Slashdot Mirror
Official FreeBSD nVidia Drivers
Hugh writes "The FreeBSD NVIDIA Driver Initiative has announced that nVidia itself will be releasing a FreeBSD driver for its line of cards. This is excellent news for people who prefer to Quake on the best OS available."
While I'm not going to rush out and convert from Linux to FreeBSD, I've always had some interest in FreeBSD :)
Now the real question, can Quake3 be installed in FreeBSD? I don't think so...
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
This is excellent news for people who prefer to Quake on the best OS available
;-)
Wouldn't this normally rate a Flamebait on a regular commment?
But ... it already runs in Mac OS X?
Good greif, FreeBSD is going mainstram. Yuk!
How can I be condecending and arrogent when everybody else is using the same operating system as I am? How can I put on airs of self-ritous opression when people are actually supporting my OS?
Oh well, off to OpenBSD, or if that too poplar, I'll have to ger an Amiga. Sigh.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
people who prefer to [run] Quake on the best OS available.
*BSD isn't the best OS available. Neither is Linux. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Neither OS is inherently more secure. Neither OS has an absolute performance advantage over the other. Silly trolls. (:
because the demo even comes as part of a fresh install
/usr/ports/games/linux-q3ademo/pkg-descr
bash-2.05a$ cat
This is the Linux version the Quake III Arena demo
from id Software / Loki Software
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I thought that included with recent versions of XFree86 was a magic platform-independant driver model, with the idea that the same binary drivers would work on multiple operating systems as long as they shared a common type of CPU (x86).
Is this no longer the case?
Kid-proof tablet..
And guess who in driver department is asleep at the wheel again coughATIcough.
This is interesting, because I moved to Linux because OpenBSD and NVidia GeForce 2 Go did'nt go together.
So, does this mean the driver will work under OpenBSD too?
Because some people like to multitask.. run a stable web, mail, database, etc server AND play some games and only have one computer. Most modern *BSD distributions are easy to use and load sound modules, video drivers isnt as hard as you think...
"I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
Mabye now game companies will offer FreeBSD dedicated servers and clients as well as Linux ones.
"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
and on top of that the link to the actual download has gone 404 along with Loki
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
It's true -- you've never heard of an 0wn3d C64+4..
Lowmag.net
I don't feel like getting a toop-of-the-line computer every 6 months
I don't like using a platform where problems cannot be fixed short of a re-install
I refuse to pay huge ammounts of money for the OS.
I will not defragment! Nor will I spend tons of money just for a reasonably decent defragmenting program.
I don't like rebooting
I will not spend a week just to disable running services, and configure the basics.
I could go on, but I'm tired of this. And no, this isn't off topic. "This is excellent news for people who prefer to Quake on the best OS available." is in the main story.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I don't feel like getting a toop-of-the-line computer every 6 months
No one's forcing you. And regardless of whether you used Windows or Linux or FreeBSD, you're still going to be limited by your hardware in the end. It isn't like FreeBSD has some super-duper-mega code to make your computer run games faster. Give me a break.
I don't like using a platform where problems cannot be fixed short of a re-install
This may have been true in WinME and previous operating systems, and perhaps I've been lucky, but I've never had to reinstall Windows 2000 or XP because of problems with the OS. It was always something I added on and goofed up, or hardware failure (bad RAM, hard drive)
I refuse to pay huge ammounts of money for the OS.
If $140 is too much for Windows XP Pro, I feel sorry for you man.
I will not defragment! Nor will I spend tons of money just for a reasonably decent defragmenting program.
Now you're aging yourself. This was only really needed with FAT(32). Windows NT4/2K/XP have all used NTFS, a filesystem that is literally hundreds of times better and faster than FAT(32) ever was. And Windows 2k/XP comes with a pretty darn good defragmenting utility.
I don't like rebooting
That's fine, I've had my Windows XP desktop at work running for the past month without downtime. I only reboot when a critical hotfix comes out, and I've been fine.
I will not spend a week just to disable running services, and configure the basics.
I don't know what you're talking about here. In a default Windows XP Pro installation, there should be no services you need to manage. Unless you plan on running a small IIS server or the like. But even that, that's pretty trivial (Add/Remove Components-->IIS) And contrary to popular belief, disabling all of your services except for a "bare minimum" won't give you amazingly higher frame rates (Ooh, you gained 1 3d mark! So fast!)
I could go on, but I'm tired of this.
No, I _could_ go on, but I'm tired of _this_. People who hate Windows just because it's a Microsoft product. Slashdot seems to just orgasm any time it gets to report on something going against Microsoft. I get tired of it.
Not All Who Wander Are Lost
You're right... it's not that FreeBSD is able to accelerate a program... it's that Windows drags it down! My first experience with Windows 2000 was on my 300MHz system. While NT 4.0 could play MP3s using up about 5% of the CPU, Windows 2000 took 60% and better just for a damn MP3. Windows XP did the same thing, just worse.
Well, as another
Here's my experience with Windows NT/2000/XP. With Unix, you setup a system, and unless someone intentionally changes something, your system will work perfectly until the end of time. With Windows, you can install it on two identical system, with the same settings both times, one might work without a hitch, and the other will be so slow it's unusable. One might accept new hardware, the other might give you a blue-screen with that exact same card. What's worse is having to change the service settings manually. I've had systems that were on static IP address, changed it to DHCP, but it couldn't get an IP address. I had to manually change the DHCP service to automatically start up, despite the fact that the interface was set to DHCP already.
You could be forgiven for accepting those annoyances, but that's not the worst of it.
The worst thing about Windows is that inexplicable crap that happens between reboots. All the system up and working for weeks, and one system will just suddenly not be able to start a service. You try to start it maually and it just refuses to do so. I've even tried importing the registry settings and applicable files from a working system as a last, failed, resort. So you have no choice but to reinstall.
Same goes for the BSOD. One day, for absolutely no reason, the system will start giving you a blue screen. No ammount of chkdsk, fixboot, or fixmbr will get it working. Booting from an NT boot floppy doesn't help either. The filesystem typically remains readable, and restoring the systemfiles almost never fixes it (you've got to wonder how a system file would get corrupted when Admin never logs in), and it will not boot up despite everything being in perfect order.
My whole point? Don't even try to debate how stable NT/2000/XP is. I've gone through administering NT boxes first hand. This is only a fraction of what I've gone through. Short of good old-fashioned torture or threat of death, I wouldn't even consider maintaining more than a handful of Windows machines... and even then I wouldn't let them get anywhere near important data.
Nooo... You don't say? Well I guess an idiot like myself, who wrote an FAQ on Windows NT could learn a lesson or two from you. On the other hand... If you aren't defragmenting your NTFS partitions, you're going to get a surprise sooner rather than later. As for the defragmentor, it wasn't bundled with NT 3.5/4.0 in the first place, and it really isn't all that great to begin with. If you'd ever used a decent defragmenter (of if you've defragmented at all) you'd probably know that.
I knew someone who said their Windows 95 machine had been up and running for months at a time. The same is true here. If your doing lightweight work, it'll stay up. As soon as you start doing serious work on it (as I had attempted to do for years with NT4 & 2000) it'll slow to such a craw that a reboot will start looking mighty good. After a few days of heavy work, it will lockup.
And yes, Windows NT/2000/XP has tons of services starting by default that should be disabled. Although I agree, there "should be no services you need to manage". But, alas, there are dozens.
I'll agree there. There are often mindless attacks on Windows just for the hell of it. However, you obviously aren't one to decide, since you certainly don't know Windows very well at all.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
No one's forcing you. ... you're still going to be limited by your hardware in the end. ... Give me a break.
... And Windows 2k/XP comes with a pretty darn good defragmenting utility.
I think he's refering to the fact that just to use the MS OS/GUI/apps requires a faster computer for every revision that Windows "advances". Would you dispute that? Did you ever go back to Windows 3.11 during the Win95 days, to see how damn fast 3.11 was over 95?
I would hazard a guess that Microsoft puts out OS'es that require more grunt and thus more PC sales, while the PC companies continue to bundle, yes you guess it... What do you think? They're trying to sell more OS'es and machines or do they really care about our system's usability?
I actually run OpenBSD as my desktop OS on my PIII-500 and my old iBook (along with Mac OSX, for the curiosity factor, which is now boring me after about 4 months). I *seriously* do not need MS Office, etc. I write my documents with html and convert them to gorgeous pdf's where need be from within any of my *nix machines.
This may have been true in WinME and previous operating systems, and perhaps I've been lucky,
I still get called to customer sites, where the customer simply installed some of their old Windows software, which then brought Win2k to a BSOD and then subsequent boot failures... I have to specifically try to fuck up a *nix to pull it off in the grand style that MS does with a natural talent. And when I have to fix a *nix, it is bloody easy. Boot "rescue" media, an install floppy or CD or whatever, get to a prompt, mount afflicted partitions, grep the logs, find the fault, fix the fault which is almost always really easy.
In MS OS, you have to decipher some cryptic core dumps or if you are really luck some really poor error logs.
If $140 is too much for Windows XP Pro, I feel sorry for you man.
Hey, my PC cost all up so far about $5000 au, notebooks total about $7000 au, you rekon we all avoid MS OS simply because of nothing more than monetary cost? Please. I paid good money for OSX, official OpenBSD CD's since 2.5 and cheap Debian cdr's from my local Linux shop.
Would the fact that I pick up thrown out P200MMX+ PC's off the street, put a free *nix on them and give them away as useful machines make me a pathetic cheapskate? I feel sorry for you.
This was only really needed with FAT(32). Windows NT4/2K/XP have all used NTFS,
Make your mind up will you. If it does'nt need this great defrager, then what's so great about it then?
That's fine, I've had my Windows XP desktop at work running for the past month without downtime. I only reboot when a critical hotfix comes out, and I've been fine.
Yeah, so what. It's a desktop right? If you were smart, you'd avoid problems and reboot your desktop at least once a day just because a typical MS desktop normally only has to gain stability from this. You wanna be a tool and talk about uptime?
But even that, that's pretty trivial (Add/Remove Components-->IIS)
You're pathetic.
And contrary to popular belief, disabling all of your services except for a "bare minimum" won't give you amazingly higher frame rates (Ooh, you gained 1 3d mark! So fast!)
Really pathetic.
No, I _could_ go on, but I'm tired of _this_. People who hate Windows just because it's a Microsoft product.
I'm tired too. 12 years supporting MS crap, has taken it's toll. You think people hate Windows because of Microsoft?
People hate Microsoft because of Windows. Fool.
At this point I'm not even going to respond since you're choosing to stoop to personal attacks against me to "win" your arguement.
By the way, you just lost.
Have a nice day.
Not All Who Wander Are Lost
I'm sure glad you posted AC! You are so elite! Boy you taught me. I'm going to take all my Microsoft products, even my whole PC, and cover it in lighter fluid! Then set it ablaze, and feel content knowing that I have purged the Microsoft beast from my body, mind and soul.
Thanks for showing me the light, brother!
Halleluah!
Not All Who Wander Are Lost
Amen brother!
.gov depts. Some entities having machines numbered in the thousands for single sites and server rooms filled with machines (from Dell's to big iron) and networking gear that are well into 8 figures. I can absolutely back up your experiences.
Windows drags it down!
it's got some horrible quirks to it
With Unix, you setup a system, and unless someone intentionally changes something, your system will work perfectly until the end of time.
With Windows, you can install it on two identical system, with the same settings both times, one might work without a hitch, and the other will be so slow it's unusable. One might accept new hardware, the other might give you a blue-screen with that exact same card.
you have no choice but to reinstall
*** you've got to wonder how a system file would get corrupted when Admin never logs in ***
Windows NT/2000/XP has tons of services starting by default that should be disabled
with over 100 Windows 2000 machines, I've seen more action than you can imagine. I know the layout of the registry by heart... I know why Windows machines crash, and can recover machines that most of the so-called experts can't do anything with.
I've been around too. I've been taking care of NT since 3.51 for major
Windows is for all intents and purposes, is an enigma to those that need to keep it working.
Unix of all flavours on the other hand, just keep going and going.
Look at OSX. An infant on the Apple desktop, it has made incredible strides in a few years. Apple has been able to leverage the best parts of Unix into a super stable, super usable system that seems to have solved problems that Windows would appear will always have, whilst allowing a temporary bridge over from Apple legacy.
Microsoft tried, basing NT on VMS, but it looks like they'll never allow a good balance between usability and features.
War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
FreeBSD and Darwin (OS X' open-source base OS, no Aqua GUI) don't share the kernel, though. Their relation is purely in user-land. Darwin uses a version of the Mach microkernel from CMU with FreeBSD's userland.
--Justin
Heh... Just one small step above the "I'm rubber, you're glue" argument huh?
Fine by me.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
So Windows XP works great for you? Great. The rest of us are still a little pissed about 15 years or so of crappy software.
The Weather Channel is sponsoring ATI 8500 drivers for XFree86. While looking through code in FreeBSD, I noticed they also sponsored some code changes there.
Yes!!! I'm a quaker (3), but I'm looking for quake2 for freebsd. First I tried with a .tar.gz version for linux, and next with a .rpm, but doesn't work!!! (sick). ;-)
Does anybody know if is possible to install and play Quake 2 into a FreeBSD machine??
Thank you.
Have a nice day
TooManySecrets
Just because a driver doesn't fall under the BSD license does not mean it can't be part of FreeBSD. In fact, it doesn't even have to be part of the kernel. FreeBSD's kernel, like Linux, supports modules. The driver could be distributed separately as a module.
In fact, many parts of the FreeBSD system are composed of GPL'd software. For example, FreeBSD uses the gcc compiler, link, and so forth. RELENG_4 is also using GNU grep, groff, tar, gzip, awk, bc, cpio, diff, egrep, sort, and most likely more.
You'll find that FreeBSD users tend to be less picky about the license to something and won't complain too much when there isn't a BSD licensed version of something available. Although the BSD license is a nicety, it isn't necessarily a critical requirement. Compared to Debian GNU/Linux, we are extremely lax about licenses.
I hope this clears up some misconceptions about The FreeBSD Project and its users. I recognize the fact that I have stereotyped the FreeBSD community in this comment just as much as others have, but my goal was to turn the stereotypes in a positive direction hoping to guide this thread back on track.
Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
Maybe they only have one computer because they spent too much money on good enough gear to be a stable web, mail, database, etc server AND play games ;-)
Matt
That's nice touch. Precise persuasive words, sharp and subtle morale sense.
That's my Linux boy!
...whether the driver will be open-sourced or not... since AFAIK the Linux driver is not GPL-ed or even BSD-ed, I bet this driver will be closed-source too...
1. XP is BigBrotherWare. ;).
2. W2K with SP3 is BigBrotherWare.
3. XMAME under NetBSD runs better than Mame32 under W2K.
4. FPS games are overrated
And how about getting some native NetBSD drivers? If we can't get source, we should be able to at least get someone to bash on it ('less everyone is h*ll bent on getting NetBSD eradicated for some reason)...
--*greywolf;
With the exception of your gripe about price of windows, you've obviously not played with anything since Windows 98/ME. Windows 2000 and XP have none of those issues you've mentioned. XP runs considerably faster than 2k even on low end pII based systems. It comes with a defrag tool that works just fine and handles this on its own without you noticing. I've never really had a problem that I've had to solve with a reinstall, and services are pretty much tuned for what most people will use the OS for.
I enjoy running FreeBSD and I love the group of people surrounding the project because they're not closed minded morons like those of the Linux camp. If you're going to take every opportunity to shoot down Windows then I suggest you go back to running Linux. With this said, I do realize that those with the loudest mouths behind Linux don't necessarilly represent the whole, but they sure make the group look like a bunch of raging lunatics.
scott
Umm, hmmm, is that obvious? Well, if you've know of anything else that is 'obvious', I'll be sure to take the opposite stance on it. You have a knack for being completely wrong.
Wow, I don't know what to say, except I have no idea how you could figure that. Get a few identical systems, install 98, NT4, 2000 & XP... Then time how long it takes for the start menu to apear after you click the "Start" button... Time how long it takes to open the "Open With" dialog, after you try to open an unknown filetype. And, of course, see what percent of the CPU power is used for playing an MP3, etc.
More complete and utter bullshit. It may be an improvement for you, over the defrag tool that came with 9x, but it is actually very lowsy.
You really need to read up on other replies in this thread... If you had, you would have looked quite a bit less clueless.
I think I've made it exceedingly clear several times, that I dislike Linux a great deal. Of course, it's a huge step up from Windows (but that's all it has really accomplished).
I find it interesting that you call others "closed minded morons", yet you have obviously not used Windows on a large scale, or for serious work... and yet you are yelling about how wrong I am. Well thank you! I'll be sure to take everything you say into consideration *cough*, *cough*, *moron*, *cough*.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Point is this:
You've been trolled.