OpenBFS Reaches Beta

Bruno G. Albuquerque writes "The OpenBFS Team (part of the OpenBeOS project that aims to recreate BeOS from scratch) has moved the project status to early beta. This means OpenBFS is now a 100% complete (but barely tested) replacement for the original Be File System (BFS). It is a 64 bit, multithreaded and journaled file system that supports unlimited number os extended attributes and has support some database-like functions (like ultra-fast searches based on an index). OpenBFS is written in C++ and is licensed under the MIT license."

Comments

Re:Yet another operating system

[newton34]

hopefully you can actually turn off your computer without nuking your os,hd and your neighbors kids. that is why I need BEOS

Great For Choice

[Tomah4wk]

When (if?) this is ported to other OS's (specifically linux) we will have yet another great filesystem. Im starting to see all those 'linux/bsd/whatever' isnt ready for the enterprise arguments slipping away. Still, why a boat needs a OS is beyond me.

Re:Great For Choice

[LordNimon]

Well, since it's written in C++, Linus will refuse to accept it in the kernel. I guess since he's not smart enough to figure out how to write kernel-friendly C++ code, no one else is allowed to figure it out either.

Re:Great For Choice

[leviramsey]

Well, since it's written in C++, Linus will refuse to accept it in the kernel. I guess since he's not smart enough to figure out how to write kernel-friendly C++ code, no one else is allowed to figure it out either.

Just because the current implementation is in C++ doesn't mean that the only implementation is in C++. Assuming that there's some way to define inodes for this fs, writing an FS driver wouldn't be too difficult.

The tougher issue is the database aspect of this fs, as it can't be hacked into the current VFS system. The best thing I can think of is exporting a few API hooks with some userspace components to allow for this. The userspace part could be done, of course, in C++.

Re:Great For Choice

[SixArmedJesus]

I would love to see this in Linux as well. This is why I switched over to XFS. Unfortunately, I quickly found that it wasn't at all like BFS and I am planning on disposing of it very soon. I used to use BeOS, and out of all the things that BeOS had to offer that made the system as a whole so great, the filesystem is what I miss the most. Unfortunately I can't run it anymore because BeOS won't even boot on my system.

Re:Great For Choice

[Anonymous Coward]

You probably know this, but you to get BeOS working on a new system you just install it on older hardware and then transfer the drive to the new machine.

Re:Great For Choice

[SixArmedJesus]

That would be good, but no matter what, BeOS won't boot if you have more than 1 GB of RAM. =0(

Re:Great For Choice

[Toraz Chryx]

Doesn't work with AthlonXPs, it detects the SSE support, thinks it's running on a P3 and does something that causes a hard lock.

Re:Great For Choice

[BGA]

Believe-me, it is not just Linus. C++ in the kernel is really a sensitive matter but it *CAN* be used if you know what you're doing. Basically, no exceptions and no pure-virtual methods.

-Bruno

Re:Great For Choice

[Anonymous Coward]

BeFS is more than just a way to store information on a disk, as is the case with extfs, ufs, xfs, etc. BeFS is special because of it allows attributes. Each file is a regular file with 0 or more attributes. Each attribute has a name and a type (integer, icon, string, etc) with data in them. *and*, the attributes can be indexed for database-like searches. (eg find all files with mime_type = "audio/x-ogg-vorbis" and style = punk and year_released
I should also mention macintosh resource forks, which is basically 2 files stored under 1 name (and slower to access and unindexed), and NTFS streams (file:stream), which are similar, but untyped and unindexed. Maybe LongHorn will change that.

Re:Great For Choice

[mlk]

i think there is an unoffical AthlonXP patch on BeBits.

New hope

[Anonymous Coward]

I gave my girlfriend's mother BeOS because I had faith that it wouldn't break (and it hasn't). But she's been using NetPositive (Netscape 3 era browser) for years now. Then the company died, and its assets were sold to Palm, and there was no chance of a revision. These guys are my new hope.

Hold on granny!

A meeting of very clever people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Clever guy 1: Why on earth should I try OpenBeOS ? What could it do for me that Windows/OSX/Linux/BSD can't do?

Clever guy 2: Why on earth should I try BSD ? What could it do for me that Windows/OSX/Linux can't do?

Clever guy 3: Why on earth should I try Linux ? What could it do for me that Windows/OSX can't do?

Clever guy 4: Why on earth should I try OSX ? What could it do for me that Windows can't do?

Clever guy 5: Why on earth should I try Windows ? What could it do for me?

Re:A meeting of very clever people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows/OSX/Linus/BSD either aren't portable or aren't user friendly.

Re:A meeting of very clever people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Most clever guy: I'm glad I use Windows. I used to use but XFree86 is dog slow and the window managers built for it are poorly written.

Please, don't give me your naive Windows flames. You are a dumbass.

Thanks,
-The English Troll

Of course

[rudy_wayne]

1. Release obscure OS that nobody cares about
2. ?????
3. Profit!!

Re:Of course

[mlk]

Just as with Linux!

It's OSS, no one is tring to make monney from it.

BEos

[Anonymous Coward]

This is an operating system that hsould be developed even if there isn't "room" in the market for a new OS. Because as it progresses there will be room. As the OS becomes more usable people will make an effort to use it. Linux is a great windows alternative but starting completely over and not building off anything else is something that should really be done with most technology every so often. There is so much progress made in computer science why should we still be building off old systems and code. Build anew and you get a faster sleeker more efficient more reliable OS. This is great news even if it might take 6 years before it has the functionality of current OSes that are offered.
Dan Mayer: Check my site for essays and videos and more of my comments.

Opera for BeOS

[J_DarkElf]

Have you ever tried Opera for BeOS? http://www.opera.com/beos/

It's still in the 3.62 version, but has 128-bit encryption, SSL 2 and 3, TLS 1.0, HTML 3.2, JavaScript 1.1, CSS1, and plug-in support.

While it is neither free nor up to standards compared to Opera for other platforms, it is certainly better than NetPositive, imnhso.

Besides, it never hurts to have an alternative ;)

Re:Opera for BeOS

[Anonymous Coward]

(Original poster here, who is NOT SHAUN!)

Yeah, I tried Opera, but the interface was awful. It seemed more crashy than NetPositive too.

I've yet to try BeZilla - I guess that's crashy too?

BFS for Linux page

[fm6]

Here. This project is referered to as a "reference source" by the file system team -- whatever that means.

One thing that bothers me about most filesystems is limited metadata support. BFS is a notable exception. One hopes that KDE and GNOME developers could use this to improve on the primitive file handling tools desktop users are currently stuck with.

Re:BFS for Linux page

[Anonymous Coward]

That's using the reverse engineered code that's been around for year(s) - isn't this BFS a new, separate, development?

Re:BFS for Linux page

[BGA]

Let me clarify that (and I really have to change that text on the page). Once upon a time there was the start of an OpenBFS team. They *WOULD* be using the Linux BFS code as a reference (with the author permission, AFAIK) but they actually never wrote one single line of code. Eventually me and Axel ttook over the OpenBFS team and ended up basing the code on Axel's previous work on the BFS Recovery Tools package.

In other words, no code has been used from that Linux driver.

-Bruno

That joke

[fm6]

Was funny the first couple hundred times you posted it. Now it's beginning to get stale.

Oh wow.

[psicE]

I hear this news, and decide maybe it's a good idea to try it out. So I install BeOS 5.04 Dev Edition (from BeOSOnline.de), get it all set up, compile OpenBFS, and transplant it in.

I restart my system, and lo and behold, it works. I type in 'touch t', and it successfully creates a file called t. However, I then see a box on the screen saying, "BeOS was unable to initialize a swap file." I realize something's wrong - and when I try to create another file, or do anything really, it refuses, on the account that it's a read-only file system. Of course, write support is implemented, but for some reason it was inaccessible to me.

At the end of all this, I finally manage to corrupt my filesystem, and despite replacing the original BFS driver, it refuses to boot. So I'm going to have to reinstall. :(

OBOS, sadly, just isn't ready for primetime yet.

Re:Oh wow.

[RevAaron]

Note the part where the OBOS team says that the driver is barely tested. B-e-t-a. :)

Re:Oh wow.

[psicE]

Actually, we're both wrong.

I made the stupid mistake of checking out module BeFS. Apparently, I'm not the only one. :D Had I checked out current, it would have worked. And I will now proceed to do that, though it involves reinstalling BeOS. :()

Re:Oh wow.

[tswinzig]

OBOS, sadly, just isn't ready for primetime yet.

This is a BETA test of one small part of OBOS. Why on earth would you think OBOS might be ready for primetime after reading this announcement???

Re:Oh wow.

[BGA]

Really, you should not be trying this on a production environment. Anyway, there are some issues that we discovered that will be worked on and as soon as I can reliably boot using it on my computer I will make a compiled package and put it up somewhere with instructions on how to install/uninstall it.

Re:Oh wow.

[GlassHeart]

Pet peeve time.

Beta software, by definition, should not be barely tested. In fact, beta software should be feature complete, basically working and usable. This means that it has gone through unit level testing, integration testing, and functional tests.

In other words, the only remaining unknown bugs are those that can only reasonably be discovered by actual volunteer users in real world situations. These users, called beta testers, generally do not have the ability to diagnose or fix any problems they find.

In still other words, beta software are already candidates for final release.

This is of course only theory, and organizations do differ on what is considered beta. However, no commercial outfit would release "barely tested" code to beta testers.

Note to everyone

[psicE]

Don't make the same stupid mistake I did!

If you browse the OBOS source hierarchy, you'll notice a BeFS module. Do not download that one. Strangely enough, the correct module to download is current. Why the other modules remain there, I have no idea.

If you download the wrong one, you'll get a two-month old driver; it can't write, and it will not take its time in screwing up your BeOS installation.

Re:Note to everyone

[Anonymous Coward]

They moved everything. They can't get SF to axe the old dirs, unfortunately.

It's a SF problem not an obos one. Good luck w/ the _BETA_ testing.

Re:Note to everyone

[Anonymous Coward]

According to the OpenBeos ppl it's because of Sourceforge not handling deletes and restructures on the CVS-tree.

Re:Note to everyone

[Anonymous Coward]

because sourceforge sucks and doesn't let you delete files/directories you've accidently created?