Slashdot Mirror


CompactBSD for Embedded Projects

miggidy_mac writes "FatPort (a wireless Internet service provider in Vancouver, BC) just released CompactBSD. It's a set of tools that allow you to build your own customized, lightweight distribution of OpenBSD and then burns it onto compact flash (or similar) so that it can be run on an embedded PC platform (like FatPort's own FatPoint). CompactBSD takes the security and networking features of OpenBSD that we know and love, and combines them with ease-of-build and small footprint, which is great for embedded devices. Check out the project on SourceForge."

151 comments

  1. Fork or comb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's so many fucking forks for BSD that it shall now be called a comb. The wheel has been reinvented so many fucking times, that I don't even think people remember what a wheel looks like. They're so busy making yet another BSD variant. How soon until we have a BSD variant that is geared towards BSD programmers seeking to make BSD variants?

    1. Re:Fork or comb? by tigga · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? This particular project made on OpenBSD kernel. It could be called "distro" in Linux speak, but it's not a fork in any way.

    2. Re:Fork or comb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forks of BSD?? Oh... yeah, I forgot just how forking unified Linux is... RedHat, Debian, Mandrake, Lindows, Ximian, Slackware, Suse, Icepack-Linux, Caldera, Peanut Linux, Gentoo, OpenLinux, Yellow Dog...

      Oh, hell... just look at this list and then try and tell me that there are more BSD "forks" than there are Linux.

      http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,3819727~r oo t=unixdsl

  2. PicoBSD? by cliffy2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know. This seems awfully familiar to PicoBSD. I guess that any "new" implementation of old technology gets press. As the adage goes, everything old is new again.

    1. Re:PicoBSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that one is FreeBSD. This one is OpenBSD, so it's ok. *grin*

    2. Re:PicoBSD? by homer_ca · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a few mini-BSDs out there. PicoBSD and ClosedBSD are based on FreeBSD. EmBSD is based on OpenBSD.

    3. Re:PicoBSD? by friscolr · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.microbsd.net/ is based on OpenBSD and FreeBSD.

    4. Re:PicoBSD? by krusty_snart · · Score: 1
      emBSD is really not going anywhere...

      I've tried to use it and it's a manual job. I like this one since it automatically strips out stuff based on a config file. You can easily change it to take out more, or leave in more.

    5. Re:PicoBSD? by funky+womble · · Score: 2

      Seems more similar to this to me (:

    6. Re:PicoBSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MicroBSD? The project leader of MicroBSD is wanted in the state of North Carolina for ripping off one of his ex employers. He is a con artist. I worked with him at a company and he wanted to create something similar like this. MicroBSD is garbage.

  3. Let's hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ... the leave out the experimental sshd code
    that openbsd loves to run by default, and
    contributed to a remote root explote. Me, I'd
    prefer old 2.x era sshd.

    1. Re:Let's hope... by norculf · · Score: 0

      They got overconfident. A basic rule of thumb is never to run things by default. Even when they have 'secure' in the name.

  4. ooh, just what I was looking for by jasonditz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Gotta get this bad boy running on all those Javastations in my back room.

    1. Re:ooh, just what I was looking for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better ask your mom first.

  5. Perhaps in conjunction w/ one of this sweet ones.. by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Soekris Engineering PC104 sbcs designed specificaly for Free/Net/Open BSD and the occasional Linux. Very nice they be.

  6. Re:Compact BSD: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSD? what's that?

  7. CompactBSD? by the+way,+what're+you · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Discreet! So no one can tell that you use it!

    --
    example.org - powered by Linux!
  8. Like... by bsDaemon · · Score: 2

    Debian?

    1. Re:Like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent work. However, Debian is a distro for GNU programmers who wish to port BSD variants to Linux.

    2. Re:Like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like.. who cares?

  9. It is official: CompactBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny
    It is official: CompactBSD is dying

    It is official; Netcraft confirms: CompactBSD is dying One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered CompactBSD community when IDC confirmed that CompactBSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that CompactBSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. CompactBSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict CompactBSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: CompactBSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for CompactBSD because CompactBSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for CompactBSD. As many of us are already aware, CompactBSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    CompactBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time CompactBSD developer Ken Simpson only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: CompactBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put CompactBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 CompactBSD users. This is consistent with the number of CompactBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of FatPort, abysmal sales and so on, CompactBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that CompactBSD has steadily declined in market share. CompactBSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If CompactBSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. CompactBSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, CompactBSD is dead.

    Fact: CompactBSD is dying

    1. Re:It is official: CompactBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somewhere in Nebraska a fat, pimply boy with no friends is giggling to himself about all his great "BSD is Dying" posts.

    2. Re:It is official: CompactBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      36,400 users of CompactBSD??!?!?!

      Wow... and they say BSD is dying.. yet, a new BSD version is announced, and lo and behold within a few days there are 36,400 users! wow!

  10. moderators are on crack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...yet again...

  11. CompactBSD - built small, to fit a child's casket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because *BSD is dying, we built it small, to fit a tiny casket.

  12. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD will die real soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.
    1. Re:Elegy for *BSD by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But then I realized,

      that your little poem,

      was nothing more,

      than *BSD trolling.

      http://www.apple.com/switch/

  13. Re:Sad News, Talk Radio, No Further Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Truly an American (and Canadian) icon.

  14. Security by Rupert · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure you can claim that any given subset of OpenBSD has the same level of security as the real thing. Presumably they're only including code that's been through a security audit, but how tested is any given configuration going to be?

    --

    --
    E_NOSIG
    1. Re:Security by Taliban+Lecher · · Score: 1

      Neither can you claim it has not. By nature of complexity, bloat does rarely ADD security or correctness. Bloat is the correct term for all that stuff not needed in embedded world.

      And as for stripped OpenBSD by Henning Brauer I would be be damn sure it is even more secure than the real thing given the context it is made for (namely removing binaries which are supposed to not be run in a given config).

      The security audit got to the parts which remain the same no matter where other parts went. In fact Your point is only valid for the rare situation of actually removing stuff (e.g. from libs) that do extra checking or other "separation" work.

    2. Re:Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, we know it sure as hell is as unscalable and crash-prone as deomonstrated earlier today.

  15. What we can learn from BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    What We Can Learn From BSD
    By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0

    Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.

    Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.

    These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.

    As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.

    Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.

    The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.

    1. Re:What we can learn from BSD by akac · · Score: 1

      Though do remember that Jordan Hubbard now works for Apple on Darwin - a Mach based system with a BSD subsystem.

    2. Re:What we can learn from BSD by Shanep · · Score: 2

      I guess we can expect a dead Jaguar real soon then?

      And lots of banks and network security companies will just drop what has been working great for them for years now.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    3. Re:What we can learn from BSD by Shanep · · Score: 4, Funny

      Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.

      Quick, better tell this guy!

      From your MIT link... We have run benchmarks to measure filesystem performances. Benchmarks have been made on a middle-end PC, based on a i486DX2 processor, using 16 MB of memory and two 420 MB IDE disks. The tests were run on Ext2 fs and Xia fs (Linux 1.1.62) and on the BSD Fast filesystem in asynchronous and synchronous mode (FreeBSD 2.0 Alpha--based on the 4.4BSD Lite distribution).

      Hey! Way to beat us BSD fans senseless with modern benchmarks! You must have looked around a fair bit to come up with this golden oldie!

      I can't be bothered looking at the postscript if it's anything as compelling as you're first effort at this Troll disguised as information.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    4. Re:What we can learn from BSD by MQBS · · Score: 0

      Usually I think it best to just ignore these comments, but at this point I feel exceptionally happy to pick this post apart.

      Hell, try this: linux is not decentralized. ESR got it wrong. It's like a hubcap, the outside pushes and the inside is spun around in circles, turning the turbine. Which is its point of failure. Linus is much more of a failure point than any model of development in any BSD. The FreeBSD system releases more efficient code, better integrated with the programs (something that every linux is SEVERELY lacking, as the programs and kernel are separately, and poorly, developed), and, this is the sticking point, *does not rely on a single person to get the job done*. And there's where linux should have failed, but by some strange coincidince has plowed on. Market share is no indication of performance; look how many systems are using Windows.

      Slight speed increases are not more important than stability and *usefulness*.

      --
      The dream reveals the reality which conception lags behind. That is the horror of life- the terror of art. -Franz Kafka
    5. Re:What we can learn from BSD by Elbereth · · Score: 2

      Hey, not that long ago, I ran a web server on an i486DX/33 with 20MB RAM (16MB + 4MB) and a 320MB hard drive. It served static pages through a 56k dial-up link. It worked just fine, even when half the hardware in the machine failed. It just enough to get the job done, and that's all you really need, right?

      Too bad that I had to throw all my 486s in the trash when I moved. They were great fun to play with.

    6. Re:What we can learn from BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.. great comparison... Linux 1.1 (years old) against FreeBSD 2.0 (again, many years old).

      Yup.. and I'm sure neither of them has tweaked their code since for performance. Oh.. except for the multiple VM systems in Linux 2.4.x.

      Comparisons between Linux 1.1 and FreeBSD 2.0 is worthless. Try Linux 2.4.x and FreeBSD 4.6. Most people don't care about performance speed comparisons between a VW Bug and a Model-T.

    7. Re:What we can learn from BSD by Strog · · Score: 1

      Hopefully you aren't considering it a mid-range machine still. ;-P

      486 can still get the low end going. I still have a couple old 486s around but I tend to use Pentiums for my low end stuff since I have a few around not doing much else anyway.

    8. Re:What we can learn from BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only explanation for these retarded posters that I can come up with is that all these trolls are scared to death of anything competing for the attentions of their precious (flash in the pan) Linux. It's almost like they want Linux to be the next Microsoft or something. Their dependence on highly dated (and dubious, MIT or no) benchmarks (even then FreeBSD 2.x was widely known to run Linux programs in emulation better than Linux kernels did) shows just how little they understand about computers, operating systems in general. But that doesn't seem to stop them.

  16. Re:Perhaps in conjunction w/ one of this sweet one by modecx · · Score: 1

    Iv'e been looking for a sbc with almost the exact same specs as this, and have been totally frustrated with the fact that very few exist, and most of the ones that do are either super expensive in low volume orders, or don't have everything I need.

    Just wanted to thank ya, looks like a helluva nice peice of hardware, not too bad on the wallet either!

    --
    Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  17. cool stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope this spreads the use of BSD in embedded environments. BSD is so cool.

  18. Does it fit on a floppy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd love a floppy disk version of BSD.

    1. Re:Does it fit on a floppy? by Squidgee · · Score: 1, Informative
      It's been done!

      Check out this [freebsd.org] for a floppy based FreeBSD, known as PicoBSD. It includes a few nice little tools, as well; you can have a dialup version, router version or networking version. All in all it's a nice little system!

    2. Re:Does it fit on a floppy? by hyperturbopete · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, picobsd isn't nearly as cool as tomsrtbt.

      When it comes to floppies, stuff thats nice about BSD doesnt really matter much. (I use FreeBSD)...

      tomsrtbt is a 2.0 series linux floppy, and its really lives up to being the most linux (read: useful stuff) on a floppy. Except it doesnt support ufs by default :-(

    3. Re:Does it fit on a floppy? by Squidgee · · Score: 0
      Tomsrtbt is nice, I must admit. But I have found I personally will take *BSD or Linux (Please don't flame me; it's just my opinion).

      Those of you looking for it can find it here. for other Linux floppy distros, check out this.

      It also seems there are a few more mini *BSD 'distros' out there. Now we can add the embedded *BSD to the list! =)

    4. Re:Does it fit on a floppy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is also this project, see www.microbd.net [microbsd.net] a project that is very alive and current with some new twists

  19. BSD & smalll systems by Arctic+Fox · · Score: 1

    I'm looking for a PC104 or similar system for a project i'm working on. I'd like it to be BSD based (Open or Free is fine), a VGA or SVGA out. I'd like to be able to have digital ins/outs as well as analog inputs as well. Networking would be a plus, but not necessary. Ideally, i'd like to write a GUI for this application using QT (or similar toolkit). A tinyBSD like this is a good start. Has anyone else done or know how to do something similar? Thanks in advance...

    1. Re:BSD & smalll systems by AELinuxGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

      NevyOS is a full desktop distro built off of the QT/emb toolkit - preview release 1 was 8 MB total. It runs all out of the kernel framebuffer so it is wicked fast on even the slowest hardware. There were mailing list posts .saying they were going GPL in preview release 2, due in a matter of weeks. The site. has just went down for construction, so expect the big announcement soon. AE

  20. GPL in embedded space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt a company will spend millions developing hardware without protecting their IP. NetBSD is free as in beer and will remain king of the BSD embedded space.

  21. Re:My Faith is Restored by Chan01 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    why is BSD dying and why is linux taking over? I personally like both of them and have no real preference for one.

  22. BSDs on embedded platforms ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's actually really nice to see that there is some BSD-embedded activity around ... i mean all the linux embedded hype is not really all that great, so it's good to see some other free os in the same corner!

  23. Wondering... by echophase · · Score: 1

    Anyone know if/how well this unit can do SSH tunneling?

    1. Re:Wondering... by krusty_snart · · Score: 2, Informative
      No problem...

      It's OpenBSD stripped down on what is essentially a 300MHz i386 PC. OpenSSH is on it by default, just like OpenBSD.

      Though you would probably want to upgrade it to OpenSSH 3.4 because of the recent security holes.

      So SSH tunnelling would be done exactly as it would on any other OpenSSH platform.

  24. Re:Perhaps in conjunction w/ one of this sweet one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    PC104? really? You should call Soren and let him know....

  25. How do the tools compare to WinCE's? by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1, Troll

    Microsoft Platform Builder is a pretty good tool for configuring and building a Windows CE customized OS. It seems that CompactBSD's CLI environment is really a huge backstep in platform configuration tools.

    Leaving aside any arguments about BSD and WinCE, of course.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:How do the tools compare to WinCE's? by philovivero · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Leaving aside any arguments about BSD and WinCE, of course.
      Leaving aside arguments about BSD and WinCE? Yeh, this is like talking about moving dirt from one place to another, and not arguing about the relative merits of the pooper scooper and the Bobcat Compact Excavator.

      (oh, lordy, when will I ever learn to stop fanning the flames???)

    2. Re:How do the tools compare to WinCE's? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... The tools are what's important here, not the OS. They purportedly do the same thing, but MS's product is infinitely more user friendly and powerful than CompactBSD.

      CompactBSD is what Platform Builder was 5 years ago when it was called the ETK, i.e. a bunch of command line batch files and build scripts.

      That your post got modded up and ObviousGuy's got modded down only exemplifies the stupid lengths that moderators will go to toe the Linux-luvin' party line.

    3. Re:How do the tools compare to WinCE's? by messiertom · · Score: 1

      Well if this was talking about Linux and not OpenBSD... you might make some sense.

    4. Re:How do the tools compare to WinCE's? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then just substitute "Open Source" for "Linux" in the post, idiot.

      Fucking pedants.

  26. Whew! These marketing guru's need a raise! by Negadin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Isnt FatPort releasing CompactBSD sorta like Tony Little selling Krispy Kremes?

  27. Best operating system for the job? by DaRiachu · · Score: 1

    Knowing that BSD and other *nix systems usually don't like hard power-downs (this may have changed since the last time I used linux), would they really be the best things to be using in embedded devices? I mean, I know windows is the end-all be-all of EVIL(TM) operating systems, but hard-crashes and hard-rebooting them wouldn't damage them as badly as the horror stories I've heard about *nix systems. Just a question.

    1. Re:Best operating system for the job? by fanatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      windows ... but hard-crashes and hard-rebooting them wouldn't damage them as badly as the horror stories I've heard about *nix systems.

      I think Windows is just quieter about what it does in recovering from hard crashes than *NIX systems, which give you options during recovery that most folks have no use for. In any event, the journaling filesystems under Linux (and the Soft Updates for BSDs) largely addresses this. Unscheduled powerdowns are usually not much of an issue with ext3.

      --
      "that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
    2. Re:Best operating system for the job? by krusty_snart · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I've switched on/off embedded pc's such as the Soekris box with OpenBSD on a compact flash without any problems.

      It just fsck's it's drives, and goes on it's merry way.

    3. Re:Best operating system for the job? by Arandir · · Score: 1

      Knowing that BSD and other *nix systems usually don't like hard power-downs

      Correction. Most *nix file systems don't like hard power-downs. The OS itself figures you know what you're doing.

      But be that as it may, most embedded devices either have a RAM filesystem powered by battery, or don't really have a hard power-down at all.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    4. Re:Best operating system for the job? by jbynum · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't believe it uses the CF except for loading the OS at boot time. It partitions off parts of memeory and mounts them as the filesystem. /usr, /var/ and /etc are kept in a file called /stand/mfs.tgz and loaded into those memory mount points at boot time.

    5. Re:Best operating system for the job? by shic · · Score: 2

      I can vouch for the argument about Windows just keeping quiet to reduce user angst.

      I've recently encountered a very unsavoury consequence with Windows 2000 and power loss (on a laptop running off mains without a battery.) While it has been argued that NTFS (a log based file system) doesn't need fsck (chkdsk) after a crash... I can assure you, from bitter experience, that sometimes it does! The good news is that I could boot from the CD to a console and run chkdsk which made an appropriate repair... not a pleasant experience.

      Whatever happened to the experimental transactional file system (Tux?)?

  28. Re:but at least they're smoking the good stuff... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tonight.

  29. Wind River? by Autonomous+Crowhard · · Score: 2

    One has to wonder if something like this can be taken from the PC to the embedded space in general. I'm sure Wind River (the owners of BSDi) would be annoyed by something like that.

    1. Re:Wind River? by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

      More to the point, the customers of Wind River will be quite happy. Wind River isn't exactly known as a customer-friendly organization.

      This doesn't seem to have such a huge effect on WR because their main product is VxWorks, not BSD.

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
  30. Shame the embedded market is in the shape it's in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All the embedded devices that were supposed to take off have died a dotcom death. There's the Netpliance I-Opener, the... Oh nevermind, I forgot this is Slashdot and everybody already knows about every hackable I-Appliance loss-leader hackable goodie released prior to IPO $$$ drying up.

    I guess a nice small flashable *NIX distro would be great for making your own homebrew NAT box or router, but isn't there already a Linux distro (Linux router project? Must oogle google for that one later...) for this purpose? Oh well, diversity breeds creativity (according to a Disney employment ad, and the mouse never lies) so this has to be a GOOD THING.

    Seriously though, one of my friends runs FreeBSD on his NAT box/file server and keeps touting it as better/easier/faster/sex life improving/more robust than Linux. Since I've set up MY Linux NAT box/file server, I haven't had to mess with it much and I really just think of it as a steady workhorse that does its job day after day without much fanfare. The only thing I can imagine BSD could improve is my sex life, but it's not working for my friend either so I think he's a liar.

    In summary...

    Small specialized BSD, Beer and Linux = Good
    RIAA, DMCA, AOL and FIRE = BAD

  31. This is neat and all.. BUT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    OpenBSD is not dying. It's not dead. Its a very nice flavor of UNIX. These things are not the problem. The problem IS OpenBSD's security. They are simply not secure. I will explain, please don't flame until you hear me out:

    1. cvs.openbsd.org was compromised in December.

    2. The entire OpenBSD tree was modified.

    3. Theo does not disclose security vulnerabilities
    as he should. Theo did not willingly disclose the
    compromise. Only due to pressure from his peers
    was anything mentioned. There has been backdoors
    in the kernel, openssh, and numerous other areas
    since OpenBSD 3.0.

    4. The integrity of OpenBSD can no longer be trusted, one would have to audit the base distro
    and OpenSSH to understand the true nature of this
    problem. The backdoors being inserted into the code are not obvious. They are carefully obscured as "bad coding practice" - these items have been audited and fixed before, but the code in question
    was modified AGAIN. Theo simply cannot reaudit the
    entire tree again in the amount of time required.

    5. OpenBSD developers are aiding in the entities attacking it. They are inserting these changes willingly into the tree, so no matter how often Theo audits, there will always be a backdoor. He would have to fire almost his entire staff to get the moles out.

    6. OpenBSD's kernel is remotely exploitable. Enough said.

    I have migrated my entire network away from OpenBSD. I urge someone to take up the project and audit the code, and fork it off. It's a great idea, a great package, and very lightweight, but it is no longer secure.

    1. Re:This is neat and all.. BUT by Nonesuch · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Anonymous coward writes:
      1. cvs.openbsd.org was compromised in December.
      OpenBSD 3.0 was released Dec 1, 2001.
      2. The entire OpenBSD tree was modified.
      ...
      There has been backdoors in the kernel, openssh, and numerous other areas since OpenBSD 3.0.
      I highly doubt the truth of these statements... Just another anti-BSD troll?

      This does bring up a good point... has anybody built a "meta-CVS", a mechanism where I can do a CVS checkout from a public repository, diff the checkout against the one I did yesterday, and then check-in to my own private CVS showing the date, the purported actual change/committer, and the real diff between the two code revs?

      If "the entire OpenBSD tree was modified", a simple DIFF would tell the story. I have every OpenBSD release set since 2.4, each of which includes a full source tree.

      It would be trivial to do a straight file-for-file diff between the Kernel sources for 2.9/3.0/3.1/current and see exactly what changed and approximately when, and compare this to what CVS claims was officially changed.

      I have migrated my entire network away from OpenBSD.
      Migrated "away" to what platform?
      I urge someone to take up the project and audit the code, and fork itoff. It's a great idea, a great package, and very lightweight, but it is no longer secure.
      Assuming you can find checkouts for the appropriate time range, doing Diff's for the core kernel code between November 2001 and January 2002 should not be a huge task. But I'm not going to put the effort in on the word of an "anonymous coward".
    2. Re:This is neat and all.. BUT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd how you know about this, considering that no search terms that I've tried have resulted in google providing information even hinting at this.

  32. Re:Perhaps in conjunction w/ one of this sweet one by metlin · · Score: 1

    Yeah, same here. They've got very neat boards indeed, and reasonable too.

    Thanks dude/ette(?) :-)

  33. The Failure of *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Why now? So why did *BSD fail? Once you get beyond the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  34. Re:CompactBSD - built small, to fit a child's cask by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, you missed it

  35. a visit from St. Goatse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Twas the night before Goatse, when all through the house
    Not a penis was stirring, not even with mouth;
    The Giver was hung by the chimney with care,
    In hopes that St. Goatse soon would be there;

    The children were nestled all snug in their beds,
    While visions of anal sex danced in their heads.
    And Katz in his 'kerchief, and I in my cap,
    Had just settled down for a fuck in the sack.

    When up in my anus there arose such a clatter,
    I sprang from the bed to see Katz start to splatter.
    Away to the bathroom I flew like a flash,
    Tore open my anus and looked at the gash.

    The moon in the glass had a vibrant red glow
    Gave the lustre of sunset to my nutsack below,
    When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
    But a miniature sleigh, and eight tiny reindeer!

    With a little old driver, so lively and quickse,
    I knew in a moment it must be St. Goatse.
    More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,
    And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;

    "Now, TACO! now, JAMIE! now, MICHEAL and TIMMY!
    On, CHRISD! on HEMOS! on, PUDGEY and CLIFFY!
    To the top of the ass! fronts to the the wall!
    Now pound away! pound away! pound away all!"

    As faggots that before the wild hurricane fly,
    When they meet with a hetero, mount the next guy,
    So up to the house-top the coursers they flew,
    With the sleigh full of sex-toys, and Goatse pics too.

    And then, in a twinkling, I heard on the roof
    The moaning and pawing of each little poof.
    As I drew in my ass, and was turning around,
    Down the chimney St. Goatse came with a bound.

    He was dressed as a furry, from his head to his feet,
    And his clothes were all tarnished with urine and shit;
    A bundle of sex-toys he had flung on his back,
    And he looked like a hooker just flapping his sack.

    His eyes -- how they twinkled! his dimples how merry!
    His ass cheeks like roses, his cock like a cherry!
    His cute little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
    And the beard of his scrotum as white as the snow;

    The stump of a blunt he held tight in his teeth,
    And the smoke it encircled his head like a wreath;
    He had a broad face and was a bit smelly,
    He shook, when he wanked like a bowlful of jelly.

    He was chubby and plump, a right jolly old elf,
    And I laughed when I saw him beat off himself;
    A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
    Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread;

    He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
    And filled all the stockings with smelly big turds,
    He layed a big log right under my nose,
    And giving a nod, up the chimney he rose;

    He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a whistle,
    And away they all flew like a fucking great missile.
    But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
    "HAPPY GOATSE TO ALL, AND TO ALL A GOOD-NIGHT!"

  36. Ultimate Hack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, so the X-Box/linux hack is pretty cool,
    but how about hacking a digital camera?

    Boot from the memory card/stick
    and plug in your USB keyboard/mouse.

    Tell me that wouldn't be cool
    (in a geeky kind of way)

  37. Re:My Faith is Restored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Umm....are you new here?

  38. Old news is new news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On slashdot, old news is new news at least twice a week :)

    recompile.org

  39. Re:Shame the embedded market is in the shape it's by Inthewire · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your friend is obviously coming on to you in the hopes of improving *both* of your sex lives.

    --


    Writers imply. Readers infer.
  40. Working on something similar by MQBS · · Score: 1, Informative

    There are about a half dozen similar projects out and about at the moment. For one, there's the myBSD project that's creating a fifth BSD distro for very specialized projects. I personally am working on a customized version of FreeBSD, called PortoBSD, built to boot off of a CD directly into a complete OS (portable email station). This is by no means particularly special.

    --
    The dream reveals the reality which conception lags behind. That is the horror of life- the terror of art. -Franz Kafka
    1. Re:Working on something similar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is also see www.microbd.net a project that is very alive and current with some new twists.

  41. 300MHz fan-less i386 processor ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone see the specs? Who still makes 386 chips, not to mention a 300mhz version?

    -Meyer

    1. Re:300MHz fan-less i386 processor ? by WECoyoteSooperGenius · · Score: 1

      It's a Nat. Semi. Geode GX-1 300MHz -- which is a Pentium MMX class SOC. Somebody was reading their compile flags and not their product info on this one.

      Fatpoint Info:

      http://www.fatport.com/pdf/fatpoint_specs

      GX-1 info:

      http://www.national.com/appinfo/solutions/0,2062 ,2 39,00.html

  42. Re:My Faith is Restored by hyperturbopete · · Score: 1

    who said BSD is dying? FreeBSD kicks ass, i've been using it for almost 4 years

  43. Why not just use emBSD? by draziw · · Score: 2, Informative

    emBSD has been around for a while, and is built on OpenBSD too. -Yes, it's targeted towards firewalls, but can be used for more.

    1. Re:Why not just use emBSD? by krusty_snart · · Score: 2, Informative
      emBSD has been stalled for quite some time now.

      I've tried to use it, but it's always revisions behind the main OpenBSD development. So security fixes never really seem to make it into emBSD very quickly.

      The nice thing about this version, is that it is always based on the newest version of OpenBSD.
      It essentially downloads the current version, hacks it up so it can fit onto embedded devices, and burns everything onto a bootable compact flash card.

      Very nice...

    2. Re:Why not just use emBSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      see www.microbd.net a project that is very alive and current with some new twists.

  44. Interesting facts: *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

    Another more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  45. First Post!! by JPriest · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    BSD - For the much much ... slower PF trolls.

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  46. Re:Perhaps in conjunction w/ one of this sweet one by Bishop · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is also worth checking out IEI. Check out the embeded single board computers. Embeded SBC There is quite a variety of socket370, transmeta, and NS Geode boards. For ordering boards in Canada contact Tri-M. Not all boards are listed on the website but most are listed in the pdf price list(in USD). I have not ordered anything from these guys yet. I am considering a ISS-102R-300 board, with 3 ethernet, and NS Geode 300mhz, for $275 USD. Or possibly one of the compact socket 370 boards.

  47. How about by DeepZenPill · · Score: 1

    a port of *BSD or Linux to my digital camera?

    Is there any way that would ever be possible? Can you boot from flash ram on those babies?

    1. Re:How about by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      Anything is possible. I mean MAME has been ported to digital cameras already. Digita Mame

    2. Re:How about by ffsnjb · · Score: 1

      Kodak DC 265 and NetBSD... have fun playing around.

      --
      "Why do you consent to live in ignorance and fear?" - Bad Religion
  48. GPL?!? by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

    If you click the link, the site says License "GPL" How can a "BSD" be GPL?

    1. Re:GPL?!? by dnaumov · · Score: 2, Informative

      BSD software can be re-released under the GPL license. It can even be re-released as a closed-source only binary. The BSD license permits that.

    2. Re:GPL?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this modded as informative? You cant take someone elses work and re-release it under a different license. What you can do is include its code in GPL'd projects. But that code is not GPL'd, it is still subject to the terms of the BSDL. Read the damn license before you feel the need to comment on it.

    3. Re:GPL?!? by krusty_snart · · Score: 3, Informative
      This isn't really a distribution, but a set of tools to create a distribution.

      So the tools themselves are GPL'd, while the BSD files are still under the BSD license.

    4. Re:GPL?!? by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I have since downloaded it and see that it is some .py files that copy files and stuff to make it smaller.

    5. Re:GPL?!? by funky+womble · · Score: 2

      CompactBSD uses the BSD license with the advertising clause which I understand is not GPL compatible..?

  49. Similar project for Linux by hazard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    WISP-Dist has similar targets, and runs on 8 Mb flash/16 Mb RAM.

  50. What's that smell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Did something die?

    It smells like something is dead.

  51. What we can learn from cars by by+Steven+Woston · · Score: 0

    What We Can Learn From cars+fuel

    Everyone knows about cars+fuel's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of cars+fuel, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save horses+hay from a similarly grisly fate.

    Let's not be overly morbid and give cars+fuel credit for its early successes. In the 1900s, Ken Thompson and Henry Ford both made significant contributions to the transportation world on the cars+fuel platform. In the 1910s, Ford saw cars+fuel as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the Model T cars+fuel product, gave the cars+fuel company a 2 year contract.

    These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar cars+fuel's progress. In 1922, Generl Transport filed suit against Ford Motor Company, claiming that proprietary transportation fundamentals agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, cars+fuel filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While Generl Transport and Ford Motor Company lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various cars+fuel distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1925, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the Netcars+fuel project, formed his own rival distribution, Opencars+fuel, as the result of a quarrel that he documents [theos.com] on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of oil-based gas from the Opencars+fuel distribution.

    As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, cars+fuel's base became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each cars+fuel distribution make transportation fundamental sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT [mit.edu] found cars+fuel's terrain movement implementation to be "very poorly performing compared to all-terrain horses' hooves." Even cars+fuel's acclaimed oil-based hay replacement stack has lagged behind, according to this study [rice.edu]. Problems with cars+fuel's base were compounded by fundamental flaws in the cars+fuel design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, intelligent, living horses are inherently superior to complex, mechanical, dumb cars in transportation development. cars+fuel developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that mechanical cars and fuel engines lead to "faster and cheaper transport". Don't believe their hype - cars+fuel's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that cars+fuel managed to make were nullified by the cars+fuel license, which allows road-builders and car companies to profit, and not give back to the horses+hay community. Fortunately, horses+hay is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL, meaning that anyone can reproduce horses, but only car-companies can produce cars.

    The failure of cars+fuel culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the Freecars+fuel core team. They both believed that Freecars+fuel had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, cars+fuel had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As horses+hay gains market share and as cars+fuel sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to cars+fuel's demise.

    --

    Steven Woston

    Lead Programmer, J-j-j-julius Software
    1. Re:What we can learn from cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It must have taken you some creative thinking skills to make the anaogy between BDS/Linux and cars+gas and horses+hay. Who says that computer people are unimaginiative, fat slobs with the creativity to only create computer stuff...

  52. wireless with Debian by sebou · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The FatPoint is also known as OpenBrick in Europe. I made a Debian image wich can fit on a compact flash and wich can also do a wireless access point. That's really impressive all we can do with this little box.

  53. Re:This is neat and all... look again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod this up, please. Someone obviously did not agree with the truth. Sometimes I wished that GOBBLES or someone would post here, set a few things straight.

  54. Re:My Faith is Restored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to agree... I started using FreeBSD back with version 2.1.1 (ouch!)..

    It's come a long ways since those days.

  55. Re:My Faith is Restored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

  56. *** BSD IS DYING *** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just kidding :-)

    This should receive wide adoption. I know one of the reasons some companies don't switch over to an embedded Linux (Lineo, uC, etc) is because of the licensing and the desire to keep their intellectual property closed source.

  57. Any plan for a "Compact Linux" ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1, Troll



    I know that there are lots of "tiny" Linux distros. But is there any that match or exceed that of "compactBSD" ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  58. Re:Need some help guys! :o( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am 27 year old open source developer

    Then a prostitute is the only way you will ever even see female genetalia. The only alternative to a prostitute is to find a fellow open source developer and have gay sex with him.

  59. Interesting claim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2. The entire OpenBSD tree was modified.

    Got any proof?

  60. Another Micro BSD distro called MicroBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there is also see www.microbd.net [microbsd.net] a project that is very alive and current with some new twists

  61. BSD is pretty much dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why waste your time preaching to the choir. Most guys in-the-know realize BSD is no longer viable. The latest Netcraft figures show that BSD is something like 9/10 of 1 percent of operating systems tallied. That is pretty small, insignificant really.

    1. Re:BSD is pretty much dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... y'know, the number of Lamborghini's that are on the road is very insignificant... in fact, I'd bet less than 9/10'ths of 1%, so I guess that Lamborghini is no longer viable. Really, Really insignificant. So when I get one, I won't bother offering to let you drive it... obviously you don't think its fun to drive something so 'insignificant'.

  62. Re:Perhaps in conjunction w/ one of this sweet one by krusty_snart · · Score: 1
    This is exactly the kind of machine this was built for...

    If you take a look on the fatport site, they have a picture of something that looks very similar to a Soekris box.

    Anyone know what this is?

  63. Why would someone use this? by draziw · · Score: 1

    Is this just an add trying to sell hardware?
    Points us to the SourceForge page, where there are: 0 Bug listings, 0 Support Requests, 0 Patches, 0 Feature Requests. The Notes page is empty, there is no project home page, and it only has 5 downloads.
    Yes - let me rush to install this on my critical embedded systems. This story should not have been posted - on freshmeat, fine - on slashdot, it's stupid.

  64. Re:This is neat and all... look again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Mod this up, please. Someone obviously did not agree with the truth. Sometimes I wished that GOBBLES or someone would post here, set a few things straight.
    Bullshit.

    I don't necessarily trust CVS for accuracy, but "cvs.openbsd.org" is not the only reference copy of the OpenBSD sources. "Inserting root holes in OpenBSD kernel" is like inserting holes in the old testament of the bible... you can change one copy at one site, but people are going to notice and figure out when/what was changed in short order.

    If you still can't get your mind around how this could be untrue, check out:

    http://monkey.org/openbsd/archive/bugs/0206/msg001 37.html

  65. Compact BSD is not a BSD at all. by Brett+Glass · · Score: 1

    Look at the SourceForge page: It's GPLed. This means it's not a BSD.

    1. Re:Compact BSD is not a BSD at all. by krusty_snart · · Score: 1
      As mentioned in a previous post, the actual OpenBSD files are still under a BSD license.

      This is a set of tools to hack up an original OpenBSD distribution, so it would work well with embedded devices.

      The tools to do this are GPL'd.

  66. Re:My Faith is Restored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, and for all practical purposes, given all the hype surrounding Linux it will never dominate the market without being more coherent... what distro should a company go with?? RedHat? Caldera? Lycoris? Suse? Slackware? Mandrake?

  67. Haiku by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Helicopter crash, dead stinking flesh, *BSD dead.

  68. B - S - D - E - A - D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Subject line says it all.

  69. *BSDead crowd is right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot *BSDead crowd is right. *BSD is dead. After seeing key developers leaving the core I decided I had enough also. I am a realist. There is no future for *BSD so it would be stupid to waste any more time on it. Better just format your *BSD partitions and use Linux. It's crazy, vital and goodlooking.

  70. CompactBSD boxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine a Beowolf Cluster of THESE!!!

  71. Re:My Faith is Restored by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux is 95% hype. A lot like Windows in that respect.

  72. It's a GRAVEYARD PARTY blues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..that's what life is all about. *BSD IS DEAD AND BEATEN.

  73. It's called cemetary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I did. It's called cemetary.

  74. Re:Need some help guys! :o( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He said "open source developer"... so, he probably works for free, meaning he doesn't have any money... so forget the prostitute, they like getting paid.

    So I guess its the gay sex with a fellow unpaid open source developer...

  75. openbsd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is there some reason we're supposed to care about openbsd? seriously, just set inetd_enable="NO" on NetBSD and you're good to go.