The NetBSD Organization

A reader writes: "Stumbled across a nice article about how the NetBSD Project is organized and some interesting ways users can help out." Good stuff, for those who want to get involved.

Comments

The great divide:

[_Sambo]

Those who hate windows use Linux.

Those who love Unix use BSD.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, well said. No wonder people see the BSD community as elitist pricks.

I use Linux, not because I hate Windows (couldn't really care less about it), but for these reasons:

1. Linux supports USB joypads. No BSD flavour does, it seems. May seem trivial, but I like to run console emulators.

2. VMware. Kludgy support under FreeBSD at best.

3. Can't seem to get multiple sound devices (/dev/dsp, /dev/dsp1 etc.) for my sound card, as I can in Linux.

4. Easy updates. When there's a security issue on my RH box, I can just rpm -U the new package. Similar with Debian. With FreeBSD, I need all the source and compilers available, then do CVSup, rebuild etc. BSD really needs binary updates.

That's just a few things which are easier under Linux, and that's why I use it -- not because I "hate Windows" or any such crap. Hey, I really like FreeBSD -- I love the solid and fast kernel, the well-structured userland and central organisation, but there are problems.

Grow up and accept things.

Re:The great divide:

[DaBj]

Or as my friend whom I introduced to BSD put it
when looking into using Linux on his desktop:
"GNU's not Unix....it's Linux"

(I can hear RMS getting his panties in a twist already)

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

1. I don't know what a joypad is but I hope it includes a box of kleenex

2. It appears to be possible to run VM with FreeBSD as host OS. AFAIK VM must be used through linux compat as it's not available in a native version. Don't make it seem like this is due to inadequate FreeBSD developers.

3. devfs has been around for quite a while and as of 5.0 is default. No need setting seperate dsp0.0 or dsp0.2 for seperate programs if they wont play different sounds simultaneously anymore.

4. The integrated userland is what makes it an OS.

Greetings to you too.

Besides, this is supposed to be about NetBSD.

Re:The great divide:

[rsidd]

Yes, that's the best way to win friends and invite users of other systems to BSD -- by insulting them.

Re:The great divide:

[pyrrho]

oh, it was meant as an insult?!

Re:The great divide:

[gl4ss]

aaargh. how did this get +5 INTRESTING?
oldest shit on the book...

it's just variety.. and people who are well into linux generally know a bit of *bsd's..

the 'problem' is people who aren't into neither linux nor bsd.. and overzealous idiots being the problem nr 2.

ksuicide2k, problem nr3 is that slashdots karma system is just plain weak if you're frequent user.. personal karma has little meaning nowadays.

Re:The great divide:

[rutledjw]

There are other differences as well:

• SMP Support, FreeBSD is the ONLY one who has it
• Commercial vendor support. Oracle, IBM, Sun, etc support Linux. BSD support is IMPROVING, but not near the support Linux recieves.
• Let's face it, Linux IS easier. I use Slackware and so I'm in the configs (as opposed to wizards), but Linux still is easier for me. Do I just need to get off my @ss and learn BSD? Probably
• Better java support in Linux. I know the "j" word is dirty around here. Even so...
• This is going to sound TOTALLY dumb - Commercial vendor support. If my company can't buy support, the world will certianly end due to lack of it. Whatever...

That being said, I'm proposing FreeBSD for our web servers as a replacement for (are you ready for this?) Apache on Windows. The fall back is actually Linux/Apache, but I think from a security standpoint, BSD is probably the way to go.

It DOES mildly annoy me to see the original parent post. BSD folks seem usually mild-mannered towards others. But every now and then some jackass...

Re:The great divide:

[BadlandZ]

Those who hate windows use Linux.

Those who love Unix use BSD.

Sorry, no.

BSD !=UNIX. As an oldschool Next and SGI guy (yes those are my roots, long before I had a PC of my own, I had a NEXT account to a shell on a CRAY).

The truth is, those who belive in "the Desktop" belive in Microsoft, or OSX, and those with HOPE for the Desktop being for the PEOPLE belive in Linux.

But, those of us who live and breath "server has power, give the server more pwoer" and at the same time belive "I want to be a CLIENT to that POWER" believe in BSD. BSD can be ported to anything (NetBSD) and given the client to the server consept, will survive.

I support the server, I have 1 server in my house and 4 x-terminals. The SERVER having all the power, and the low cost clients is the future. The future is UNIX.... Linux is sidtracked trying to make the Desktop the future. But in the Future, people what THIER INFO SECURE, HONEST, and EVERYWHERE, ON DEMAND, now, clear and clean... Who is leading the way to that? OpenBSD (secure server) and NetBSD (access to it from ANY DEVICE).

Have faith, the Force is with the BSD's.....

Linus has opened the door. But, the security and reality has always been in the BSD's.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, you're a retard. Not big on the research, are you?

Re:The great divide:

[Corporate Troll]

• SMP support? Who cares? Not on the desktop at least. I'm deperately trying to get a dual system and no shop in my neighborhood is *willing* to deliver one!
• I give you that one
• Having both experience with Slackware and BSD (OpenBSD specifically), there is not much difference in configging the systems. Do some greps and you're on your way in no time. Don't forget that Slackware is the Linux that is closest to BSD (considering configuration).
• Granted... as a Java developper I am disappointed. Yes, my Mac OS X (a BSD after all) doesn't seem to have Java problems.
• Common problem with many companies... As if Windows support was great... Tsss... As you say "Whatever"

Look, I am far from a BSD fanatic. What I think is that the original parent poster was going for a +5, Funny. Unfortunately he was modded to Interesting. I think that BSD people are most of the time quiet in the back, while Linux people are yelling at about anyone they can (including the harmless BSD people in the back).

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux is far more client server advaned, that is the market key to Linux. How can you say it's lacking? It's how Liunx got it's foothold, just look at a Apache.

Re:The great divide:

[BadlandZ]

Liunx got it's foothold, just look at a Apache

Your kidding right? BSD has done more for me (and every IRIX user) as well as ever OsX user, Motorla user, etc.. than anyone else. I love OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD..

Look at the OpenBSD user base vs. the security contributions they put into Apache vs. the Linux user base vs. what help they gave Apache. Open BSD has done MORE per user that almost ANY OS on ANY project when it comes to security, espically Apache. The web wouldn't have a clue what security was if it were not for the likes of the OpenBSD guys. Don't even try to give me that shit....

BSD guys may not be the popular UNIX, or the gimme commy open source gods of the "Linus Linux" community. But take a history lesson.... GNU has made leaps and bounds into opening software to the general public. But what Open Source (GPL) has don, BSD has managed to keep the people with the money in the ball game. Where would GPL or GNU be without the BSD's of the world? How can you SERIOUSLY find fault with people who want to help and retain SOME profit? Are you such the communist you thing BSD is evil too now?

Re:The great divide:

[Doctor Memory]

Let's face it, Linux IS easier

Two words: package system

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. I'd now say that Gentoo Linux is likely the closest equivalent to any BSD.

Gentoo is nice.

Now maybe either FreeBSD should learn some new tricks from Gentoo, or Gentoo should do something cool like use a FreeBSD kernel instead of Linux.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

Slackware is crackware. It's a dead distro. Easier to install? Hardly. It's a buggy p.o.s.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

RMS has already crossed the DMZ and vowed to write software for his dead leader.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

> I don't know what a joypad is but I hope it includes a box of kleenex

Hentaiiiiiiiiiiiii! *whap*

It's a game controller, I think. Joystick* + gamepad == joypad.

(*: Not that this is such a innocent term either.)

- etaoin shrdlu

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

how exactly is apache related to the linux kernel? it even has its own license

Re:The great divide:

[jschauma]

SMP is in NetBSD-current. And it's working quite nicely - I'm using it on several servers.

Re:The great divide:

[SN74S181]

People are always saying that Slackware is dead. One wonders what their motives are in wishing it so.

I've always wondered if it's resentment and/or hostility toward something that works well but doesn't really have many shiney bits to diddle with.

Slackware isn't dead. I wish the Sparc port of Slack hadn't died, though.

Re:The great divide:

[mrmag00]

Errr, OpenBSD is a project aimed at making a operating system where security is the primary goal. Of course the same people who contribute security-related patches to other projects such as Apache are going to contribute to OpenBSD - they have similar interests.

If I am interested in optimizing the speed of an application, just because I work on project X doesn't mean I won't also be interested in project Y and project Z. And the neat thing about open source is if I don't do it someone will eventually anyway.

Re:The great divide:

[SN74S181]

Linux is far more client server advaned, that is the market key to Linux.

Nope. Uh-uh. With ever 'advance' in Linux, with nearly every 'distro' it becomes a fatter and heavier 'desktop' while adding just about nothing in the way of being a better client. Face it, the 'fat desktop' model of computer has a lot of appeal, and it's where Linux is heading.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

and the number of people who use BSD is what, 1/10 of 1%?

bwah, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!

Linux has a presence BSD exists only on Slashdot and other geek forums.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

I run Slackware, and have for many years. A few years ago I decided to install FreeBSD on a box to get a feel for how it works. Plus, I needed to do some compile tests since my users were reporting incompatibilities.

The install was interesting, and did things Slack (still) doesn't support by default, like installing from a ftp/http server. I got it working, then logged in.

That's when I started feeling the pain. Little things just didn't work the same way. Utilities I'd come to rely on just weren't there. I found myself going out to ftp.gnu.org over and over. I had never realized just how much I used those tools until they were gone.

At the end, I concluded that I could probably make a nice system with a FreeBSD base and a bunch of GNU stuff layered on top. I also determined that it would be a ton of work no matter how I did it - by hand, from the ports collection, no matter.

The easier solution for me is to just get a system that's primarily composed of the GNU tools in the first place. The fact that it has Linux underneath is just a nice benefit.

I'm sure something like Slackware with BSD underneath would be good, but what's the point?

Re:The great divide:

[rplacd]

and people who are well into linux generally know a bit of *bsd's..

Actually, they don't. I've run into many Linux people who have never tried *BSD.

Also, most people who make the jump from Linux to *BSD, even after using Linux for years and years, rarely switch back.

Re:The great divide:

[dinivin]

Sometimes I think it's better written as:

Those who love Unix use Linux.

Those who hate Linux use BSD.

Dinivin

Re:The great divide:

[xA40D]

4. Easy updates.

Funny that. I use FreeBSD over RH for exactly the same reason.

BSD really needs binary updates.

No, it doesn't. The installation program has an update option if you really insist. But you can't beat a CVSup and make world. And portupgrade is funky too.

When there's a security issue on my RH box, I can just rpm -U the new package

I do a portupgrade every week, and make world every month. So, when there is a security issue on my FreeBSD box, the chances are I've already fixed it without realising it.

Re:The great divide:

[xA40D]

Linux has a presence BSD exists only on Slashdot and other geek forums.

I use FreeBSD, so I read BSD on slashdot - I don't bother reading very much Linux. It doesn't interest me.

Yet for some reason Linux users are drawn to BSD stories like moths to a flame. Perhaps they are so insecure that they can only feel good when are knocking some other OS.

Not that I mind. The BSD Trolls are some of the best in the world. Always worth browsing BSD posts at -1.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

"But you can't beat a CVSup and make world. And portupgrade is funky too."

I don't want developer tools on a production server. That's a no-way.

Then what?

Re:The great divide:

[ShawnD]

But you can't beat a CVSup and make world.

Sure you can. I just set up OpenBSD on a SPARCClassic (50MHz CPU, 48MB RAM, 2GB SCSI disk). This is a small webserver, DNS server and may take over from my DLInk router when I spend the time to learn the PF feature. I don't want to compile stuff on such an underpowered box. I would likely have to build the system on an NFS mount due to lack of disk space.

BTW OpenBSD works much better on it than Debian did. It runs faster, takes up a little less disk space and seems to leave more RAM free.

Re:The great divide:

[bopal]

Linux is far more client server advaned, that is the market key to Linux.

Well, I mount my /home from my own nfs freebsd server which is connected via 100bastTX ethernet. on linux simply unraring an archive gives me i/o errors due bad linux nfs code. on my laptop nfs mounts work like a charm. so you can't tell me that linux is more client/server advanced.

Re:The great divide:

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want developer tools on a production server. That's a no-way.

????,?

Then I suggest you try this great OS I've heard of. It's called Windows. No compiler, binary install for all software, binary upgrades, lots of hardware support.

On my production servers "developer tools" are a must.

Re:The great divide:

[Groganz]

I think this thread needs more:

• Bullet Points

Re:The great divide:

[MobyTurbo]

There are other differences as well:

SMP Support, FreeBSD is the ONLY one who has it

NetBSD has SMP support available or in development for i386, Sparc, Sparc64 VAX, and Alpha. I'm not sure if these are all in the stable branch, some may be in development. I haven't really kept track of this issue much lately.

Commercial vendor support. Oracle, IBM, Sun, etc support Linux. BSD support is IMPROVING, but not near the support Linux recieves.

Apache's own website runs under FreeBSD, and most Linux binaries run fine under *BSD at normal speed, not to mention source.

Let's face it, Linux IS easier. I use Slackware and so I'm in the configs (as opposed to wizards), but Linux still is easier for me. Do I just need to get off my @ss and learn BSD? Probably

BSD is very close to Linux, especially Slackware. The installers are more bare-bones than most Linux installers are nowadays (though I found the Debian installer worse) but running BSD is actually easier than running Linux in many ways. The pkgsrc/ports system of installing 3rd party software is excellent, the distribution getting the most buzz now, Gentoo, copied it and this is largely the reason for it's success. Recompiling kernels and upgrading to new versions are far smoother than Linux usually is as well.

Better java support in Linux. I know the "j" word is dirty around here. Even so...

Yeah, the Java support is lousy. FreeBSD supports jdk1.3, but only after a complicated installation process thanks to the fact that Sun et. al. haven't given them permission to distribute Java2 native binaries yet. Java 2 support for NetBSD of course is non-existent, though there are people who are working on getting it into pkgsrc...

This is going to sound TOTALLY dumb - Commercial vendor support. If my company can't buy support, the world will certianly end due to lack of it. Whatever...

NetBSD has Wasabi, which has hired many of the top developers of NetBSD.

Re:The great divide:

[evilviper]

SMP Support, FreeBSD is the ONLY one who has it

Actually, OpenBSD is the only one which doesn't have it. As a matter of fact, NetBSD was the first to have SMP on the Alpha.

Let's face it, Linux IS easier. I use Slackware and so I'm in the configs (as opposed to wizards), but Linux still is easier for me.

I used Slackware until I found OpenBSD. Every last one of the BSDs are far easier than ANY Linux distro (I've used all the mainstream ones, and about a dozen of the obsecure ones).

Better java support in Linux.

"Better" is a pretty obsecure term. FreeBSD has very good java support... but I'm not into Java so I can't say it can take everything you can throw at it, but I haven't had any problems with it.

I think from a security standpoint, BSD is probably the way to go.

That's the understatement of the year.

It DOES mildly annoy me to see the original parent post. BSD folks seem usually mild-mannered towards others. But every now and then some jackass...

It does mildly annoy me to see your post. Slashdot folks seem to usually have a sense of humor. but every now and then...

Re:The great divide:

[evilviper]

BSD !=UNIX.

You're kidding right? BSD IS Unix, with the exception that they can't use the brand name.

Hey, if it wasn't, why would they have been sued in the first place? To be specific, BSD took Unix, and made it better.

Re:The great divide:

[FireBook]

FreeBSD does have the cvs system for managing source and ports source packages (as well as pkg_add etc) and it seems to me at least to be as effective than any other system (rpm, dpkg etc)

Re:If it's dead, how can there be an organization?

[sporty]

Divide into cemetaries, tombs and caskets?

Excellent!

[TheReckoning]

Now that apple is beginning to behave badly, maybe it's time a free project showed what it can do with the BSD core. I'm all for this. I just wish I had more spare time!

Re:Excellent!

[Anonymous Coward]

I just wish I had more spare time!

To be fair, the fact that you're posting on /. probably indicates that you already have too much :p

Re:Excellent!

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm all for this. I just wish I had more spare time!"

Ah yes, the rallying cry of the free software world. A whole bunch of good ideas that 'someone', never the person speaking, mind you, should put into action.

Look out business world. Ha ha!

Re:Excellent!

[lussmu]

"Now that apple is beginning to behave badly, maybe it's time a free project showed what it can do with the BSD core. I'm all for this. I just wish I had more spare time!"

I'm all hot about it too. Guess what? The best Linux, Debian, is being ported to other kernels as we speak!

I can't stop laughing...

[Anonymous Coward]

...everytime I remember how that Theo de Ass was kicked out from the NetBSD project for being an asshole. Funny, Niels Provos recently got tired of him and left OpenBSD to join the NetBSD camp.

Thank you,
ekrout

Re:I can't stop laughing...

[Anonymous Coward]

My favorite email sig:

"NetBSD -- because Theo is an asshole"

Organization chart

[Anonymous Coward]

lookie here

Did anyone else notice...

[gmulert]

...the OpenBSD banner ad at the bottom of the page?

Re:Did anyone else notice...

[Anonymous Coward]

A FreeBSD banner for me ...

Re:Did anyone else notice...

[mshultz]

"Did anyone else notice the OpenBSD banner ad at the bottom of the page?"

well since daemonnews.org seems to be solely devoted to BSD, it doesn't really strike me as particularly odd that the BSD folks would be buying ad space there, right?

Or is this publication entirely supported by the BSD crew?

Re:Did anyone else notice...

[mshultz]

nevermind, I'm dumb. really dumb. ignore that last post.

Re:Did anyone else notice...

[softweyr]

Daemon News banners ads are filled in randomly. I loaded the page in question then hit the 'reload' button five times and got the following ads on the page:

bottom banner "Get BSD Stuff" box

LinuxWorld NYC NetBSD 1.5.3
NetBSD 1.6 OpenBSD
DOSSIER Iron Systems
Iron Systems FreeBSD book
LinuxWorld Expo FreeBSD 4.7
FreeBSD 4.6.2 update NetBSD 1.6

As another reply pointed out, Daemon News supports all BSD derived operating systems, commercial or free. You might even come up with a Darwin or Mac OS X ad in the mix.

"A reader writes..." ???

[Anonymous Coward]

What happened to "An Anonymous Coward..."

Re:"A reader writes..." ???

[Anonymous Coward]

Anonymous Coword committed suicide when apple iraped him!

Re:"A reader writes..." ???

[TheReckoning]

With the trolls here, it takes real bravery to post a BSD article on Slashdot, so you can't rightly call the submitter a "coward", can you?

He also summed up the target link well in his article submission, so he's definitely a "reader".

Re:"A reader writes..." ???

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for your reply, but I was truly curious about whether the Slashcode changed to that effect or if the Editors had control over whether it posted as AC or "reader". Does anyone know???

Re:"A reader writes..." ???

[Anonymous Coward]

"A reader" is the user name... Try http://slashdot.org/~A%20reader

Article for the blind

[Karamchand]

This article is formatted for the blind, right? Header size: 120px; text size: 80px; ... *g*

Re:heh

[Anonymous Coward]

Next time try making a link of the url using HTML, like this:
<a href="http://www.google.com">Click here</a>

That produces a link like this:
Click here

Knoppix-like distro for *BSD?

[TheReckoning]

Are there any bootable-CD distributions of *BSD, like the Knoppix distro for Linux? It would be really cool to bring a couple of CDs with you in case you ran into some open-minded person willing to look at a free OS, and not have to worry about partitioning or overwriting anything.

Re:Knoppix-like distro for *BSD?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes there are bootable CDs for NetBSD, but as you can immagine it is a little more complicated than your typical linux since NetBSD runs on vastly more platforms.

Try looking at http://www.netbsd.org/Sites/cdroms.html

Re:Knoppix-like distro for *BSD?

[leoboiko]

There is a NetBSD Live! CD, but I haven't tried it nor heard about it for a while.

Re:Knoppix-like distro for *BSD?

[footility]

freebsd from cdrom: http://freesbie.org

Re:Knoppix-like distro for *BSD?

[high]

From that URL I only found a link to 1.5.2 but when I've looked some more in the ftp tree I noticed that there is an Live version for 1.6 also here:

ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/iso/1.6/

Here is the CD-cover too:

ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/iso/1.6/i386live -c over.jpg

Re:Knoppix-like distro for *BSD?

[ffsnjb]

The FreeBSD live filesystem cd (number 3 or 4 in the release) is probably what you're looking for.

Public Domain license == truly free software

[Anonymous Coward]

No threat of RMS induced lawsuit.

Re:Maths teasers

[Anonymous Coward]

The answer is 42.

NETBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

Why use NetBSD when the MR monopoly is already there :)

SK

netbsd ...

[SuperDuG]

Whoa ... back to the wonders of the open source world where one thing is obviously better than the other, they can't both be ... *gasp* equally great *gasp* ...

Needless to say if anyone ever asks you a question of what runs NetBSD ... you can safely say more things than any other operating system. NetBSD runs on everything from a supercomputer to a dreamcast and everything in between. The most impressive things I've seen from NetBSD is the ability to get the OS running on anything that can process information and NFS ... second to none.

There are ninches for everything ... portability ... netbsd wins hands down.

Re:netbsd ...

[donio]

Is NetBSD really more portable than Linux? I know that NetBSD fans love to claim this but is it really true? What are some platforms that NetBSD runs on but Linux doesn't? There are many pieces of hardware where NetBSD won't run or is not practical, for example anything with more than 1 CPU (yeah, I know there is some rudimentary SMP support but it's not usable for real work) or my Sharp Zaurus.

Re:netbsd ...

[bluGill]

Depends... As one person I know said: "Linux is easier to port to [our custom platform] than netBSD, but netBSD is much easier to maintain once to port is done". Linux has no interest in systems he doesn't own, thus even though support from non x86 platforms exists, they are always behind. NetBSD makes an effort to keep things in sync.

There are platforms that linux supports that netBSD doesn't (netBSD requires 32 bits or more, linux has a 8086 16 bit port). If you did a strict count on that basis you would likely find that some form of linux runs on more platforms. However netBSD has official support for more platforms. That means the support is not out of date, and you are running with the latest modern netBSD features.

Re:netbsd ...

[Gilmoure]

What are some platforms that NetBSD runs on but Linux doesn't?

Mac68k! My Quadra 650's been running as NAT for a couple of years. Took over from my old IIci.

The closest thing to Linux on old Mac 68k hardware is MKLinux and that's really not being developed any more. NetBSD is current!

Re:netbsd ...

[macshit]

However netBSD has official support for more platforms.

My understanding (mainly from reading debian mailing lists, so there's an obvious bias :-) is that it depends on how you count -- netbsd lists many `similar' platforms as being separate ports, whereas linux simply lumps many together under each architecture and has arch-specific ways of differentiating them (making them a bit hard to enumerate).

BTW, there's one fairly unique class of systems that linux now supports and no other `mainstream' kernel does, to my knowledge: those without an MMU, since uClinux was merged into the mainline kernel. Granted, life is a bit (OK, a lot :-) rougher on these systems, but it's really nice seeing old familiar stuff running on a funky microcontroller, and gee, interrupts sure are cheap!

That means the support is not out of date, and you are running with the latest modern netBSD features.

This probably is very true; linux is a bit anarchic in comparison to the BSDs...

Re:netbsd ...

[donio]

Linux on mac68k

Status page for the Quadra 650 support. ...and for the IIc

Re:netbsd ...

[SN74S181]

NetBSD is much, much more portable than 'Linux' if you refer to an Operating System, and not just a Kernal. 'NetBSD' represents a kernal and a complete base userland, all under one unified seamless source tree. Linux, on the other hand, is a kernal, and any number of different utilities and packages lumped together. There are dozens of versions of 'Linux' just for the x86, let alone the variations when you move from one architecture to another, whereas there is one NetBSD port for each platform, and all the NetBSD ports consist of base userlands compiled from the same source tree.

Hope this makes sense. What it means in the final analysis is that I can (almost) tar up the /etc directory from a NetBSD 1.6 Sparc machine and expand it into the /etc directory of any x86 or 68000 or MIPS or PPC NetBSD 1.6 machine and it will just work.

Re:netbsd ...

[Gilmoure]

Cool! Since OSX came out, I've pretty much stopped paying attention to Linux. Will have to grab some of this stuff and play around with it. Thanks!

Re:netbsd ...

[SuperDuG]

go to netbsd.org and they're all listed on the right. There are quite a few systems that linux does not run on.

Re:netbsd ...

[saintlupus]

The closest thing to Linux on old Mac 68k hardware is MKLinux and that's really not being developed any more. NetBSD is current!

Debian has a m68k port, I was using it for a while on a Quadra 950. Not that Debian is all that much more current than MkLinux, but you might find it useful.

--saint

Re:netbsd ...

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the S/390
What about the S/390!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:netbsd ...

[mvdw]

I know at least one platform that netBSD runs on that Linux doesn't, and this one matters to me: DEC alphas running turbochannel busses. Yes, I know these things are old, and yes, I know my desktop runs rings around it, but gee it's cool to be able to say I have a DEC alpha (that I got for free...).

Re:How man people actually read this section?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then your post was the unfunniest thing in the history of the Universe. Please continue and read the Old Ike stories -- should bring a smile to your face.

rofl weak troll

[Anonymous Coward]

As I recall NetBSD had full USB support a year before linux did. FreeBSD probably wasn't close behind either.

Re:rofl weak troll

[rsidd]

As I recall NetBSD had full USB support a year before linux did. FreeBSD probably wasn't close behind either.

True enough, unfortunately USB support on FreeBSD is still pretty flaky (not sure about NetBSD). I know, I use FreeBSD (for other reasons).

Unix Tips @ Ablabla.org

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a manpage about this in /usr/share/man/

I think on BSD it's /usr/local/man/
It's not much info, but it can help you hit the ground fighting.

**New** BSD slogans

[Anonymous Coward]

FreeBSD: "Drowning in red tape"
NetBSD: "More Core than lines of commiters"
OpenBSD: "Dictatorships kill"
Darwin: "It takes a mighty corporation to turn out a tender BSD!"

Re:**New** BSD slogans

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux:"Anonymous Also-rans 'R Us"

Re:**New** BSD slogans

[Groganz]

BSD/OS: "Still here somewhere"

The NetBSD Organization

[Anonymous Coward]

The NetBSD Organization? More like CELDA!

From the article

[__past__]

For example, if a kernel developer makes a change that affects a utility then they normally just go ahead and make the change to the utility as well.

This innocent little sentence sums up one of the most important reasons to prefer BSD over GNU/Linux (or make that RedHat/GNU/Linux, SuSE/GNU/Linux...). It is really nice to have a coordinated group responsible for a complete, working system, instead of a distributor that merely duct-tapes together unrelated, each on their own incomplete, parts.

Re:From the article

[otis wildflower]

Debian?

Re:From the article

[sparkz]

Of course, if you're after multi-platform support, you could go to Sun for your SPARC support, etc, etc, etc ... that's *actual* support, not the (normally great) support you get from the F/OSS community.

Re:From the article

[Anonymous Coward]

Unix is about making *independent* parts work together. Not maintaining a fixed number of packages. Linux (distrobutions) have really screwed up in the past few years in the name of "user friendliness." My Redhat 8 is so friendly its a pain in the ass to administer, and worthless as a desktop (but at least it has anti-aliased fonts and fewer confusing "options") I don't have much faith in the evolution of linux distros to hit upon the right combination of ease of use by chance, or by imitating windows. I used to get so much more done on my (2 or 3 years) old linux systems, but now they are "incompatible"

Re:From the article

[micheas]

It is really nice to have a coordinated group responsible for a complete, working system, instead of a distributor that merely duct-tapes together unrelated, each on their own incomplete, parts.

What do you think the BSD ports collection is, if not unrelated, incomplete parts?

This only applies to kernel hackers. To everyone else this just flies in the face of reality.

Re:From the article

[__past__]

What do you think the BSD ports collection is,

Clearly separated from the base system it is. Sure, it is still possible that my Apache and my mod_frobnicate won't play together, the ports are basically out of reach from a QA standpoint. But the kernel and the basic userland tools, basically the POSIX stuff and them some, can be expected to work fine together. Even with "imported" stuff actually developed elsewhere,like GCC or BIND, you get more safety, simply because the separation makes the whole much more manageable.

Re:From the article

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry to disagree, but I seem to remember about 2 years ago setting up an apache proxy server at work on Linux... Mandrake 7.x at the time, and what a pain. I didn't want a GUI, or all the other myriads of crap that it wants to install by *default*. I had to sit in that stupid graphical installer and go through and deselect all kinds of stuff that I didn't need in there, so I could get just a *basic* system... A kernel and basic userland, and apache.

Re:From the article

[mvdw]

Mandrake 7.x at the time [...] all kinds of stuff that I didn't need in there

There's your problem right there; now, if you'd chosen slackware, you wouldn't have to fight that graphical installer...

Who is Scott Lockwood?

[Anonymous Coward]

And why is he hated so? Does he run K5?

What a fantastic story!

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't get it from Project Gutenberg did you?

Why so many negative comments?

[core plexus]

I help out on some sites, and they all use Apache and freeBSD, and I've never had a problem. I believe it makes it less expensive for people to host on non-Microsoft servers, and having and open mind is important to keeping open software. If a fraction of the users of Microsoft and other commercial software spent a fraction of their time and effort (instead of downloading pr0n) to projects...well, who knows what could happen. A movement, perhaps?

Re:How man people actually read this section?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sense of humor also means you understand when someone is trying to make a joke. The post was unfunny because it was not supposed to be funny.

Yup

[nurb432]

Netbsd Live...

moderation abuse

[Anonymous Coward]

This is redundant, yes, but very relevent to the discussion of the NetBSD organization, and very insightful. I can understand why the typical idiotic slashbot can not understand this, though it is important for them to start listening. Whoever modded that down shouldn't be allowed to moderate.

BSD is Great!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is great. BSD was one of the first original free source operating system distributions and it's still the most technologically advanced stable free operating system in the world.

*BSD clusters?

[The_Mutato]

Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of that? Seriously though, I want to know if it is possible to cluster in *BSD (which I suppose it is). If anyone knows a site that shows benchmarks of identical Linux and *BSD clusters. If the *BSD cluster is faster, then I will search with all my might for >1GhZ used boxen and make a cluster myself!

Re:*BSD clusters?

[questionlp]

Nik Clayton of the FreeBSD project has a page with links to resources on clustering FreeBSD. Some of the links are dead, but the ones that work should give you enough information about clustering FreeBSD (and possibly other BSD operating systems).

It's probably not as elegant or as well known as Beowulf clustering, but it has been done :)

Re:Takes a Licking and Keeps on Ticking!

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess none of the moderators get the joke.

Has the installer changed yet

[eadint]

I once had a client who wanted a bsd server. im used to solaris and linux, but i thought, hey why not, its the original old school it would probably be fun and educational. needless to say the installer was the most confusing gawd awfull thing i had ever run across. it took me three weeks to figure out how to get apache, perl, sendmail, and gcc working. and that was just figuring out how to install them. the menue system wasnt counter intuitive, it was strategically designed to confuse and bewilder you. i still dont really know if i set the server up well. i ended up turning the project over to a freind of mine who had done it a couple of times before. i remember walking away thinking that i wouldnt play with BSD for a while at least untill i heard that the overhauled the instalation menues. so does anybody know if they made installing BSD esear? man.

" there are only 21 real people in the world, the rest are just mindless monkey put there to prevent you from finding the other 20" ---plif.com

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[bsd_usr]

You must be a newbie or something. I'm sorry. I'd say more, but what a waste of time. Although, I do hope they don't change the installer, because it's fast, simple, and easy for those of us with a clue.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm.... GCC is part of the system, last I knew.

cd /usr/pkgsrc/www/apache
make install

gee.. thats tough.

Sendmail.. well, ok... that damn sendmail.cf file is the ugliest config file I've ever seen, but its the same on solaris, so I'm not so sure why you'd find it so hard if you are "used to solaris and linux".

Ahh.. but wait... now I see your ending of "overhauled the installation menues [menu's?]".. other than atrocious spelling and horrible punctuation througout your post, my general consensus for you would be to stick with Windows and GUI configuration. I can tell you that if you have that much problem with BSD, I wouldn't want to let you *near* any serious production systems, Solaris, Linux, BSD, or otherwise.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[eadint]

no i tried this install in 1988, and ive been working with computers for 10 years,

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[sputti]

I found the NetBSD installer the best and easiest installer i have ever passed through. I started using NetBSD by version 1.4.2 and i only kept it first because the installer was that nice and easy to handle. Ever gone thru the Debian installer? Oh my! I hadnt to rue the decission :-) NetBSD simply rocks!

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[mackstann]

i agree! :)

the installer is simple and no-frills, and gets the job done well, without confusing the hell out of you in the process.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[Pete]

eadint, I have to agree with the other guy responding to your post who mentioned your atrocious grammar and spelling. Okay, I know this is Slashdot, but goddamn... you can spell "strategically", but you can't spell "easier"?? :-)

Anyway, I'm puzzled that you didn't like the NetBSD install - and as a couple of others said regarding their experiences with the NetBSD install, I found it the cleanest and simplest OS install process I've ever used. Just beautiful. Now if you were talking about OpenBSD, I could maybe understand you - I don't particularly like their install process, especially the disk partitioning part (though once you have it installed it's great).

And as regards your comment... "it took me three weeks to figure out how to get apache, perl, sendmail and gcc working. and that was just figuring out how to install them." - well, erm, two of those four (gcc and sendmail) should be included in the default install! The others - well, you could certainly install them from source (which works fine), or you could read the documentation and find out how the NetBSD packaging system works. It's not really that hard - or at least it shouldn't be.

Which version of NetBSD (for which architecture) did you try using? Note that for the question you asked (ie. "has it improved since I used it before?") this sort of information is kind of critical, so it's a little suspicious that you didn't include it originally. And I now realise that you didn't specifically say you were using NetBSD - just "a bsd", so you should probably clarify that point as well.

If you don't respond, it's probably fairly safe to consider you a fairly lame troll. Though perhaps slightly more subtle than the good 'ol "BSD is dying" guy. *grin*

Pete.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[ShawnD]

the installer is simple and no-frills, and gets the job done well, without confusing the hell out of you in the process.

After just going throught an OpenBSD install I found the installer pretty good. It didn't do nearly as much as the Debian installer, but it did leave the ystem in a usable state and was much easier to use with a serial console and a lousy terminal emulator (I didn't feel like getting out the monitor with the old style Sun 13W3 connector).

The only part I didn't like was the disklabel editor. Yech! If it would have let me work in MB instead of sectors I would have prefered it. It rounds off what you enter anyways.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[eadint]

it was free bsd back in 1997
i got it from the oakcd archives.
does that help.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[eadint]

if i remember it was just telling the thing to include the package, i ended up going though 100 menue or something like that. and then i gouldnt find the documentation on the package system. the menue system was non explanatory. and no gcc and apache and perl did not install on the first attempt, so im not sure what your talking about, i realise that this was freebsd not net bsd so that could be the difference

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[eadint]

you must be a real fucking moron and a wast of skin, if you think your so superior, your not. i could probabbly out program you out administer you, and i have way more exeperiance on diferent hardwar than you will have. get off your high horse, moron. real professionals help others, not critisize, so you must be a 14 year old pron kiddie , trying to look big.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[Anonymous Coward]

I do have to admit that even *I* found (and still do find) the FreeBSD install to be confusing.

I much prefer NetBSD's. Very basic and to the point, partition disk, select what slices are what filesystems, select which sets to install, and go... when its done, set the time zone and root password and you are pretty much all set.

Note that it is a very *basic* install. You can install "X", but don't expect KDE or Gnome unless ou install it from pkgsrc. The elegance of NetBSD is that the base install is just that, a good *base* to start from. Very minimalist. On the plus side, for a simple headless server (like a remotely managed webserver or DNS server or something) you aren't stuck with all the crap a lot of the linux distro's stick you with... why does my web server need a GUI? You could run a small apache website on a 500MB disk (if you can find one of those anymore ;-) ). I generally setup my older machines (DecStations, VaxStations, 68K Mac's) with 1.7GB or 2GB drives, which I have piles of... I'm not storing MP3's or DVD's on them, and if I was I'd NFS mount the space off my server (160GB for now).

pkgsrc tree is very simple... get the latest from the ftp site (it gets updated enough that the one on the CD doesn't always work for some packages if the old version's aren't available anymore), untar it into /usr (or wherever you feel is appropriate), cd to the appropriate directory for the package you want, and do a "make" on it.

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[rigga]

I think that you missed the great documentation that accompanies FreeBSD. I installed FreeBSD as a *Totall* BSD, Linux, SCO, Solaris newbie. Now when I install any NIX or UNIX system I think how nice it would be to have the same simplicity that is the FreeBSD installer. I honestly have tried to install Mandrake and get so frustrated and angry that I just stop. I like FreeBSD and Debian's installers the best. Just give me the basic system and let me build what I want. I laugh when people talk about how hard installing FreeBSD is. Look at the handbook it is the single most usefull *nix manual out there. Oh and by the way its "menu" not "menue"

Re:Has the installer changed yet

[Anonymous Coward]

Better than that damned IRIX installer,
you need to put in all 7 CDs in the right
order or else your in dependancy hell.
Talk about bloat.

is it just me.

[eadint]

is it just me or does the penguin in the add above look really scarry and evil. its off topic but man. mr penguin ad dosent like being in a BSD post.

Re:*BSD is dead

[BadlandZ]

Linux is far mor dead than BSD, just look at NetBSD, and how many more ports it has than Linux. THen look at the Secure port, OpenBSD, then the General port, FreeBSD... DEAD? Red Hat is more dead that any BSD. F.off. I'm not much for a person to tell someon to F.off, but this deserves a full on F.OFF!.

IN SOVIET BSD

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU are dead!

What Java problem?

[dmelomed]

http://wonka.acunia.com/. Also FreeBSD will soon get native Java. They're working on it. Also, it's possible to recompile JDK from source for *BSD. Yes, it is labor intensive.

Re:0ld ike

[Anonymous Coward]

s/Ike Thomas/Jon Katz/

Answer: Inferiority Complex

[Anonymous Coward]

That is why the slashbots hate the BSDs.

Incidentally, that is also why they hate MS. MS is successful and their employees live full and happy lives, while they flip burgers and live in their parents' basement.

How odd...

[C0LDFusion]

...someone posted here the other day that BSD was dead...I'm confused... :)

A Story about BSD Posted By Homos

[Anonymous Coward]

Coincidence? You be the judge!

First On-Topic Post!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is good to know for those of us who actually
use NetBSD (I use sparc and x86 versions). If I cared enough
to I would definately help out the pkgsrc folks
(especially to get OpenOffice working and maybe a couple
other programs). Too bad I don't really have time to
work or help out. It would be good for those who can't
kernel program but would like to help out.

It hasn't really changed

[leereyno]

I don't like the installation system that it uses either. When you first sit down in front of it you don't think there will be any problems. At first it reminded me a lot of slackware which is the version of Linux I started out on. However if you're not careful before you're done you will have installed the OS TWICE without meaning to, among other things. The biggest challlenge is to get it to do the things you want without doing the things you don't because you've already done them. The main reason for this is that the install routine does not really work in an entirely step-by-step chronological manner even though its interface would lead you to believe that it does.

Once the system is installed the package/ports system works beautifully and the system is very fast and stable. It runs well on a P-200 with 96 megs of memory. The last version of Redhat that would do that was probably 6.2 or 7.0 at the latest. The 2.4 kernel increased the minimum system requirements a great deal.

Overall I think that Linux's evolutionary and laise faire(sp?) development model will lead to the best solutions. The speed of its development is a testament to that. The problem is that the road to get there is a rocky one. There is something to be said for a mature code base that is maintained and carefully pushed forward by a small group that is dedicated to making sure it gets the job done and works right, right now. Linux, on the other hand, can be thought of as being in continuous beta. The degree to which it is solid and secure depends upon the bugs and quirks getting shake-and-baked out by dozens of independent companies and hundreds of individuals. This is why the dot-zero versions of Redhat are always quirky and poorly optimized while the dot-two versions generally work well.

If I was going to set up a web server I'd probably use FreeBSD. If I was going to set up a desktop system I'd use Mandrake or Redhat. If I was going to set up a system where security was the most important thing I'd use OpenBSD. The only reason I can think of to run NetBSD is if you've got some oddball hardware that you can't afford to replace with an x86 system.

Lee

Re:It hasn't really changed

[mackstann]

The only reason I can think of to run NetBSD is if you've got some oddball hardware that you can't afford to replace with an x86 system.

Why? What don't you like about NetBSD?

Re:It hasn't really changed

[Anonymous Coward]

The only reason I can think of to run NetBSD is if you've got some oddball hardware that you can't afford to replace with an x86 system.

What about wanting your sparc, X86, and MacPPC systems all running the same OS, just for ease of administration? (not that I find switching between Solaris, SunOS4, BSD, HPUX, or any other Unix all *that* difficult).

One of the things that pisses me off the most is our "disposable" society... my P2/350 sitting in my computer room makes a just fine little webserver. My P166 box makes a fine little NetBSD firewall/DSL(pppoe) box. My Mac Q650 makes a fine little development platform for another 68K system, while my Sun Ultra-1 serves some files up. The DecStations and VaxStation.... ok, those are more toys right now (man's gotta have his toys ;-) ).

Oh.. and my Tadpole SparcBook 3gx, just nice to have handy to sit on the porch in the sun (in the summer - its COLD now!) and work on programs, scripts, etc.

But, they all run the same OS, same basic userland (with various added packages). NetBSD (mix of 1.5.x and 1.6).

When you talk about "can't afford to replace with... x86" I shudder. I haven't spent money on a computer in several *years* now... my latest desktop is a 1GHz P3 (512MB RAM) that I got for *free*. I don't play a lot of games, I don't need 140fps frame rates from a fancy video card, its more than enough. And no, I'm not broke... I bank close to $2K/month since I paid my house off (and I'm 38 years old). I could *easily* afford the latest whiz-bang-ba-bam 8Ghz system with the GeForce Ti890,000,000 video card. But, according to all the ex-GF's, I certainly don't need to compensate with super-power-computers for lack of other 'attributes'.

NetBSD!

[mackstann]

Damn, got here late, this story was posted while I was at work, and now probably no one will even see this comment :P

Some random thoughts:

I've run Linux for about a year and a few months, I've run Debian *only* for about a year, and recently I started running NetBSD on my desktop machine (yes, my desktop machine, not my server, router, or toaster). I don't see why people denounce the BSD's for desktop use. Mozilla runs, Xterm's run, irc clients run, Gaim runs, XMMS runs, MPlayer runs, damn, everything on my desktop runs :) For those that like KDE or Gnome, they run, in fact NetBSD had KDE 3 way before Debian ever did. So what's the fuss?

I moved from Linux to BSD for many reasons, BSD is much more tightly integrated. You don't get the "oh, that's Jim Bob Developer's fault, email him", etc. You don't get manual pages that state "This manual page is old and incomplete - please read the GNU info manual". Of course opinions differ, but I _like_ man pages. I don't like info manuals.

Another factor is the license and attitude of the community as far as licensing. I don't really like the GPL. Sure, in a perfect world, all software would be free, there would be no evil corporations, and everyone could sit around reading fine literature and hiking out in the mountains - BUT that's not going to happen. If people want to make a product and sell it, let them do it (as long as they're not breaking the law :)). If BSD wasn't around, alot of other operating systems would have gotten crappier TCP/IP stacks, OSX would probably be in much worse shape than it is (if it ever came to light at all), and many other things. So what if a vendor doesn't want to release their changes? They paid their people to write the code, let them have it. The original source will always be around.

BSD init is alot cleaner than Sys V init - no piles of symlinks with funny names - and NetBSD's rc.d system takes care of Sys V init-style init scripts (/etc/rc.d/named restart). In fact, NetBSD's rc.d system is being ported to FreeBSD.

ipf is, IMO, a hell of a lot nicer than IPTables.

The whole base system is consistant, well documented, well thought out, and easy to use as long as you know how to read. The userbase is *much* more intelligent and experienced, on average, however it is quite a bit smaller, than Linux's.

For software - there is pkgsrc, which is like Free/OpenBSD's ports system, or Gentoo's portage. pkgsrc is kept very up to date, I'm running Mozilla 1.2.1 from it right now.

As far as being a server or firewall/router, NetBSD runs any OSS Server stuff great, and I'm sure most Linux-only stuff would run fine under emulation.

Any other NetBSD users out there in the wasteland that is Slashdot? Speak up! :)

Re:NetBSD!

[leoboiko]

I did read it (-: and I have a similar story. I've been running Debian exclusively for two years and switched my home machine to NetBSD. I still use Debian in the university (it's not my decision anyway) and I like both, but I prefer NetBSD.

I agree with most of your points. I'd add these two:

• Minimalism. This is the main reason I like NetBSD. It is more minimalist than any Linux distro and even FreeBSD.
• Good code. Not only the documentation is great, the source is very clean, organized and commented. This is nice for a CS student like me. Section 9 of the manual (kernel internals) is so fun.

But we disagree in the opinion about licensing. I really prefer copyleft. But I understand and respect the BSD point of view, and I agree that BSD licenses are better in certain cases - games, for example.

Re:NetBSD!

[mackstann]

I'm still running Debian on my other machine, I would switch, but it's running Apache, MySQL, BIND, Exim (i'm gonna get to learning sendmail), and something else i swear (buzzword overkill, brain freezing up) - anyways I don't...IPTables! That's it :P So I'll have to learn some ipf.

Anyways it'll be a while until I'm confident in doing all that with NetBSD, so Debian stays for a while - not that I all of a sudden don't like it, but I definitely prefer NetBSD now.

And of course I agree with your two added points :)

Re:NetBSD!

[ChristTrekker]

Minimalism. This is the main reason I like NetBSD. It is more minimalist than any Linux distro and even FreeBSD.

Hear, hear! My SE/30 runs NetBSD. I love the "unclutteredness" of the system and the package system.

Regarding licenses, I haven't done much comparison of the two. But my gut feeling is that while GPL gives freedom to code, BSD gives freedom to people. Personally I think freeing people is a worthier goal.

Re:NetBSD!

[Anonymous Coward]

System V init scripts being ported to FreeBSD
About bloody time!
Thanx for letting me know that NEtBSD already
uses them, they tend to make thingd a *lot* easier

Re:If it's dead, how can there be an organization?

[xA40D]

just like Latin is a dead language.

Well, I learnt latin at school (only language I was any good at).

And many languages have Latin roots.

And Latin is used in the taxonomy of may things.

And I believe Latin is still used in the legal profession.

So if, in death, *BSD is destined to end up just like Latin all I can say is....

Great!

obligatory jokes, mk. II

[La Temperanza]

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of anti-BSD trolls. In Soviet Russia... BSD trolls YOU! 1) Post comment: "BSD is dead you morons." 2) ??? 3) PROFIT!!!

Re:Maths teasers

[Anonymous Coward]

1. dy/dx = ((cos x) + 1) / ((sin y) - 1)

2. du/dt = kc (sin k(x - ct))

Re:Maths teasers

[Anonymous Coward]

bah stupid typo

2. du/dt = kca (sin k(x - ct))