FreeBSD 5.0 Available

Vegard writes "Although not yet officially announced, the 5.0 version of FreeBSD is beginning to appear on the FreeBSD FTP site and mirrors world wide." Congrats to the developers. Update: 01/19 17:44 GMT by T : Some more detail -- Dan writes "Scott Long of FreeBSD Release Engineering team has officially announced the availability of FreeBSD 5.0 release. Improvements include second generation UFS filesystem, GEOM, the extensible and flexible storage framework, DEVFS, the device virtual filesystem, Bluetooth, ACPI, CardBus, IEEE 1394 and many more! FreeBSD is also available on 64-bit sparc64 and ia64 platforms."

Comments

Release Notes

[Squeezer]

If you want to see what is new in FreeBSD 5.0 then click to view the release notes.

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/relnotes.html

Re:Release Notes

[Anonymous Coward]

SMPng along with the TrustedBSD stuff are probably the most important changes, but I'm REALLY happy of the POSIX compliance changes.

When companies realize the benefits fo the BSD license this will takeover the world.

Re:Release Notes

[MsGeek]

From what I understand, all of the improvements Apple made to KHTML will be in KDE 3.2 when it comes out. Apple *IS* giving back to that project, who says they won't give back to FreeBSD? Considering that Jordan Hubbard is an Apple employee now, they will probably get a lot of pressure to do exactly that.

Re:Release Notes

[micsaund]

I am consistently impressed by the FreeBSD team's ability to document their products. Whenever I need info from RedHat, for example, it ranges from a hassle to a PITA. The FreeBSD team maintains an entire, several hundred page handbook as well as east-to-find release notes, descriptions of their processes, FAQs, and much more.

I realize that many of the "hardcore haxx0rz" don't see the value in this documentation, but the fact that it exists and is maintained shows the professionalism and dedication the FreeBSD team has (which results in a damned fine OS!)

Re:Release Notes

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Some companies are already well aware of the benefits of the BSD license. The net result? One company is now the largest single producer of UNIX operating systems in the world, measured in terms of number of units shipped per year.

The BSD license is a beautiful thing. Software that carries the BSD license can really, seriously, no-shit change the world for the better.

Oh, hooray

[RPoet]

The release hasn't been announced, which would mean it hasn't reached the mirrors yet, which would mean they need the master FTP server to be up and running. How very convenient of Slashdot to link directly to the master FTP server before this has happened! This is sabotage.

Nice linking

[Openadvocate]

Now why would you link directly to a FTP server? We all know that a lot of people will begin to download a +600MB ISO file and that no single FTP server would be able to handle the Slashdot crowd. Now I hope that the people here that wants to download FreeBSD has the brain power to check the mirror list first, if they not already has a favorite mirror. Still the proper thing to do, would be to link to the mirror list directly.
Also by using the mirror list, our US friends wouldn't have to download from a server in Denmark, but maybe a local one instead. Oh, well I guess that's just me, but I really think that in the lengthly, time consuming screening process of each article, someone would show a bit of responibility, knowing the effects, posting a article with links have.

Re:Nice linking

[mikerod]

I guess since *BSD is dying the /. editors saw no harm in linking :-))

Re:Nice linking

[b0r1s]

Now why would you link directly to a FTP server? We all know that a lot of people will begin to download a +600MB ISO file and that no single FTP server would be able to handle the Slashdot crowd..

Correction: No single Linux server would be able to handle the Slashdot crowd. A single FreeBSD server can do it easily.

http://www.bsdtoday.com/2000/October/News296.html.

This is from 2 years ago, many advancements have been made, particularly to the hardware and network stack, so assume that these numbers are on the very low end of estimates.

"We're very pleased to have servers that we built, running the FreeBSD operating system, set new milestones like this. It really shows just how well our large servers can perform in real-world situations using freely available software", Greenman said. "Equally impressive is the server's stability. It was pumping out upwards of 300 million bits per second to over 3000 users at a time for the past several days without a glitch and has been operating crash-free under similarly high loads for nearly two months now."

Re:Nice linking

[ianezz]

I thought Linux used the FreeBSD TCP/IP stack too

No, Linux has its own implementation of networking code rewritten from scratch.

This is why problems affecting the traditional *BSD implementation of TCP/IP (which is used pratically everywhere except for Linux) don't usually affect Linux. Of course, the opposite is also true.

That said, the FreeBSD kernel is known (or, at least, it has been known) for being able to handle high load/low resource conditions far more gracefully than Linux.

Re:Nice linking

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

Does it have anything to do with linux being monolithic kernel?

FreeBSD is also built on a monolithic kernel. Monolithic kernels tend to be as fast or (usually) faster than MicroKernels - no message passing, everything is essentially 'global' and readily accessed. As far as monolithic goes, you might be having a brainfart about MacOS X, which is a MicroKernel (Mach) with a kernel level BSD blob (a mix of Free and NetBSD).

FreeBSD has always been able to withstand higher loads than Linux. Just been around longer. It has a more mature VM that can take the load, and has a more mature TCP/IP stack.

Not a troll, I just FreeBSD has stability advantages over Linux under high load. Linux has a lot of other advantages, take your pick. I don't know why folks get into religious arguments and start yelling over what free UNIX you should use. "You know if you use THIS free, stable, x86 UNIX-like system with a lot of application support, you're real cool, but if you use THAT free, stable, x86 UNIX-like system with a lot of application support, you're a total asshole man." I must be clueless; I just don't get it.

A few mirros

[KAMiKAZOW]

The ISOs are not yet on all mirrors, but at least on the following servers:
ftp://ftp.uk.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO -IMAGES-i3 86/5.0/
ftp://ftp2.uk.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO -IMAGES-i 386/5.0/
ftp://ftp5.uk.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/IS O-IMAGES-i 386/5.0/
ftp://ftp6.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-I MAGES-i386 /5.0/
ftp://ftp14.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMA GES-i38 6/5.0/

Please look also if the files appeared on the other mirrors.

Re:A few mirros

[__past__]

Please look also if the files appeared on the other mirrors.

No, please don't. Wait until it's released. The ISOs may still change without notice, destroy your computer and piss in your fish bowl. Say with me: These files do not contain a released FreeBSD version.

And, of course, instead of downloading ISO images, consider using CVSup to save time and bandwidth. Or at least don't download all ISOs - you don't need all packages, and installing the stuff you want from the network works without any problems.

My review of FreeBSD 5.0

[Stanley Feinbaum]

I managed to get a free copy of freebsd thanks to my status as a journalist, however I was sadly disappointed by this product.

I attempted to install freebsd on my IBM laptop, however I discovered my particular model was not compatible (which is odd, since it runs win2k just fine, which has many BSD elements in it). I decided to try it on my p4 system which I use for games occasionally. Unfortunately I discovered that BSD refused to be installed on my NTFS partition, and I was required to create a new partition! I have never had this problem with windows before and was baffled at the amount of work BSD forces one to take on just to get it installed! I decided to abort my attempt at reviewing BSD since it didn't seem to work on any of the systems I had! Furthermore I discovered that not only does Freebsd not run any new games, it doesn't even run Microsoft office, the standard office program! A truly terrible computer product!

I give FreeBSD 1/10

Re:My review of FreeBSD 5.0

[BusterB]

If you want NTFS support for FreeBSD, simply find a source of unencumbered documentation on that FS and let the developers know where you found it. Having trouble? I thought so!

NTFS is intentionally underdocumented, so most attempts to support it in other OS's have been mostly reverse-engineering attempts. You could sign an NDA, but probably wouldn't be able to write free code with that information. Do not blame FreeBSD for not supporting undocumented features of another OS.

If you have an example of any non-Microsoft OS that can install on NTFS, please prove me wrong!

Re:My review of FreeBSD 5.0

[Sycraft-fu]

Uhh first off, I think the parent post is joking, making fun of moronic journalists. Secondly, pages 700-777 of "Inside Microsoft Windows 2000" (an MS book) provide a very good starter NTFS reference. Also the MSDN section on NTFS (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url =/library/en-us/fileio/base/ntfs.asp) is another place to look. Finally, NTFSDOS is a third party, commercial, tool that allows DOS to access NT drives.

Re:My review of FreeBSD 5.0

[debaere]

" ... it doesn't even run Microsoft office, the standard office program! A truly terrible computer product!"

You are right, MS Office is truly a terrible computer product :)

Hasnt this happened before

[Anonymous Coward]

Time and time again everyone says DO NOT LINK DIRECTLY to the main site, link to a mirror list. The fact that you still linked to the primary site and even said it has not been announced makes me wonder do you ever fucking read our comments. You guys need to develop a checklist before you post news items. 1. is it a dupe? 2. did i spell check this? 3. if there's a link to an product that was just released did i post the mirror link instead of the primary link? 4. And finally ask yourself this question, is this news the slashdot crowd really cares about? (*note this does not pertain to the current story)

RC3 was a good experience

[Anonymous Coward]

Good to hear the final 5.0 release is out. I installed FreeBSD 5.0 RC3 on my Pentium 100MHz with 32MB of RAM and I must say I'm really impressed how well the system performs. I'm a console freak so I try to do everything I need to do using console programs. It's been a really great thing to notice all of the utilities I have needed are also available as console programs.
I use "slrn" to read the Usenet news, "lynx"/"links" to surf the web, "mutt" to read/send e-mail, "mpg123" to listen to music/internet radiostations. Truly great experience and imagine it works _really_ smoothly and fast on computer which was bought in 1995. I am impressed and a happy FreeBSD user!

Announcement.

[saintlupus]

Although not yet officially announced

Uh, maybe there's a reason? Like they want to finish pushing everything out to the mirrors?

--saint

Mirror

[huhmz]

Has been available for a couple of days now, since the mirrors are gonna get hit bad now i figure i could contribute with my unofficial 100Mbit mirror.
ISOs for i386 here:
mirror

Dont forget to check the md5sums, I could be an evil blackhat after all. Enjoy.

FreeBSD 5.0 NOT released

[cperciva]

Quote from the 4.6 (non)release story:
Murray Stokely writes "We have gone over this for the past 2 releases now. I thought I had made it clear that you were not to publish information about FreeBSD being released until you saw a signed PGP message from one of the release engineers. Are you trying to help the spread of trojanned copies of FreeBSD? The release is not ready yet, and will not be until the front page of FreeBSD.org is updated and a PGP signed announcement message is posted to announce@FreeBSD.org."

Unless the rules have changed, slashdot screwed up again.

Re:FreeBSD 5.0 NOT released

[rsidd]

In that story, FreeBSD release engineer Bruce A. Mah comments:

This wouldn't be such a big deal except we had a very similar situation in 4.5 with someone posting a bogus release announcement to Slashdot (and having it slip past the editors). I really hope there isn't a third time.

Well, here's hoping there isn't a fourth, Bruce....

Early annoucements

[__past__]

I really wonder whether CmdrTaco is just too stupid to learn that a FreeBSD version is released when the release is announced by the release managment team and not when some files appear on some FTP sites, or if this has become some weird kind of personal vendetta or insider joke. Not only that he fucked up for every single release for some years now, they even started to announce release candidates early recently.

Despite being idiotic, this behaviour is really harmful. FreeBSD takes care to let their mirrors prepare for the traffic peak when a new version is released. The early "announcements" on slashdot of course mean that the people managing the mirrors - voluntarily, people not only FreeBSD but lots of free software projects depend on - don't have this time to prepare, and might get major problems, which in turn might mean that they decide not to support FreeBSD and other projects by providing bandwidth for free any more.

Unless this is some funky plan of VA Software or whatever their name is this week to push SourceForge, it would be really nice if slashdot could just stop damaging the Free Software infrastructure.

Keeping it a secret.

[vskjefst]

If you don't want the public to spot your releases until they are officially announced, then you should keep them hidden. Upload your files with restricted access to the master ftp and all mirrors, issue the press release, THEN make the files public.

Re:Keeping it a secret.

[shlong]

As the release manager for FreeBSD 5.0, this situation was disappointing for me because:

1. I had formed an agreement with Hemos last week that Slashdot would only accept submissions from the release engineering team and/or PR team for this.
   
2. The story that did get posted was crap. It didn't have a link to an announcement, release notes, or anything.
   

On all, it was very unprofessional of the Slashdot editorial team.

Mirroring with peer2peer networks

[root 66]

Would be great if those who already completed their downloads of the iso files could share them using their favourite peer2peer program to take some load off of the FTP servers.

Oh yeah !

[SILIZIUMM]

And I just downloaded the 4 ISOs of 4.7 yesterday !

But it's not a problem since many people said that it was better for me to stick with 4.7 and then switch to 5.1 or 5.2. Not a problem too since I'M on cable and I downloaded theses ISOs at 300+ kb/s :)

Re:Oh yeah !

[b0r1s]

But it's not a problem since many people said that it was better for me to stick with 4.7 and then switch to 5.1 or 5.2. Not a problem too since I'M on cable and I downloaded theses ISOs at 300+ kb/s :)

This is a valid point that I haven't yet seen addressed: which is better for the average user, 4.7 or 5.0?

There have been many, many changes to the code in 5.0, and there are bound to be more than a few bugs. If you're running a site that can have zero downtime, and you don't have redundant servers, don't bother switching to 5.0, it's simply not ready yet.

If you're a home user, don't mind a few make buildworld, make buildkernel, make installkernel, make installworld sequences, upgrade. There's enough new that you'll enjoy it, and there's enough stability that you probably won't notice the infrequent bugs.

If you're asking yourself "Why should I upgrade when everyone says there's going to be bugs?", the answer is simple: the bugs can't be found without testers, so everyone on the team needs your help to find them quickly. If you encounter a bug, file a PR, and maybe even try publicizing it on a mailing list. Letting the developers know that bugs exist is the first step in getting bug-free code.

Its slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew this would happen, so i uploaded it to my oc-255 server, enjoy!

Early Adopter's Guide

[Anonymous Coward]

And if you want to read some thoughts on whether you should upgrade, then click to view the early adopter's guide.

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/early-adopter .html

Summary:

"While FreeBSD 5.0 contains a number of new and exciting features, it may not be suitable for all users at this time. In this document, we presented some background on release engineering, some of the more notable new features of the 5.X series, and some drawbacks to early adoption. We also presented some future plans for the 4-STABLE development branch and some tips on upgrading for early adopters."

BitTorrent Links for 5.0 release

[mxs]

Since Slashdot had to link to the FTP, maybe this will help lighten the stress on the mirrors : http://tacos.sus.mcgill.ca/~hperes/BT_BSD5.0/ has BitTorrent files for the i386 release ISOs.

BitTorrent is a peer to peer fileswarmer. It's Free and Open Source, and comes in flavors for *ix, win32, and MacOS X. Clients are avaiable @ http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/ ...

Once you have finished the download, please keep the window open as long as possible so that others can get the file as well. Thanks !

The download might be a little slow at the beginning, but as more and more people hop on, it should get really fast. Just give it a couple of minutes.

MOD PARENT DOWN

[ChrisCampbell47]

Absolutely the only +5 comments on this thread should be people excoriating CmdrTaco for A) posting before PGP-signed announcement and B) linking directly to the master ftp site instead of the web page listing the mirrors.

I mean, I expect this from one of the junior "editors", but Cmdr Taco? Come on.

GEOM sounds interesting

[DrSkwid]

I hope one can run GEOM filters in userland. Sounds like a way to implement a totally soft file system.

I'll use the eponymous plan9 example of ftpfs

ftps -m /n/FreeBSD ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD

This would mount the remote ftp site into your local namespace so that when you did ls /n/FreeBSD you got the directory listing of ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD

Shell programmers will instantly see the advantage of such a system over application level ftp clients.

You can use all the tools you presently use for files for manipulating the remote filesystem. None of your applications will have to understand ftp to operate and you can write new ones without even worrying about ftp libraries or whatever difficult protocol you can envisage.

plan9 achieves all this by employing a kind of universal protocol called 9p [now 9p2000]. It's quite a simple protocol and just does not much more than read, write, walk.

It sounds like the filtering system is a way to implement virtual file systems. I do hope so.

There are many interesting applications for such a concept. The list supplied with plan9 is here