Slashdot Mirror

Needless to say, the machine's tight on the outside withstanding such attacks, but also on the inside, if one of my users starts thinking he needs to act funky.

Try it! -> www.netbsd.org/Ports/sparc/

- Hubert P.S.: There's also support for sparc64, sun3 and sun2 hardware in NetBSD, if required.

Note: Sun Microsystems does not provide support for the Linux operating system, either directly through Sun's Enteprise Services division, or by any indirect means. Linux users who wish to receive commercial support for their Linux systems should contact the vendor of the operating system distribution, or investigate third-party organizations that may help them.

I run NetBSD on my old SPARCs (IPC and SS-10). That's a sun4c and sun4m architecture. The NetBSD folks managed to do something that Sun never did: get a single kernel to run on both sun4c and sun4m architectures.

Anyway, NetBSD doesn't come with the massive amounts of pre-compiled applications that Linux distros do, but you can typically get a "pkg" for the applications you do want.

To my fingers, NetBSD feels a lot like SunOS 4.1.3, which I happened to like a lot. If anything, NetBSD 1.5 is speedier on older hardware than Sun's SunOS was.

What options do SPARCstation owners have for a reletively up to date distro that isn't in beta or otherwise have bizzar issues stemming from someone just trying to recompile an Intel distro for the Sparc architecture?

While working as a Solaris admin in big corporate sparc shop a while back, I developed a NetBSD floppy-based disk wipe procedure (for systems being decomissioned), which went onto become official there. Much nicer than waiting for a Solaris CD boot. I also managed to get Linux to be the OS on the on-call laptop, after the managers had tried pushing Solaris x86 (on a laptop.. heh..), and Windows NT.

You might just be suprised at how well they perform.

-dan

I'm not sure why Linux is so much faster on the gettimeofday() call. I'm guessing it perhaps can retrieve the time directly into the final buffer? Or perhaps it has a more efficient way to copyout the data?
Then again, maybe NetBSD uses a different way to get the time. When gettimeofday is called, NetBSD does a few I/O accesses to the timer chip (Intel 8253) and returns the result of that. What does Linux do? (I don't have a copy of the linux source handy)

eric

1. It allocates disk sectors in extents - therefore, it absolutely requires defragmentation. See Executive Software's Diskeeper benchmarks, and their white paper. You don't have to believe Executive Software, and there may be good reasons for disbelieving them. Think about it: every other filesystem that has had extent-based allocation ended up with defragementers: DEC's ODS-2 (VMS), SGI's EFS (Irix) are two examples of radically different filesystems by radically different vendors, yet each required defragmentation. Fortunately, SGI provided such a good one, that 3rd party vendors didn't even bother.
2. Each file has multiple "streams". These could very obviously promote security problems. Alternatively, see this for another example. Microsoft itself has had a bunch of problems with NTFS streams, including bizarre interactions with IIS.
3. It's broken by design. Any fool can extend the MFT and use up all of a partition's disk space.

Dreamcast Linux

NetBSD, too, if you swing that way. ;)

Dreamcast NetBSD

Raw links for the Goatse paranoid:

http://linuxdc.sourceforge.net/
http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/dreamcast/

The flaw in the OS isn't Solaris specific. Any x86 OS is/was potentially at risk.

For info on the LDT vulnerability, see this NetBSD Advisory.

Additionally, Argus doesn't even sell a version of PitBull for Solaris/x86. Their Solaris/x86 version is only for R&D and it was the one that was used in the InfoSec challenge.

--

*sniff* *sniff*

There be trolls here. But given the fact there are gullible people who will buy into the conspiracy you push...

First, take a look at:

Where you see how many developers of OpenBSD are in the "American" sector.

Next, take a look at:

BTW, what outside independent group has reviewed M$ code, or DEC code, or Sun code, or AIX code...

I suppose you don't consult to the feds, since they use xbsd (DOJ uses OpenBSD).

As an expert on operating systems, you should be aware that the common commercial vendors are full of bugs and security holes. By telling your customers that they are safe because they are using American/commercial products, you are doing them a disservice.

How could you trust the agenda of an outside independent code review. After all, they might be just as anti-American!

I truly hope you make it as an anti-xbsd consultant. Good luck.

I use FreeBSD, so don't let other know what I am about to say. :)

I believe NetBSD would support all of those hardware platforms you mentioned. Unfortunately, I do not believe it has support in Samba concerning ACL's, but I do not know for certain. Check out Samba to see what OS's it supports ACL's.

FreeBSD is mainly an x86 OS with some support for a couple of other platforms.

No, not quite true. FreeBSD supports multiprocessor x86 and has for awhile, NetBSD is rolling out SMP on x86, alpha, sparc, and ppc (see this post for links.

NetBSD took longer, because portable code that will support many platforms easily is their grail. Writing that type of code naturally takes more time.

This looks a lot like a shell to me... you can even telnet into a Dreamcast. http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/dreamcast/dmesg/010202 .txt

Well, while the code hasn't made it into any releases yet, NetBSD supports SMP in some form on x86, alpha, macppc, and sparc. Perhaps others too...

Well, while the code hasn't made it into any releases yet, NetBSD supports SMP in some form on x86, alpha, macppc, and sparc. Perhaps others too...

Well, while the code hasn't made it into any releases yet, NetBSD supports SMP in some form on x86, alpha, macppc, and sparc. Perhaps others too...

Well, while the code hasn't made it into any releases yet, NetBSD supports SMP in some form on x86, alpha, macppc, and sparc. Perhaps others too...

Buy one now and help out: http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/dreamcast/

Supported Devices: The text console, the keyboard, the broadband adaptor, the GD-ROM.

You can use NFS and all that stuff. Now it'd be nice to have some devices/libraries to get to the graphics and sound engines.

-Daniel

and there isnt even a web server platform that runs on the mac!

Really? Then what's this? Oh, and how about this? And then there's this, and this! Don't forget this. And finally, there's this! Now I figure either you meant to say something else, or you just don't know what you're talking about. If it's the former, perhaps you should clarify. If the latter you just lost alot of credibility in my mind.

-----
"Goose... Geese... Moose... MOOSE!?!?!"

After using assorted Linux distributions, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris, and other operating systems for the past few years, I've started tinkering with RTOS' (Real Time Operating Systems) such as QNX, dabbled with ChorusOS for a month or two, and have looked into a few others (Nucleus, ThreadX).

Some RTOS' can be used, for a typical production server running http, mail, etc, often faster and more productive than most other OS', and I'm sure there has to be advocates of RTOS' with a comment or two. There are benefits to making a switch or are RTOS' a high tech OS solely geared for companies needing higher computing standards, but I can see many here trying to advocate Linux, Linux, and oh yea Linux, and I'm sure there are those who will mod unfairly. whatever

Don't get them confused, a lot of THESE OS's are not free to download, and they're not the same as using redcrap, or dumbian progeny. The article itself though didn't mention that some of these are pricey OS' it seems like they just jumped on another "Oh ... OpenSource" for attention.

Is our soldiers forthcoming homecoming?

No other OS runs on lots of platforms ?

I'm sure you're familiar with NetBSD :)

Linux is not "#1" in platform-variety. Many linux ports are half assed or unusable.

Your microsoft paranoia is a bit unfounded. Why would microsoft give a damn if you wanted to run linux on your computer ? It's your computer - not theirs. If linux is what you want to use, by all means, go for it. They'd rather sell you windows, but if you dont want to buy it, they can't make you*

*A long time ago it was difficult to get a cheap name brand computer without paying "the windows tax". even this is no longer the case. But it was never _impossible_.

It's a nice idea - just a shame it's unworkable until it's accepted by the current top level authorities, which of course it never will unless they can screw money out of it...

do what i do - start small. if everyone on slashdot can turn on half a dozen people to these alternate roots, they may actually start seeing some traffic.

for example - i run a small network at home, hooked up to the internet through a cable modem. i've got a linksys router set up to share the connection and handle NAT, but since i've got ports forwarded to a couple of different machines i've got my netbsd box set up to handle the dhcp for the network. which is nice, because it's pushing the orsc root rather than the dns address for my cable provider. there's three people on the network - that's three more people who know that there is a choice.

every time you set up a network for someone (and don't tell me you don't do it all the damn time, if you're on slashdot you're on call to half a dozen lusers and their families) do something like this. educate the people whose machines you fix. start small.

Sure, linux could go all cloistered and slow like *BSD and only release the occassional new update, but then, this is slow precisely because there aren't thousands of users helping find the bugs.

Actually, you are completly wrong and ignoring the fact that due to their more open developement process *BSD is "faster" since you can get a new current Kernel (and OS) every day (Or with anon-CVS every few hours...) and don't have to wait for Linus or Alan to anounce a new (test-)version.

• http://www.netbsd.org/Releases/release-map.html
• http://www.freebsd.org/handbook/cutting-edge.html
• http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade-minifaq.html#1. 1

You just don't know it because you're too stupid to get it running.

gee, i sure love trolling. don't you?

jackass.

and for the record, i get linux running fine. i just use a real os for my server needs, thanks.

- Hubert

No, they're referring to the PPC-based hardware that Be Inc. produced and sold for a short time. After all, NetBSD is its own OS, and doesn't care what other OS's your hardware might be capable of running.

What I wouldn't do for one of those babies though. Honestly, BeOS is beautiful...

For the most part, BeOS is strictly an x86 OS. It's been a few years now since a PPC-based machine has been manufactured with which BeOS is compatible.

NetBSD/i386 already runs Quake3; please see ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/ga mes/quake3arena/README.html and ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/ga mes/quake3arena-demo/README.html for more information.

NetBSD/i386 already runs Quake3; please see ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/ga mes/quake3arena/README.html and ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/ga mes/quake3arena-demo/README.html for more information.

--

Things are cheerier if you run Linux. According to the faq a PCI card will generally work in the UltraSparc version if it works in the i386 version. But that isn't a guarantee. Sometimes a driver writer makes assumptions about the underlying platform that don't hold for other platforms.

You'll probably find that the biggest problem isn't individual PCI cards, but rather getting Linux to run on the thing at all. Although at under $1k this shouldn't be a problem for too long--assuming the Blade architecture is close to other UltraSparc machines, anyway.

It would also be worth looking at NetBSD's UltraSparc port.

http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/portability.html
http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/system.html

To conclude, it's not as much work to add a port as one might think, and except in the (less common) cases of working with MD code, you improve one port and you improve them all.

http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/portability.html
http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/system.html

To conclude, it's not as much work to add a port as one might think, and except in the (less common) cases of working with MD code, you improve one port and you improve them all.

I started using NetBSD in 1996 after a surplus decstation 5000/240 was given to me by a friend. since then I've been won over by NetBSD's emphasis on portability and full support of platforms linux is still struggling on. (alpha 3000/xxx, decstation, and vax.)

the NetBSD Goals page really lays out the reasons I like NetBSD.

This is a Unix FAQ, ksh FAQ, and a Bash FAQ. As a bonus, I found this pertinent discussion in the NetBSD bug database.

NetBSD has had this in its package collection for a long time now, it's available at ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/ga mes/quake6/README.html.

You're wrong. NetBSD runs on over 30 Platforms! From now on, go read before you post.

You're wrong. NetBSD runs on over 30 Platforms! From now on, go read before you post.

From the mailing list archives.

Some of the technology in their SDK is likely licensed from other venders and Sega wouldn't have the rights to release it publicly. There is an interesting message on the NetBSD Dreamcast port mailing list however.

Very good point. Too bad whoever keeps making up these rumors about Micro$0ft and Sega didn't think about.

Don't forget Netbsd, DreamSNES and Bleem for DC.

It's a damn good thing console gaming companies make most of their profit on the games. I would suspect Sony is actually taking a small loss on the PS2, as the hardware is insanely expensive. It makes sense that you'd sell them the first hit cheap, and take profit after they're addicted. This probably explains why Bleem is still around.

The rumor is only made more plausable because of this, but, all the same, I think I'll /ignore anything more anyone but Sega has to say about their system. My heart has stopped twice over the past week, already, upon notification that I might not be able to pick up any more great games like Jet Grind Radio.

When the Dreamcast market collapses and you can pick them up for 20 UKP at CEX, and the good folk over at NetBSD get their port ready for primetime, this will be a great source of cheap, powerful hardware. I won't say the B word, but you know that you can build a parallel supercomputer in your shed...

When the Dreamcast market collapses and you can pick them up for 20 UKP at CEX, and the good folk over at NetBSD get their port ready for primetime, this will be a great source of cheap, powerful hardware. I won't say the B word, but you know that you can build a parallel supercomputer in your shed...

Anyway, one starting point could be this paper which discussess how to port the NetBSD kernal to a new architecture and could provide useful pointers (by the way, I've only just started CompSci this year, up till now I've just been a techie).

Cheers.

The Dreamcast is going to beat Indrema in becoming the first open-source (I know, but I want your attention) gameplatform. OpenBSD is, as far as I can tell from the mailing list, near to support the ethernet adapter. NetBSD might be a strange platform for SEGA to have running on it's hardware, since NetBSD's license states that you can redistribute binary only. But once the driver is done, it will also (my guess) be awailable for you Linux guys ;) Somebody write an X server for it, and I'm in. (It will even be supported by kylix)

The Dreamcast is going to beat Indrema in becoming the first open-source (I know, but I want your attention) gameplatform. OpenBSD is, as far as I can tell from the mailing list, near to support the ethernet adapter. NetBSD might be a strange platform for SEGA to have running on it's hardware, since NetBSD's license states that you can redistribute binary only. But once the driver is done, it will also (my guess) be awailable for you Linux guys ;) Somebody write an X server for it, and I'm in. (It will even be supported by kylix)

Cisco offers their IPTV, which is commercially available.

There are several H.323 streaming server commercially available as well. This standard is used by many Internet2 video applications.

There are also open source alternatives. The vic vac and rat tools long in use on the old mbone are certainly available in open source : for netbsd and for Linux.(You might want to read this before you get into these.)

If you want to multicast your streaming video, you should contact Multicast Tech.

I dunno what OSes you might run on them apart from Ultrix and possibly OSF/1.

And a number of companies, including BSDi and those listed here, here, here, here, here, here would probably disagree.

And a number of companies, including BSDi and those listed here, here, here, here, here, here would probably disagree.

• required