Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FreeBSD 5.0-RC2 Now Available

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the stuff-to-download dept.

An anonymous reader writes "FreeBSD 5.0-RC2 has been uploaded to ftp-master and is showing up on most of the primary mirrors. ia32, ia64, pc98, and alpha images are available now; sparc64 will be pushed out once it becomes available. The plan going forward is to cut an RC3 in early January, followed by 5.0-RELEASE a week later."

23 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. Not a dupe by Stinson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Its not a dupe. Compare the 2 articles. The earlier one this morning said that the FreeBSD developers said its compiled and should be available shortly and put up the release schedule, where as this new said its definitly available now, and even on mirrors, which normally take a while to get up to date. If anything, at the farthest, this is more like a partial dupe, but figuring CmdrTaco posted it, he most likely reads his news everymorning and noticed the previous one.

    1. Re:Not a dupe by shlong · · Score: 2

      It is a dupe. The first article was a very poor paraphrasing of the announcement.

      --
      Cat, the other, tastier white meat.
  2. pthreads using rfork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does this release candidate have a native pthreads implementation that uses rfork to provide kernel level threads?

    1. Re:pthreads using rfork? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Re:pthreads using rfork?
      I looked at the man page, this seems similar to the clone call on Linux, which they wrapped pthreads around. Aren't there performance issues on this, that it's a process not a thread? I could see issues with signals as well.

    2. Re:pthreads using rfork? by Leimy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I thought pthreads were going to be based on KSE's [Kernel Scheduling Entities and yes it is possible to see something less than a kernel process as a schedulable context and to build one's threads and processes upon it.. though I will admit to not being very familiar with the architecture of KSE's yet. :)] and not be full processes. In fact I am 100% positive that FreeBSD 5.0 is going for M:N mapping of threads to processes meaning that they are not planning to do the 1:1 that linux had for years up until NPTL came out.

      Linux used to use clone to get a new LWP but 2.6 should have some much newer, better stuff.

    3. Re:pthreads using rfork? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      No, threads based on fork/rfork/clone is a horrible idea. threads will be based upon KSEs, which will give solaris level threading performance, and much less overhead. This basically splits the process into an equal number of threads as you have processors, scheduling is done by the kernel of those threads, and user-level threading is done within each of those. This means you can fully utilize all the CPUs in your machine with only that number of kernel schedule entries, the overhead of managing thousands of threads is pushed off to that applicaton (where it should be). In terms of scalability, this is where it is at. Its simply a briliant idea. I'm surprised it took OpenSource this long to get it.

    4. Re:pthreads using rfork? by muyThaiBxr · · Score: 2, Informative

      FreeBSD has linux threads which do something similar.... FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE (as far as I know) will also have it's own form of kernel threading called KSE's... These are much better than the rfork threads.

    5. Re:pthreads using rfork? by rplacd · · Score: 2

      I believe the KSE migration won't be complete until 5.1 or so. This page is incomplete: http://www.freebsd.org/kse/

  3. Re:Use a mirror... please :( by filekutter · · Score: 2, Funny

    65 kps, ....... just a bit more and I'll have a new toy to play with... ;}

    --
    I call computer-illiteracy job security
  4. Re:Big Step For Lil Devil by (startx) · · Score: 1

    what's the point of copy/pasting comments from the first story as ac? dipshit

  5. Read it first on Slashdot by Groganz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tomorrow: Freebsd 5.0-RC2 one day old.

    1. Re:Read it first on Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This afternoon:

      Freebsd 5.0-RC2 ALMOST one day old.

      LMAO ;o)

    2. Re:Read it first on Slashdot by horcy · · Score: 1

      hehe but this joke is gettin' really old. FreeBSD is a big thing so why not give it the attention it deserves. We dont want articles about every security patch M$ is releasing right? So why not some attention for this instead. One thing though, FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 almost ready is A BIT over the top.

      --
      Check my site: http://pixel.pagina.nl
  6. Re:Big Step For Lil Devil by someonehasmyname · · Score: 1

    Yahoo!

    --
    Common sense is not so common.
  7. pending bsd vs linux flame war... by thogard · · Score: 1

    os vs os wars should be moded to -1 but I just saw something I thought was odd...

    In the "related links" section for this topic there is a link: Compare the best prices on: Software/Operating Systems

    so which has the best price, Free BSD or Linux :-)

  8. CVS Tree created by pfish · · Score: 1

    If you'd like to use cvsup to get to this release, change your current

    <i>*default release=cvs tag=</i>
    to:
    <i>*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5</i>

    Note: You may have to run this 2 times - the first time it will <B>DELETE</B> the contains of your existing src dir, the second time it will inflate it.

    1. Re:CVS Tree created by pfish · · Score: 2, Informative

      Cute...it didn't post in HTML as i selected.

      If you'd like to use cvsup to get to this release, change your current

      *default release=cvs tag=
      to:
      *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5


      Note: You may have to run this 2 times - the first time it will DELETE the contains of your existing src dir, the second time it will inflate it.

  9. Re:Why bother? by schematix · · Score: 4, Insightful
    That is interesting. My company is currently using FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE-p2 on a dual athlon mp box without a hitch.

    Not to start a flame war, but for certain things, FreeBSD is just better. Not to mention it makes my life a lot easier as an admin because of the excellent organization of the entire operation system. I switched my current company (along with the admin who was a Linux lover since 1.0) to FreeBSD and so far it has been perfect. The comment from the original admin: "Why didn't we do this sooner?". When you need something that just works, FreeBSD is there to do it.

    --
    Scott
  10. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny


    The only thing clearly obvious is that you are a dumbshit troll. Do you work for Microsoft??

  11. Re:Why bother? by filekutter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a fren' of mine sez: "BSD is a nice mature 30 yrs old, while Linux is still a very young 10 yrs old. Now, who do you want running your rig? A youngster or a flexible battle scarred adult?" Remember, BSD is Unix, not Linux! HMMMM? The question contains the answer as far as I"m concerned.

    --
    I call computer-illiteracy job security
  12. Re:Why bother? by benedict · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People's Front of Judea, anyone?

    News flash: for most intents and purposes, the
    similarities between Linux and BSD are far more
    significant than the differences.

    --
    Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
  13. Re:Why bother? by filekutter · · Score: 1

    benedict, i thought a while on your note, and I do agree..... they are very similar. Nada else to say... no argument, or stance to take... :)

    --
    I call computer-illiteracy job security
  14. Re:Why bother? by Solosoft · · Score: 1

    Naw ... I could run BSD and be lame like you george ?

    --
    Solosoft.org - Your Online Resource to Nothing