review of the top article, the syntax of the language is not about to change radically) is relatively unimportant. As long as the provider (PHP) gives the implementer (the PHP developer) a heads-up on those changes, and sufficient time to revie

"[...] without GNU, there never would have been OS [...]"

If by OS you mean OSS and not Operating System then I'm afraid that I respectfully disagree.

You already can: Behold NetBSD's Packages Collection. Use it on NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, Solaris, Irix, Darwin, Mac OS X...

More details here.

You already can: Behold NetBSD's Packages Collection. Use it on NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, Solaris, Irix, Darwin, Mac OS X...

More details here.

You already can: Behold NetBSD's Packages Collection. Use it on NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, Solaris, Irix, Darwin, Mac OS X...

More details here.

I would say you're an obvious Windows Turd.

Lots of people care, this is another victory for NetBSD and the BSD community.
Why?

My take on the NetBSD idea, is not why, but why not?
If you can run NetBSD on a dreamcast, or any other piece of equipement with a CPU, then you can have a simple firewalling router, or a file server. The possibilities aren't endless, but there's a lot.

see WIPO

As to Unix:

Nothing like facts to really mess up your argument.

I'd like to see that -- but I've looked, with no luck.

The NetBSD/hpcarm page lists the iPaq H3600 as a supported model -- it's at least got the same CPU as the SL-5500. I'd give it a shot on my Zaurus, but I haven't figured out how to load the kernel -- all the bootloaders are written with WinCE in mind!

I have my doubts that it will. The older POWER-based IBMs were MCA machines, which, doesn't work yet, and NetBSD efforts aren't much better. Your best bet is to keep AIX on that box for a bit longer until the porting effort bears fruit.

Bow down and worship the goddess of BSD!

You Linux-using fags cannot possibly comprehend the beauty of the one true goddess!

See how a true believer honors her. Take another look at the proper way to show your devotion to the divine babe of BSD!

There is truly no hope for Linux as long as the lovely Ceren smiles upon us!

• SCO is suing IBM, allegedly because big blue stole some sort of "secret recipe" from SCO to integrate it into Linux.
• IBM -- again, AFAIK -- never collaborated with the BSDs, and the BSDs are therfore immune to the law suit

Everyone should read this.
Applies to Linux/FreeBSD/OpenBSD/Darwin/Others as well as NetBSD.

All of the brouhaha over Linux seems to have overshadowed the fact that it was actually NetBSD that was the first UNIX-like operating system to boot on the AMD64 architecture (under simulation, several years ago, long before there was silicon). If FreeBSD and OpenBSD leverage this work, they won't be far behind. (OpenBSD has diverged from NetBSD, but not so much that they can't bring in the architecture-dependent stuff from NetBSD very quickly if they want to.)

FreeBSD is wonderful. I use it as my desktop right now.

But if you want something similar for GNU/Linux, snag Gentoo. No binary support yet, but they GRP should be coming out eventually. ^^;;; Otherwise, it's like ports.

A wee bit less stable, but it's the only GNU/Linux distro I'll install anymore.

Also, the NetBSD ports tree has a binary package for it's ports tools for Slackware GNU/Linux.

It would be great to be able to run *BSD on these machines, especially the older ones we have where hp-ux just doesn't hack it anymore.

The NetBSD Advocacy page has some posters available for print-it-yourself.

- Hubert

Bow down and worship the goddess of BSD!

You Linux-using fags cannot possibly comprehend the beauty of the one true goddess!

See how a true believer honors her. Take another look at the proper way to show your devotion to the divine babe of BSD!

There is truly no hope for Linux as long as the lovely Ceren smiles upon us!

Here's a link from the NetBSD documentation website. And here's one provided by a netbsd user, translated from spanish. The second one is better because it incorporates ssh and a chroot jail for the entire repository. I have the actual english version which I downloaded from one of the netbsd mailing lists, don't remember exactly which one though. Search through them, should still be there.

I think it's you guys who misunderstand what Theo does... which is threatening to spam the FreeBSD and NetBSD mailing lists through an anonymous remailer when he doesn't get his way. Quit supporting the little crybaby.

If I were writing spam filter rules, I think I would fix that problem with extra rules:

[...]
include diff -u output and have 'foo@bar wrote' attribution: +6.6 points
include diff -u output and have quote text: +3.3 points
include diff -u output and have 'In-reply-to': +3.3 points

Except that all of those would apply to the same legitimate mailing-list message if someone replies to another message and attaches a patch. If I cared I could probably find just such a message in the wild without too much effort....

Better tell these people, then.

There's a workaround for bypassing the 'eprom' password on Sparcs (actually it's NVRAM with a battery built into the module). You remove the NVRAM chip from it's socket, boot up the system to the OK prompt, then plug the chip in live, with the system running, and make your security changes. I have successfully done this on SparcStations that I bought on eBay that had a password. It's slightly risky, but on older Sparc boxes (all those nice classic SparcStations) it would be NUTS to have to buy new NVRAMs.

The technique is documented here. And here. And here too.

There's also a technique to tack on a replacement external battery on those NVRAMs. There's no reason to EVER buy a new one for non-critical boxes. Most of my older Sparc boxes have had that surgery performed on their NVRAM chips (involves actual physical surgery on the module) and live happily powered by a pair of AAA cells.

The All NetBSD Packages document (long) states 3706 packages ... numbers, numbers, everywhere!

Some people are already working on that in the -CURRENT tree. It's called syspkg. See the original post here