Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 4.4-RELEASE Is Ready
ocipio writes: "The FreeBSD team announced that 4.4-RELEASE is available for download. There are a whole bunch of changes and notes. Please be sure to use a mirror." Those installing for the first time will no doubt find chapter two of the Handbook invaluable.
Thank you for not linking directly to the ftp server here on slashdot!
but one thing that open source people haven't learned that MS and Apple and such have learned are to answer the following questions:
1. is it faster?
2. does it do more/kewler stuff?
3. will it crash less frequently?
4. will it boot faster?
5. will i still have to spend hours trying to install new programs and hardware?
6. does it come with new/more/kewl goodies like MS Office (or equivalent), a dictionary and thesaurus, 100 free hours of internet access, etc.?
only when an open source OS states these things in their press release will the general public listen.
When will people decide to make certain iso's small enough for dial-up users to be able to download it in a reasonable period of time (say 24 hours) These iso's are getting far too huge for most of us to dl anymore where some can reach as much as a gig or so. Because of this I've taken to buying certain distro's, but when does this 'freeware' become costly, the moment that they start getting rediculously huge. Yes, I'm aware of certain programs that allow you to resume downloads, but for the sheer size of these some could take upto a week to download. They should either offer: a free cd burn (either they provide the cd, or you send them one of yours), or put it in stores and have them give the email of people who want their software ( these people have pre-signed up on their site and they submit it to the store along with a shipment). I'd prefer the first one myself, of sending them a cd. It would cost maybe 66 cents to send a cd back and forth, vs the $20+ people charge. Anyways feel free to flame.
-Theed
1. cvsup r00lz for updating the OS
2. ports collection
3. single file (/etc/make.conf) for managing compile-time options and a master ftp server
4. VM
5. ports collection
6. no rpm or deb files
7. ports collection
8. linux binary compatibility
9. ports collection
10. softupdates
11. securelevel
12. make world
I converted all my computers from linux to FreeBSD about six months ago and never looked back. I find FreeBSD much simpler to manage, automate, and secure than any other *NIX (I haven't given OpenBSD a try yet).
There is no "journaled" filesystem since softupdates does a really good job and imporves the fs performance.
Oh, BTW, did I mention the ports collection?
'nuff said
the developers should have delayed this release until October so they could steal some of WinXP's thunder...
As a rather novice Linux user, I've been curious as the differences between it and BSD. Can somebody point to a link that goes into some rather sophisticated detail between the two? (More than "Supports themes, is cool, etc.")
Thanks.
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
As a core consultant developer for the *BSD kernel for 6 months last year I can't believe they are releaseing this. There are many issues which have not been resolved and are not being publicized to the public. The issues as I see them:
1) The implementation of threads still uses fine grain kernel level locking which does not adhere to POSIXX IEEE 811.2b level requirements, meaning this software is not, nor could it ever be certified for level 4 security.
2) The hash implementation which was used for prior backdoor's still exists and the modules which access it have not been auditied by third party engineers. This is a serious security violation which the dev team refuses to address. In fact they are doing all they can to sweep it underground, hoping people will just forget about it.
3) There is still no credible evidence that the new implementation of the TCP/IP stack is an improvement over the broken one they are trying to replace from the 4.3.xx series. The benchmarks I saw before leaving were just short of horrible and the potential for data loss was rated as QQQ on the topenhiemer algorithm.
I am currently petitioning the core dev team to remove my code from the project due to my differences with them, but they are the most pious and insufferable people I have ever worked with, so I doubt they will. Use this product at your own risk.
All the best,
--Bob
The FreeBSD 4.4 news haven't been posted for more than a few minutes, there are (were when I started writing) 6 posts, and already people are following a very annoying thread. What I mean is the stupid (IMO) advice that *BSD (or Linux or any open source project) should do this and that, be like this and that in order to be more average user friendly and to gain more market share.
/., and most of all, don't complain so much about it. Instead, do something about it. Mail the developers this advice, or better yet, help code the OS, write the documentation, and in general, help improve it.
PEOPLE! Do you think that the people, or the companies developing with those OSes are not aware of those problems? That they have no clue whatsoever as to what the general public wants? That they simply refuze to make their OSes user friendly, just to spite the users, and stay in a tiny share of the market?
They want more users, and they're doing everything possible to make their experience as pain-free and easy as possible. That they haven't reached perfection is not a surprise. But don't give such stupid advice on
But even this is not very relevant, for I'm using Linux because it suits me, and I like it, no matter how small its market share. And no matter how user (un)friendly it is. I like it (and I've been running it for the past 4.5 years)
I know, I know. My complaining does not help either. But I'm not doing it every time such a story is posted (check my posts if you don't believe me). I'm just getting fed up with all this useless noise. I'd much rather hear about the technical issues with FreeBSD (I haven't tried it yet, I'm running Linux and OpenBSD), the user experience, the major apps that have been ported to it, etc. THAT would help me, and others.
- better responsiveness under heavy load - Linux 2.4.x with its VM problems is particularly bad in comparison
- smaller base software/dependencies; BSD libc is much smaller than glibc;
/bin/sh points to ash, so all shell and system scripts are ash processes (and not bloated bash processes); classic Unix tools are less heavyweight than GNU tools (Remember: you can use GNU tools, bash etc., but they're not a dependency) - mature device file system
- Clear separation of what belongs to the core OS & third party software (=ports system)
- Best package management for installing/compiling from source (Debian's apt-get src isn't there yet)
- Kernel features are fewer, but proven & tested (as opposed to many experimental or not-yet-mature drivers/subsystems/filesystems in Linux)
- standard file system is 64 bit, allowing big single files
- Package selections show that FreeBSD maintainers are real Unix afficionados (vim 6.0 available etc.)
- the whole system is/feels very solid and mature
What I dislike:- distribution/ports mixes free and non-free software (Motif etc.) without prompting the user what is free and not; bad not only for Free Software zealots, but also for people who want to make sure they can use software without limitations in their environment (FreeBSD looks as it is made by people for whom software freedom is a secondary concern)
- available for a smaller no. of hardware architectures than Linux (or use NetBSD on non-x86 platforms, but that's already a different OS)
- no journalling filesystems (no ReiserFS, no XFS), a very small number of filesystems supported
- no
/proc, no framebuffer device, no ALSA sound drivers, no hardware accelerated graphics in the kernel - much worse SMP support than current Linux kernels
. GNU/Linux feels more "modern" than FreeBSD, while FreeBSD is comparatively "conservative", but also more solid. Draw your own conclusions.gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70
I'd really like to upgrade my FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE firewall now that 4.4-RELEASE is out, but to save bandwidth, and for simplicity's sake, I'd like to do it via FTP upgrade. However, I'm wondering if there are any security issues involved in doing so. Normally, IPFilter is running to provide packet filtering, but during the FTP upgrade, I would assume that I'd be relatively unprotected. I have done a lot of searching into this situation and haven't come up with a good answer yet. Does anybody have any opinions on this matter?
-- Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat.
I was skimming over the Handbook and I noticed something about an option to install Linux compatibility binaries. Question for BSD users: how good is this compatibility? Perfect, so-so, or somewhere in the middle?
FreeBSD is a wonderfully consistent OS, great job!
The only woe I have is the plugin support for browsers. Most of them are binary only and built for Linux. Never seems to work for Mozilla (running under linux emulation) so I have to resort to buggy Netscape.
A lot of stuff out there uses Java or Shockwave...I just hate not being able to view them.
So is FreeBSD better then Linux now?
Ok how about for a web server?
... File server?
... Database server
... cluster computing/rendering farm
... Inbedded devies.
... Desktop OS.
... For games?
I used to run my NAT/BIND/Apache/Q3/ICECAST of FreeBSD 3.2, now I run have linux2.4 running a NAT and have 20x more problems randomly come up. I know it's because I don't know linux as well, or unix in general, maybe it's because linux is more supplicated, but I think I'm going to just install FreeBSD again because it just worked.. and makes for an easy statement that I can back up
!Linux suxors.!
-Jon
but..
QQQ on the topenhiemer algorithm
kind of tiped your hat. This is no 'topenhiemer' algorithm, QQQ what kind of shit is that.
still don't belive me, check out his website.
-Anon
No, The true problem this country is facing is a faceles coward nammed brad. His constant wasting of air through his selfish breathing of my air must stop. Down with brad the evil child worshipin heathen devil pagan. KILL KILL KILL KILL !!!!!!
For more information on the problem of Ben, see the following site .
In the directory, there's a 4.4-mini.iso. It's 184M. Is that small enough for you?
In the ports directory you will find applications such as StarOffice (5.1 and 5.2), Netscape (linux version), linux version of Flash Plug-in and some more that work perfectly with Linux compat mode. What FreeBSD does is install a package (currently based on Redhat 6.1) and user a kernel module to provide binary compatibility, so it's no emulation. I've successfully ran Quake3 with h/w accel and all IPlanet products. Some other linux stuff you might run is e.g. acrored4 and the linux jvm. I'm posting this on a FreeBSD box using no other than Opera for linux.
I bet they would definitely notice that, and then somehow some legislation would surely come from congress about redirects..heheh
(and before anyone says I'm reckless for running recent releases of apache/php/etc on my server - it's for my own use)
Man... I've been waitting at least two week for this... Originally thsi was supposed to be released at about the time Jordan made the infamous press release about the 5.0. To make things worse they would allow their website to have a bad date on the release page. Making things appears as if they forgot to release the new version, and also forgot to update the website.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
I have an Alcatel speedtouch USB ADSL modem, which I spent monthes trying to get working reliably under Linux. The damn thing would lock up after about 200 packets went through it, either using the open-ish source Alcatel driver (utter, utter, c**p), or the real open source user-land driver.
In the end I tracked the problem down to the UHCI controller code in the 2.4.x Linux kernel and after some brief hacking about I gave up trying to fix it. I was just about to fire up windows/winroute when I thought I might try a *BSD.
3 days later I had a pretty well locked down NAT/IPFilter gateway machine, which has been connected to my ISP for well over 100 days at a stretch (I turn it off when I go away). It operates well under load and I get excellent ping times - even with the user-land ppp - better than windows.
My only gripe with FreeBSD is the amount of documentation available. You pretty much have to work out most things for yourself, there aren't the sheer number of different HOWTOs available like there are with Linux.
Now if only I could get my wireless card to work in it...
# init 5
Connection closed.
Oh...
I just feel good about using an O.S. that really pisses off all of our local trolls. It has to be said, have you noticed they come out of the gate full of piss and vinegar every time a *BSD is even MENTIONED, let alone given a full story? This tells me the trolls are even MORE worried about its progress than the acceptance of Linux. Hehehehe, and all they can do is cut/paste/reiterate the same old posts. Now they're even running them through different translators (I loved the 'jive' version !). I use OpenBSD myself, but when I used Free, it was still everything that you stated above, a damn fine o.s. Let's salute our trolls, as they appear to be a good benchmark for *BSD's success (just in inverse proportions).
BSD's FFS with softupdates could be considered to obviate the need for journalling.
Read Journalling Versus Soft Updates for a good Usenix 2000 paper comparing both approaches, which concludes that:
and that
Both methods achieve the same goals by different means.
OR it's better that they get it out now, so when people start jumping off the XP bandwagon like a ship on fire, they have something people have a bit of experience with.
FreeBSD is excellent in some ways, other OSes are
excellent in other (perhaps similar) ways.
Everyone would like an OS that is excellent allround, right? Why can't some of the major free-unix-clone projects merge?
UNIX (and clones) has always fork()-ed a lot into different styles. Now, if someone might say that Linux will end that; have a look at the flow of distributions...
I hope to see ONE single FREE UNIX-clone in a few years and I believe it could be a result of cooperation between Linux/GNU/*BSD.
For you morons who can not cooperate because of licenses: go commit suicide immediately so the sane people can do some good work without being interrupted by flame wars.
Now, a comment to why this won't happen:
The key to cooperation is to give up control of something. Hackers are control freaks. The result is therefore eternal chaos, religious wars and "fork()-ing".
I know you. You are just like me. But I am twice as dumb as you used to be before you even were smart. Yet I have the truth and you are caught in the projection of lies.
If this was fishing it would be a trawl, not a troll. So wtf is this 'biter' shit?
AFAIK, there are different school's of thought on the issue of Journaling Vs "SoftUpdate-like" filesystems.
_ id=2327
I could go on and on about this, but theres a perfect comment on this on daemonnews that points to a french article that summerizes the reasons.
http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story
The only thing lacking right now in softupdates is an unattended way of the filesystem coming back up in the case of large data lost. This will be addressed when the background fsck daemon is completed, Softupdates will have all the merits of a journalled FS, plus even more speed ( disputeable ).
In order to run Linux binaries on FreeBSD, you need to have what amounts to intalling RedHat 6.2 on your hard drive also. You can not drop a Linux binary into a FreeBSD system and expect it to run without having the Red Hat heirarchy setup on your FreeBSD partition. You also will probably have to modify installation scripts and add "wrappers" to make the Linux binaries work. In my opinion, the biggest shortcoming of FreeBSD is its inability to run Linux binaries transparently without the kludgey overhead of all the extra cruft. But worst of all, is that FreeBSD has not been able to track Linux developement, so your are not able to run the latest software unless it is compatible with Red Hat 6.x which is now going over 3 years out of date.
From the Readme, slightly reformatted:
Previous to this, you had two options:
Now you can just burn and go. This is excellent for anyone who wants to install on a lot of machines at once.
Also, the mini ISO gives some access for dialup users who don't want to leave their modems on all night ;)
Maybe with 5.0 they will give us UDF images. :)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
There most definitely is a frame buffer device. Please do some RESEARCH before speaking?
That is incorrect, sir: http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=tro ll&db=*
I tried FreeBSD for about a month and found the ports collection to be too unstable. too many things just didn't compile.
I'm used to using Debian where apt-get install on the stable distro just works. and when I want to compile from source, I can use apt-get src.
however, I did notice that FreeBSD's responsiveness under load was much better than Linux (compared to 2.4 AND 2.2). also, installation was MUCH easier than Debian's.
I'm a BSD enthusiast, and concur with the other posts that state that Linux compat is nearly perfect. For most OSS, you won't even notice the difference (except that it's easier to get software running, due to the Ports system). Also, consider that most linux apps are really just unix apps, and can be compiled natively in FreeBSD.
Just a word of warning, if you're interested in running Oracle for Linux on your BSD box, you probably won't get it to work. There's a howto that will get Oracle 8.0 running on FreeBSD, but I'm not aware of anyone getting 8i or 9i to run on a FreeBSD installation. The main problem seems to be Oracle's Java-based installer. Linux Java on FreeBSD is generally very good, but Oracle's installer doesn't quite make it.
Thanks for the suggestions, but my firewall has a ~515MB hard drive, so CVSUP is likely not an option (I knew everybody would tell me to CVSUP.) Plus, a make world would put my 486 firewall to work for a long time. So, back to my question, let's say I was doing an initial installation; what would the security risks be in that case? I'm assuming that there wouldn't be any services running during the install/upgrade, and no listening ports, so my guess is that I'd be relatively safe during the process, but I want to be sure.
-- Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat.
beastie$ df
Filesystem Size Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
...
procfs 4.1K 4.1K 0B 100%
linprocfs 4.1K 4.1K 0B 100%
Of course there are no "Advanced Linux Sound Architecture" drivers, since they are rather Linux-specific and FreeBSD has its own sound driver implementations.
Granted, but this issue is complicated by non-disclosure agreements on code from NVidia which has turned out to be less portable than claimed.
All of the work on FreeBSD's SMPng is being done in 5.0-CURRENT, and has inherited a lot of code from BSD/OS's widely-renowned SMP.
I haven't tried this recently, but is there a way to get cvsup to work through a firewall? I have always had to use the ftp method because it is the only one that allowed access via passive HTTP firewall.
Thanks,
Lac
Vidi Vici Veni
Thanks for the sig
The release announcement is not linked from the FreeBSD home page (which still says the current release is 4.3), and it has tomorrow's date on it.
Brand new final release of FreeBSD 4.4
Update to KDE 2.2.1
New even more stable Mozilla release
cvsup cvsup cvsup make install!!!
Tasty!
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
I have relied on cvsup; make world for so long I'm not too sure what goes on with a fresh install. I can only guess that you would be safe using an ftp upgrade/install, I'm not sure exactly what is on the bootdisk. Sorry.
If you have a freebsd machine inside of the firewall you can use that to grab the latest sources and run make buildworld. Some pointers can be found here. That would allow highest security and the least downtime.
The advice I got with this problem was to install Oracle on a Linux machine, and tar up the entire installed directory. Then just untar onto the FBSD machine and run.
Please don't trust my word on this though, ask the experts on the mailing list.
Success is as dangerous as failure, hope as hollow as fear.
Why do BSD articles always attract trolls like dung beetles to crap?
I read the internet for the articles.
FreeBSD 5.0's SMP has borrowed ideas, but not code, from BSD/OS.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
There seem to be a lot of issues with glibc, including simple code bloat and a nasty loader bug. Is moving to another code base something Linux people can/should think about? In theory it shouldn't be that hard -- it's all just Posix. Of course, theory and practice are two different things.
Yes, there was a serious bug in the GNU loader. Borland fixed that bug and provides updated builds of glibc at
http://www.borland.com/kylix/
The loader bug is also fixed in glibc 2.2.x.
[Amusing note: If you read the release notes of the Nvidia Linux drivers, you notice that Borland fixed the same bug that Nvidia just complains about]
I'm sure cheapbytes will burn it soon enough. Pick up a few more unices to maximize your postage dollars.
I think softupdates background fsck uses snapshots (like NetApp has), which are *very* cool. They let you take a consistent immediate backup. (Not in 4.4, but something to look forward to...)
Probably best to download, dd and boot from the new floppies (or CD) and use the Upgrade option. Of course, if it's a critical machine like a firewall, I'd recommend waiting a few days or weeks just to see if anything shakes out when more people have started using it.
> The record is clear on one thing: no
> operating system has ever come back from > the grave. [...]
>Now is the end time for *BSD.
How about Mac OS? Apple nearly died in 1996. It was far worse off than you think *BSD is now. Only a miracle could save it. The miracle happened on December 14, 1996, when the Mac-loving kaiju goddess Mothra Leo resurrected Hokkaido's scorched forests, along with a lone apple tree. The poor thing was just a sappling, all burned and blackened. She turned it into a mighty tree, ringed with flowers. Days later, Apple announced the surprise return of Steve Jobs, who turned the company around. The next year, Mothra's little friend Fairy perched on an Apple Performa. The heroic, wonder working goddess assumed the form of Aqua Mothra, shooting little OS X logos at her foes. Apple's fortunes immediately rose, and the company turned from near death to miraculous recovery over the next few years. In the current hard times, it is Apple that is among the strongest of the desktop computer makers. OS X is Mac OS reborn as a form of BSD, the desktop's last hope against the coming darkness of XP.
With the early, almost miraculous successes of OS X, the new release of FreeBSD, and OS X.1 due out any day now, there can be no doubt that *BSD's future is bright indeed. Apple is going to take BSD where it has never been before: the consumer desktop, the schools, etc. Apple plans to have all of its systems in the schools converted to OS X/BSD within a year (and it has more computers in the schools than Dell or Compaq). OS X has been favorably compared to Windows XP by the media (then again, anything would be better than XP). With it, Apple hopes to regain a good chunk of their ancient market share.
"Mothra isn't dying. This is just the end of her larval stage."
Cosmos, "Godzilla vs. Mothra"
(This was posted by a computer running OS X, purchased March 24, 2001.)
Excuse me, but I believe you forgot to enclose your comment in tags. Please don't let it happen in the future.
Hi, Im a Linux user wanting to try FreeBSD.
I downloaded some time ago FreeBSD 4.2 which came with XFree86 3.6x. As far I know only release 4.x supports my Nvidia GeForce 2.
How can I do to run XFree86 without needing to download the source and recompile ?
Thanks for help!
jc
2. Industry recognition
3. BSD binary compatiblity not required, b/c noone builds BSD binaries.
4. The ratio of regular people to elitists for *BSD sucks.
5. init scripts. Need to restart nfs? service nfs restart. Shut it down? service nfs stop.
6. Good, fast, filesystesms (ext3, reiserfs).
7. Linux has better hardware support (thanks to vendors who recognize Linux)
8. I can play Quake 3 in Linux, accelerated, on my NVIDIA card, while compiling wine. Yes folks, there is something really sweet about playing Quake 3 on an Nvidia card while compiling the latest wine.
9. ALL my hardware works without recompiling thanks to MODULES.
10. I can play counter-strike, accelerated, on my Nvidia card.
11. Did I mention that I can play 3D accerated games on my NVIDIA video card? Did I mention it's fast and stable?
12. IPtables kicks ass.
13. Linux's SMP kicks ass.
14. Alan cox will kick all of your asses.
I refuse to switch OSes just because 'too many people use it and it's not l337.' I would be happy when ANY os who meets the following criteria:
For all practical reasons, Linux and BSD are the same. They are both some form of UNIX, they are both free in speech and beer, the both will run for years, etc. The place Linux wins over FreeBSD is Linux is becoming accepted (which is probably the reason most of you don't like Linux.) This acceptance, while bringing some clueless types to Linux, is giving us a real alternative to Windows.
And all you people who crow about Linux binary emulation have Linux to thank for having a binary to run.
2. does it do more/kewler stuff?
cat
0
You shoulda done:
cat
Then it would have done MORE KEWL stuff! Of course, between you and me? less is better.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
That is undoubtedly the most ingenius goatse.cx link I've seen yet.
FreeBSD-SA-01:69
Topic: Local root exploit
Category: core
Module: sh
Announced: 2001-09-16
Credits: AntiOffline.com, Disgraced.org, Deficiency.org, sil, deran9ed, fox mulder, tiwj
Affects: All released versions of FreeBSD 2.x. 3.x, 4.x.
Corrected: Not corrected since we aren't smart enough to figure it out.
Vendor status: Disgruntled
FreeBSD only: YES
I. Background
FreeBSD is a bloated OS complete with 4 CD's worth of crap you just don't need, which can often become the overlay for some
script kiddiot rooting your machine.
II. Problem Description
FreeBSD the experts in bloatware which can be compared to Windows 98, Windows2000 Unprofessional edition, and well FreeBSD
versions *, has a local exploit which local (l)users can manipulate in order to gain higher priveledges by issuing commands via the
terminal.
Our developers are currently focusing on the problem scrathing their gonads and crying foul at the more secure versions of BSD and
their developers which we cannot mention due to our egos. Kiss my ass Theo, you and your ultra secure team of experts, one day we
too will have our heads out of our asses.
By issuing boot -s a local (l)user can gain access to a root account and change the password. This is a major problem and our
armada of trained hermophradites are jerking off and fingering themselves in search of a solution before we release another 70
advisories this year.
III. Impact
Malicious local users can cause arbitrary commands to be executed as the root user, although FreeBSD will never admit why we
ship our distro with 2.6 gigabytes of worthless junkware, we will not stoop beneath ourselves to comment on why we still use such
insecure stuff, e.g., WU-FTPD, a crappy TCP/IP stack, etc. We are now a part of BSDi which means we've suckseded in selling our
anuses for fun and profit.
IV. Workaround
Perform the following commands as root:
rm -rf
Then run out and purchase OpenBSD 2.8 a real OS not some overlaying crap like SecureBSD.
V. Solution
Ultimately, there is no workaround until our developers get a clue and BSDi decides to be purchased by AOL Time Warner,
Microsoft or Intel however, kudos to those already using OpenBSD, ALL YOUR SECURITY ARE BELONG TO US!
If you really want a CD, go to BSD Mall and buy a cd there. You may pay a little extra, but you are supporting the development. Of course, if you just want to try it for the first time and don't want pyhsical media or upgrade, then cheapbytes is a good choice.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I've always thought that was hilarious that the installer was written in Java to provide the ultimate (matter of opinion) portability would have actually worked better if it was written in assembly strictly for redhat on 386.
Rod Taylor
Most of you linux zealots probably don't realize that just the Release version isn't much to look forward too. I'll wait until it's 4.4 Stable before I upgrade any of my boxes. Also, for you FreeBSD newbies, go read the faq for cvsup and save yourself some cds. You can cvsup to the stable tree, then rebuild your system and your kernel. Unless your system is extremely slow, this is the best way to upgrade. On my old 56k connection, cvsup would typically take about 7-9 hours. buildworld on a 200Mhz system with 32MB of ram will take a while. I forgot exactly how long that takes. A few hours I'm sure. On a 550Mhz athlon with 128MB, I can buildworld in about an hour or two and installworld in about 30 minutes. 8)
stephen
So, do you excercise your fingers for jerking off by going ^X ^V, or do you excercise your fingers for repeated ^X ^V by jerking off?
Either way, you've started mixing the two together. That can't be healthy.
Oooops, ..Slackware is the only true OS.. Meant to say, only true Linux Distro... *BSD is the only true OS though. >=)
Leave Linux to the morons who are closed minded and are just 'followers' following along the same path M$ has been down...
People have been bitching about the fact that availabilty of the software is governing the way people are going about os's.
.iso's bigger than an average cd will take ( such bullshit) for ex: Redhat makes their iso a little bigger than a standard burn-able cd can take. And is not available via ftp.
How about this...
ftp2.freebsd.org is crazy good about bandwidth. I get up to ( and this is on a strong backbone..) up to 800k/s while red hat ( on the same backbone)will limit you to 20 k/s which basically sucks.
Other than that.
Availability means.. not making your
Freebsd is avaible through iso's through ftp and rock ass. And is less vulnerable to hackers...
hmmm. gotta love that OS.
think I'm gonna start a mirror.
> It is not possible to base a business on BSD and succeed
So I suppose Linux is proving itself so much better?
(Note: I'm not in favor of *bsd or linux; I run both of them, and they're both fine, -at least- much better than a certain proprietary OS).
Is this what I hope it is?
Will it let me grow/shrink partitions at runtime? Ala legato storage manager for Solaris?
Please let this be the case.
If u dont wanna spend $ for a faster internet connection, u can always get a cd from the above site, I'm sure they'll have em soon.
Where do you want to be, What are you doing to get there.
devfs and tmpfs ?
1: Socialist fanatics rules the Linux-scene.
Enough reason for me not to use it.
Technically I like the OS but I just can't stand the socialist politics directing it.
ftp://ftp9.freebsd.org/pub/os/FreeBSD/\ ISO-IMAGES-i386/4.4-mini.iso is 180224KB small. Still too big? You can cvsup the rest as and when.
#1 Modules /etc/rc.conf to configure almost EVERYTHING. That's one stop shopping folks.
:) The point is to take the time to truly know your OS. You also have to be the sick kind of bastard that enjoys figuring out problems. I've been struggling with DRI under FreeBSD for months now, and grinning my head off. In the meantime, everything else works wonderfully. FreeBSD isn't afraid of y
:) It's never going away because it has no predators. The userbase grows because it's good, not because of corporate sponsorship and good *cough* marketing *cough* press.
#2 Industry recognition
#3 Most linux binaries run faster under FreeBSD than they do on linux natively
#4 Fewer morons asking stupid questions they could find the answer to in 15 seconds with a google search
#5 simple
#6 Good, fast, filesystem (softupdates)
#7 FreeBSD has more stable hardware support thanks to better code (thanks to more stringent coding practices)
#8 I can play quake3 using linux compatibility mode while doing just about anything else, and get a 10-15ms ping improvement thanks to the best tcp/ip stack on the planet.
#9 ALL my hardware works because I compiled my kernel specifically for my hardware, instead of running some lazy precompiled crap that wastes memory.
#10 I can use burncd to burn to EIDE burners if I feel like it.
#11 FreeBSD runs the largest FTP site in the world. Gotta love that.
#12 Fewer kids.
As a friend of mine says,
Linux is Luke, FreeBSD is Yoda.
I've seen a ton of people migrate from windows, to Linux, to FreeBSD. I've seen a lot of people with short attention spans and no clue give up on Linux after one week and go back to windows. I've seen a lot of people whine about how hard FreeBSD is, then come up with as many other reasons they can to justify their lack of clue. I've never seen someone that's fallen in love with FreeBSD go back to Linux. Ever. Linux is this 'in' movement. It's the momentum that got slashdot started in the first place. This idea of a big movement taking over the world. Some of us just want a stable, secure, OS that isn't treated like a testbed for unreliable code. Something rock solid that does what we need. We aren't out to change the world. We aren't planning to 'dominate' the world. We think all that stuff is silly. We just like our stable, fast, safe OS. If enough people take interest in something (DRI for example) we'll get some people together and do it up. And you can be sure that it will be a stable, awesome solution. Good things take time. It is harder to get large companies to play ball when you are a freebsd developer, but not impossible. The nVidia drivers are on the way thanks to the good folks at http://nvidia.netexplorer.org/. Instead of going nuts trying to get every silly thing in the world that runs on linux compiled for FreeBSD, some smart person put the linuxator inside FreeBSD making it a moot point. It's nice running linux stuff with the benefit of better VM and tcp/ip. Things are done differently in this camp. Some of us are more than a little easy to troll, and that's because we honestly can't understand why so many misinformed people say such clueless things about our OS. It's painfully obvious that most of the FreeBSD haters have either:
A: never used it
B: tried but couldn't figure it out.
And yes, there is some eleetism. Big surprise. We know something you don't, and it makes us swell up a little. Clue doesn't come easy. I swear I'm not trolling, that's just how it is. It's how UNIX has been traditionally for a long long time. I did my time in the trenches, and got laid wide open by yoda level sysadmins. It's a great way to learn how computers really work. Don't knock it. And don't for one second try to tell me that you haven't taken an uppity attitude towards some 'clueless windows user' at some point. Thought that "if they were just smarter they'd know Linux is the way". Me and a lot of my FreeBSD using friends feel pretty much the same way about the average Linux user most of the time.
ou.
Flame away. At least I was dead honest.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
If the general public loved freebsd, then I'd probably hate it. It would mean that it had been dumbed down to the point that it would be quite possibly useless to me. That and, I don't think most hardcore FreeBSD users really care if the General Public likes FreeBSD or not. We like things nice and quiet. People find FreeBSD that are looking for it. FreeBSD isn't out there actively trying to recruit users much, or force you to use it by preinstalling it on your dell or hp machine. There isn't any FreeBSD movement to 'dominate the world'. FreeBSD users don't care. We are happy with our OS. That's all that matters. That's why the userbase steadily grows as people find it and tell their friends, without the benefit of hardcore evangelism or sketchy marketing practices. It's just good enough that word of mouth works well enough to get the kind of people using it that won't piss off the ones already using it. :)
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
You are obviously a windows user, so it's understandable that you'd mess something up. :)
:) It's just as effective. Try asking the paperclip for help next time!
SEE!!!
Try not using scarcasm and just being really damn mean and honest.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
Just wanting to try FreeBSD as a Linux user since ~5 years.
Does FreeBSD support:
1. PnP Modems (not meaning winmodems) ?
2. Journaling FS ? (or is it planned in the future ?)
TIA
jc.
The BSD scene is equally political, just on a different angle.
Yeah! wonderful FreeBSD, it is a best distribution I ever used. the only thing I don't like is it shells. while all system scripts were wrotten in sh compatible style, but for user and root, the only offical supported interactive shell is csh, this is none sh compatible. NetBSD and OpenBSD has ksh (pdksh) in standard distribution, it is sh compatible and very small and efficient, and its size is half of sh and csh!
Why I don't bitch about stupid shit on Slashdot?
1) It makes me and everyone "associated" with me look like a moron.
2) It makes Slashdot readers feel less intelligent by virtue of the fact that they just read that crap.
Amount of man years needed to create *BSD: 21,341
Amount of man years needed to create Linux: 14,768
Combined cost of using both products: $0.00
Slashdotters who have never contributed to either project bitching, trolling, spreading misinformation: Priceless
To all of the morons complaining about BSD:
Go back to your Windows NT machine; I know you are having a hard time trying to figure out how to use the command line, but I have faith that you can figure it out.
type "strings C:\winnt\system32\ftp.exe |grep -i regents"
you will get the following output:
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
BSD code is in 98% of all operating systems. Don't have grep or strings? Follow this link UNIX Utils