Slashdot Mirror


BSD Journaled File System Ready For Testing

Dan writes "The Journaled File System for FreeBSD (JFS4BSD) Project has the goal of porting the JFS Technology from IBM/Linux to FreeBSD. It uses a log-based, byte-level file system that was developed for transaction-oriented, high performance systems. Scalable and robust, its advantage over non-journaled file systems is its quick restart capability: JFS can restore a file system to a consistent state in a matter of seconds or minutes. The jfsutils is under a compilable state on FreeBSD."

113 comments

  1. {IBM,GNU}/Linux by palfrey · · Score: 0, Redundant

    IBM/Linux? New one on me... GNU/Linux, yes, but not IBM. I don't use the "GNU/" phrase myself, but it's got good reasons. IBM haven't donated *that* much to Linux (not compared to GNU foundation)

    --
    Beware the psychokinetic mimes!
    1. Re:{IBM,GNU}/Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was just a reference to JFS that was put together by IBM for Linux.

    2. Re:{IBM,GNU}/Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux means soap, toothpaste and personal care progucts anywhay...so why not IBM/Linux.

    3. Re:{IBM,GNU}/Linux by MavEtJu · · Score: 1

      IBM/Linux are the linux-labs at IBM. Nothing more, nothing less. So nothing to see here, keep walking.

      --
      bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
    4. Re:{IBM,GNU}/Linux by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IBM haven't donated *that* much to Linux (not compared to GNU foundation) I am trying to figure out why so many ppl insist that GNU has delivered everything and that companies do not. Who do you think supports GNU and other oss projects? Some of the support is in direct cash. Other times, it is in supporting roles such as tools, bandwidth, etc. They do so by allowing coders to work on company time on these projects. They paid for training for employees that did not directly benefit the company, but it did the employee, esp. with regard to oss. There are many ppl from IBM, HP, Sun, SGI, etc. who have helped on a large number of projects and the company backed them. And yes, I do know each of these companies have had managers who have tried to stop their employees from doing this work, but overall, most have not. Finally, there have been a number of IBMrs who have contributed to Linux in either direct or indirect positions.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  2. A mixed blessing. by cbiffle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This strikes me as both a good and a bad thing.
    Good, because journalled filesystems are a Good Thing. I use FreeBSD exclusively on both desktop and workstation, and while SoftUpdates is very good, it and journalling have different aims. (SoftUpdates aims to keep all file metadata consistent at all times; journalling aims to keep all file -data- consistent at all times.) Choice is always good, and I could see myself using SoftUpdates on /home and JFS on the maildirs, for example.
    However, this is a bit of a Bad Thing in that one of FreeBSD's simplicities has always been the One Filesystem, UFS. Granted, UFS has evolved some (UFS-Softupdates and now UFS2) but there was never a question as to which filesystem to choose: UFS has enough tunables, most of them automated, that you can optimize it for small-file, large-file, high-latency, low-latency, etc. I've found it to be capable of keeping up with the various Linux filesystems in their own areas. But if this is merged into -current, there will be a choice to make when preparing a slice. This is one of those things that's hard to change after the fact. :-)

    As for me, I'll stick with UFS2 until I see how this shapes up, but tally-ho!

    1. Re:A mixed blessing. by zeenixus · · Score: 1

      so you basically what you are saying is that having a choice is a "bad thing". and in other completely unrelated news,the average iq of slashdot posters takes yet another nose dive.

      --
      In Bob we trust.
    2. Re:A mixed blessing. by ctr2sprt · · Score: 5, Informative
      (SoftUpdates aims to keep all file metadata consistent at all times; journalling aims to keep all file -data- consistent at all times.)
      That's just not true. Soft updates works by ordering writes so that the metadata is always in a consistent state. This has the effect of also keeping the data in a consistent state, since data sits in the to-be-ordered queue right along with the metadata. Journaling filesystems typically track only the metadata (though some, like e3fs, can also do ordered data writes), which means that data can be lost as the metadata is returned to a consistent state.

      Don't believe me? Read the JFS overview from IBM, which says:

      JFS only logs operations on meta-data, so replaying the log only restores the consistency of structural relationships and resource allocation states within the file system. It does not log file data or recover this data to consistent state. Consequently, some file data may be lost or stale after recovery, and customers with a critical need for data consistency should use synchronous I/O.
      The only benefit JFS has over UFS+SU in this context is faster on-crash fsck times. And it only takes about a minute to check a 60GB UFS filesystem after a crash, which is about 3 orders of magnitude better than e2fsck (I don't know how speedy jfs.fsck is in non-replay mode).

      The chief benefit of JFS for FreeBSD is going to be portability. Which is a pretty big one, although I don't see JFS supplanting UFS before FreeBSD 6.0, if then.

    3. Re:A mixed blessing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JFS will never supplant UFS

    4. Re:A mixed blessing. by Nickus · · Score: 1

      The nice thing about UFS in FreeBSD 5.0 is that you have background fsck. So the machine boots really fast and if you have unclean filesystems they will be checked in the background. You can work with your computer in the mean time, you will just notice a slight performance drop.

    5. Re:A mixed blessing. by Nevyn · · Score: 2, Informative
      That's just not true. Soft updates works by ordering writes so that the metadata is always in a consistent state. This has the effect of also keeping the data in a consistent state, since data sits in the to-be-ordered queue right along with the metadata.

      wrong, if you write to the middle of a file then both UFS+SU and a metadata-only journal won't keep the data consistent in a crash (Ie. you can have some old data and some new data).

      If you have a real journal (Ie. data=journal in ext3) then you get consistent data writes too, which is very different. There are other ways to achieve the same thing (WAFL, the unfinished Tux filesystem for Linux) you appear to be correct that JFS only supports a metadata journal.

      --
      ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
    6. Re:A mixed blessing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So is ext3 a log-structured file system, rather than a journalled one? There's a BSD log-structured file system called, surprisingly, LFS (IIRC, it was the first LFS). Nobody really uses it, and I don't think it even builds any more (there was an effort to revive it a couple of years back, though, so maybe it does now).

      One of the ideas behind LFS was that all writes (metadata and data) would go to the end of the log, making them quicker (by avoiding seeking all over the place for writes to different files), while reads would generally be satisfied from a large cache, making the often-fragmented nature of files a non-issue.

      In the real world, it was found that reading data spread across the log was a major drawback, which led to the idea of a journalled file system. This reduced the log to the metadata and stored the data in the traditional way. The write performance naturally suffered a bit, but this was more than made up for by the better read performance.

      A JFS is also generally consideredgood enough in terms of recoverability since in-cache data (with write caching) can be lost no matter what file system you're using, and all that's lost is the in-cache data. Corruption of metadata (e.g. with stupid ideas like asynchronous writes), on the other hand, can leave the entire file system in an inconsistent state.

      At the end of the day, if you want to ensure data integrity, i.e. that a write completes before the system call returns, you have to bypass the write cache entirely. In most cases, killing performance for marginally improved data integrity isn't worth it. In those cases where it is worth it, the cache can be selectively bypassed.

    7. Re:A mixed blessing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can work like a log-structured filesystem depending on the mount option. Actually there are three choices: metadata-journal, everything-journal, and something-else. I can't remember what the third option is, but it has something to do with data ordering.

      Data integrity can be offered in many ways besides bypassing caches (and that by itself isn't enough to do the job). In fact, disabling caches on modern IDE drives is a very bad idea. All major databases have their own scheme for data integrity. The Tux2 filesystem has a scheme. And of course journalling is a way.

      Basically you want the fs to act as if an operation is atomic. It either completes or it doesn't.

      For most people, they just care about fsck times after boot. For them either soft updates or metadata journalling is fine.

    8. Re:A mixed blessing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Atomicity is separate from ensuring a write is complete before the system call returns. E.g. a JSF with write caching will ensure transactions are atomic, but not that the transaction associated with a particular write call has completed when that call returns. If you're relying on that write having actually completed, a JFS with write caching isn't good enough.

      With regard to databases, I've never heard of a database that claims to guarantee data in volatile storage will be preserved if the system goes down. Any database worth the name, on the other hand, guarantees the database will remain consistent and represent the results of all transactions which have actually completed.

      I really would like to hear how the completion of a write transaction can be guaranteed without the performance penalty of writing the associated data to persistent storage.

  3. ReiserFS by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 2, Redundant

    Whats wrong with ReiserFS (my favourite) or EXT3? or SGI's XFS even? Strangely, i've never even heard of IBM's JFS before, as ReiserFS/EXT3/XFS make all the news here.

    D.

    --
    You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
    1. Re:ReiserFS by rplacd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      jfs is one of the oldest journalling filesystems available. it's stable, has been stress-tested, is backed by ibm, etc.

      reiserfs and ext3fs are nowhere near as capable. xfs is pretty good, too -- in fact, it's what i use on my debian box.

    2. Re:ReiserFS by Arandir · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...as ReiserFS/EXT3/XFS make all the news here.\

      And here you have discovered the biggest diffrerence between Linux and *BSD. BSD developers don't give a flying fsck about making the news, they just want good solid stable code. I mean, who out there with more than two bytes of valuable data gives a rat's arse about which filesystem makes the news the most?

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    3. Re:ReiserFS by Sygnus · · Score: 3, Funny
      Whats wrong with ReiserFS (my favourite) or EXT3?

      The GPL.

      --
      First posting isn't trolling. It's...first posting. :) -- Illiad
    4. Re:ReiserFS by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Explain why a GPLed filesystem is bad.

    5. Re:ReiserFS by Arandir · · Score: 1

      Because it's infrastructure. Such stuff should be under the LGPL, BSD, MIT or similar unrestricted or weak copyleft licenses. Even the Linux kernel has an exception that moves its license to the state of weak copyleft.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    6. Re:ReiserFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't answer the question. "Infrastructure" doesn't explain anything.

    7. Re:ReiserFS by Arandir · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Infrastructure, as in kernel, filesystem, libc, etc., need to be free. Not free as in it pleases RMS, but free as in no restrictions.

      Using this kind of software in an embedded system could mean that unrelated and underived proprietary information might have to be released, since all linkage will be static. If Linux were under the pure GPL without any linkage exception, it would be failing in the embedded market.

      General purpose libraries, and stuff that acts as general purpose libraries (kernels, filesystems) must not place any restrictions on software that merely uses them. But the GPL restricts how you may use the software since it (or rather the FSF's interpretation of the GPL) declares that linkage is usage.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    8. Re:ReiserFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, troll.

  4. is it gpl'd? by rplacd · · Score: 1, Interesting

    if so, it'll never end up as part of the base install.

    1. Re:is it gpl'd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's hope so. Why anyone would waste their time on this crap is beyond me.

    2. Re:is it gpl'd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A kernel module maybe. Probably not compiled in by default.

    3. Re:is it gpl'd? by Ded+Bob · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes.

    4. Re:is it gpl'd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is, and it will never be part of the install, but it's still useful.

    5. Re:is it gpl'd? by geniusj · · Score: 1

      Maybe not enabled by default, but that doesn't mean it won't make the base install. That didn't stop GPL_MATH_EMULATE :-)

    6. Re:is it gpl'd? by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 1

      GPL_MATH_EMULATE was NOT under the GPL!

      It is under a modified BSDL. How do I know? I'm the one that put it into FreeBSD way back when.

      Here is the clip from the top, it then follows up with a modified 4 clause BSDL (It's almost LGPL).

      This copyright notice covers the redistribution and use of the FPU emulator developed by W. Metzenthen. It covers only its use in the 386BSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD operating systems. Any other use is not permitted under this copyright.

      It was added to the system along with the sun libm so I could use ghostscript on a i386 with no math-co...:)

      BWP

  5. UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everything! by Zeio · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the most impressive things about Linux is the XFS filesystem for it. It is thoroughly tested, production quality, and extremely robust. It is a please to deal with XFS. I personally have tested XFS for robustness and speed, and I have done things such as set up scripts to get, untar, copy erase, and start and stop various daemons and databases and then while this looping miasma was going on RIP THE HARD DRIVE from the system (SCA, SAF-TE, hop swappable). I have yet to see a lengthy FSCK or a corruption. Simply the best!

    UFS2 is interesting, and provides a lot of improvements to UFS1, the soft updates are fairly effective at keeping things consistent and there is a background fsck in FreeBSD that works quite well.

    A filesystem which is just as robust as XFS in terms of durability is JFS, but sadly I have found this filesystem to be a bit short on the performance side. I believe the main function of JFS is to provide support for those moving from older IBM systems to newer things that possibly include the us of Linux over AIX or OS/2.

    I personally will not consider Reiser or EXT3 and could go into detail as to why. I have strong opinions as to what types of filesystems belong in production, and these will not qualify.

    So, while JFS for FreeBSD is a good thing, I would like to see at some point an attempt to move XFS to FreeBSD, and if I had that capability, I would have already started.

    FreeBSD is coherent, well documented and with things such as Vinum, and JFS-like filesystems and hopefully someday XFS, it really does quote a bit and is released under a flexible, corporate-friendly license (which I believe helps to foster and promulgate further development, not stifle or prevent it).

    On of the series of equipment that I am most impressed with is the Juniper routers. They are the best routers available in my estimation (65xx switches are my most favored switches). I feel very at home with JunOS because it is largely FreeBSD:

    JuneOS version 5.6R1.3 built by builder on 2003-01-02 20:19:20 UTC
    Copyright (c) 1996-2001, Juniper Networks, Inc.
    All rights reserved.
    Copyright (c) 1992-2001 The FreeBSD Project.
    Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
    The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
    JUNOS 5.6R1.3 #0: 2003-01-02 20:38:33 UTC
    builder@zu.juniper.net.:/build/zu-b/5.6R1.3/o bj-i3 86/sys/compile/JUNIPER


    --
    Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
  6. Re:ReiserFS tsarkon demands your blood. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Reiser is shit. And please, you stupid fuck, try and tell my why Reiser is better than XFS or JFS. Please. I want to hear it. I want to hear your fucking diarrhea. You know, JFS is one of the oldest and most robust filesystems there is. You know nothing tird, just because you never heard of it means JACK SHIT. I hate people like you. The best filesystem in the world, arguable, is XFS and you use fucking Reiser. You know what a fucking tird you look like? I'll tell you. Take Sponge Bob, change all the yellow to doo doo brown, and that the fucking pile of shit you look like.

    Man, you fucking fuck. You think FreeBSD would what a piece of shit from Hans buttfuck Reiser on FreeBSD's glorious, fast, well documented and stable system?

    You know how old and good even UFS is? With soft updates? You know what UFS is or does that not exist in your cunt world. Man I HATE YOU. Fucking loser. You are officially a loser. GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE AND AWAY FROM ME.

    EXT3 is shit. Look at fucking Redhat bugzilla you fucking fag. Lots of data loss bugs and shit being fixed. You are a stupid asshole.

    XFS rules you fucking pussy. JFS rules too.

  7. a useful thread to read by rplacd · · Score: 1, Interesting

    see this thread on journaling filesystems & freebsd.

    i'd like to see xfs on freebsd too, but the license...

  8. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

    1. Re:*BSD is dying by cm5oom · · Score: -1, Troll

      It is official; Netcraft now confirms: That the *BSD is dying guy needs to SHUT THE FUCK UP

  9. A gentle correction... by plsuh · · Score: 5, Informative

    JFS, other journalled file systems, and Softupdates have the same goal -- keeping file metadata structures consistent on the disk. JFS does not attempt to maintain file data integrity in the event of a crash -- that is the job of a DBMS. Go and read the web page on JFS from IBM that is linked to in the original posting.

    Granted, journalled FS's and softupdates go about things in different ways. Softupdates trades off potentially increased disk space usage and higher disk and CPU activity after a crash (performing the background, reduced set of checks in fsck) against a smaller relative performance penalty vs. a non-journalled FS in normal usage as compared to a journalled file system.

    My own $0.02 is that this is a nice scratch-the-itch, check-the-box-for-PHB's addition, but for most normal usage softupdates is a better choice. See the papers by Ganger and Patt and McKusick for more details. (Links copied from the OpenBSD FAQ pages.)

    --Paul

    1. Re:A gentle correction... by yakovlev · · Score: 1

      From what I could tell from reading those papers, softupdates can't recover if the corruption occurs while writing a sector to the drive. With that kind of error a journal is necessary to be able to recover. The other solution would be to always rewrite the superblock for every update and maintain several copies of the superblock (effectively journalling only the superblock.) This is essentially what TUX2 does.

      I could be mistaken, but my understanding is that softupdates may allow you to update an on-disk inode or directory structure that has other things pointing to it, which could corrupt a filesystem if the system crashed during the update.

      What's your understanding of this? Am I mistaken?

  10. Developer lashes out: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant
    The End of FreeBSD

    [ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

    To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

    To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

    To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

    Future

    I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

    However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

    You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

    = Mike

    --

    To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
  11. Developer lashes out: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    The End of FreeBSD

    [eds. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

    To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

    To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

    To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

    Future

    I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

    However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

    You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

    = Mike

    --

    To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
  12. *BSD filesystem group by hubertf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think it would be nice to have a group working on filesystems for all BSD systems (Free, Net, Open, ...), just like what KAME does for IPv6 on BSD.
    That way, every BSD project would benefit from the efforts.

    - Hubert

    1. Re:*BSD filesystem group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't see why. One project makes improvements and the other projects grab them up. That's how it works.

    2. Re:*BSD filesystem group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Berkeley Fast Filesystem with Soft Updates and Background Fsck is faster and more reliable than a journalling file system. The BSD projects are concerned with stability, security, and readability of the code. Therefore, the FFS will not be replaced!

    3. Re:*BSD filesystem group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could still be improved. look for docuemntation on C-FFS ;)

    4. Re:*BSD filesystem group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed 100%, but the VFS (and VMs) on all BSD systems have differences and this makes work more difficult. Unfortunately, even in freeBSD, which is in theory more popular, there are not sufficient FS ppl to start such a project :(.

    5. Re:*BSD filesystem group by geniusj · · Score: 1

      I know NetBSD has LFS (log-structured file system), which I assume is journaled. Does anyone know anything about this? I know it's been getting some attention from the developers lately after a period of being stale.

      Cheers,
      -JD-

    6. Re:*BSD filesystem group by geniusj · · Score: 1

      To correct myself, it appears that log-structured filesystems are not the same as journaled filesystems..

    7. Re:*BSD filesystem group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      an elegy for *bsd

      I am a *BSD user
      and I try hard to be brave
      That is a tall order
      *BSD's foot is in the grave.

      I tap at my toy keyboard
      and whistle a happy tune
      but keeping happy's so hard,
      *BSD died so soon.

      Each day I wake and softly sob
      Nightfall finds me crying
      Not only am I a zit faced slob
      but *BSD is dying.
  13. GPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    thank god(and IBM) its under the GPL.

  14. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.
  15. Great feature but where is CD burning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should I wait for the next major release?

    1. Re:Great feature but where is CD burning? by dadragon · · Score: 1

      Just install cdrecord. Just like Linux.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    2. Re:Great feature but where is CD burning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really haven't read any documentation have you? You already have cd burning software installed by default.

      As other posters have pointed out, burncd is installed by default and is quite capable of writing any .iso files you want. Type man burncd for more info.

      CDRecord is part of the ports tree (sysutils/cdrtools) and provides more complex CD-writing requests.

  16. BSD sorrrow, trouble, and woe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  17. Quotas? by nocomment · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Will it do quotas for users?
    FreeBSD makes an awesome mail server for that reason alone (not that there isn't a ton more).

    --
    /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
    /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    1. Re:Quotas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
      It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

      FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

      Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

      OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

      Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

  18. Re:UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everythi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can you say GPL violation? using GPL code (XFS and JFS) under BSD...taints the BSD kernel with GPL fs code.

  19. Not the JFS itself, but the jfstools by lertl · · Score: 2, Informative

    According to the comment on http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_ id=3539 the JFS code itself isn't ready yet, but the jfstools are. So you can take a JFS disk from a Linux box and use the jfstools, but you can't mount the JFS right now.

  20. Re:UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everythi by wabb1t · · Score: 2, Informative
    Richard Stallman mentioned in a comment that including GPL code with the source of the FreeBSD kernel was no problem, and that the GPL only covered the compiled kernel if it contains the GPL code.

    This basically means that you cannot distribute the FreeBSD kernel with both GPL and proprietary code, but there is no problem distributing it if you leave the GPL part out of the compile. See Greg Lehey's Diary, namely the Tuesday, 18 December 2001 entry.

  21. Old Ike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    When I think of dirty old men, I think of Ike Thomas and when I think about Ike I get a hard on that won't quit.

    Sixty years ago,I worked in what was once my Grandfather's Greenhouses. Gramps had died a year earlier and Grandma, now in her seventies had been forced to sell to the competition. I got a job with the new owners and mostly worked the range by myself. That summer, they hired a man to help me get the benches ready for the fall planting.

    Ike always looked like he was three days from a shave and his whiskers were dirty white, shaded by the brim of his battered felt fedora.

    He did not chew tobacco but the corners of his mouth turned down in a way that, at any moment, I expected a trickle of thin, brown juice to creep down his chin. His bushy, brown eyebrows shaded pale, gray eyes.

    Old Ike, he extended his hand, lifted his leg like a dog about to mark a bush and let go the loudest fart I ever heard. The old man winked at me, "Ike Thomas is the name and playing pecker's my game."

    I thought he said, "Checkers." I was nineteen, green as grass. I said, "I was never much good at that game."

    "Now me," said Ike, "I just love jumping men . . ."

    "I'll bet you do."

    ". . . and grabbing on to their peckers," said Ike.

    "I though we were talking about . . ."

    "You like jumping old men's peckers?"

    I shook my head.

    "I reckon we'll have to remedy that." Ike lifted his right leg and let go another tremendous fart. "He said, "We best be getting to work."

    That summer of 1941 was a more innocent time. I learned most of the sex I knew from those little eight pager cartoon booklets of comic-page characters going at it. Young men read them in the privacy of an outside john, played with themselves, by themselves and didn't brag about it. Sometimes, we got off with a trusted friend and helped each other out.

    Under the greenhouse glass, the temperature some times climbed over the hundred degree mark. I had worked stripped to the waist since April and was as brown as a berry. On only his second day on the job and in the middle of August, Ike wore old fashioned overalls. Those and socks in his high-top work shoes was every stitch he wore. When he bent forward, the bib front billowed out and I could see the white curly hairs on his chest and belly.

    "Me? I just love to eat pussy!" Ike licked his lips from corner to corner then sticking his tongue out far enough that the tip could touch the end of his nose. He said, A man's not a man till he knows first hand, the flavor of a lady's pussy."

    "People do that?"

    He winked. "Of course the taste of a hard cock ain't to be sneezed at neither. Now you answer me, yes or no. Does a man's cock taste salty or not?"

    "I never . . ."

    "Well, old Ike's willing to let you find out."

    "No way."

    "Just teasing," said Ike. "But don't give me no sass or I'll show you my ass." He winked. "Might show it to you anyway, if you was to ask."

    "Why would I do that?"

    "Curiosity, maybe. I'm guessing you never had a good piece of man ass."

    "I'm no queer."

    "Now don't be getting judgmental. Enjoying what's at hand ain't being queer. It's taking pleasure where you find it with anybody willing." Ike slipped a hand into the side slit of his overalls and I could tell he was fondling and straightening out his cock. "Now I admit I got me a hole that satisfied a few guys."

    I swallowed, hard.

    Ike winked. "Care to be asshole buddies?"

    ***

    We worked steadily until noon. Ike drew a worn pocket watch from the bib pocket of his loose overalls and croaked, "Bean time. But first its time to reel out our limber hoses and make with the golden arches before lunch."

    I followed Ike to the end of the greenhouse where he stopped at the outside wall of the potting shed. He opened his fly, fished inside, and finger-hooked a soft white penis with a pouting foreskin puckered half an inch past the hidden head.

    "Yes sir," breathed Ike, "this old peter needs some draining." He exhaled a sigh as a strong, yellow stream splattered against the boards and ran down to soak into the earthen floor.

    He caught me looking down at him. He winked. "Like what you're viewing, Boy?"

    I looked away.

    "You taking a serious interest in old Ike's pecker?"

    I shook my head.

    "Well you just haul out yourn and let old Ike return the compliment."

    Feeling trapped and really having to go, I fumbled at my fly, turned away slightly, withdrew my penis and strained to start.

    "Take your time boy. Let it all hang out. Old Ike's the first to admit that he likes looking at another man's pecker." He flicked away the last drop of urine and shook his limp penis vigorously.

    I tried not to look interested.

    "Yes sir, this old peepee feels so good out, I just might leave it out." He turned to give me a better view.

    "What if somebody walks in?"

    Ike shrugged. He looked at my strong yellow stream beating against the boards and moved a step closer. "You got a nice one,boy."

    I glanced over at him. His cock was definitely larger and beginning to stick straight out. I nodded toward his crotch. "Don't you think you should put that away?"

    "I got me strictly a parlor prick," said Ike. "Barely measures six inches." He grinned. "Of course it's big enough around to make a mouthful." He ran a thumb and forefinger along its length and drawing his foreskin back enough to expose the tip of the pink head. "Yersiree." He grinned, revealing nicotine stained teeth. "It sure feels good, letting the old boy breathe."

    I knew I should button up and move away. I watched his fingers moving up and down the thickening column.

    "You like checking out this old man's cock?"

    I nodded. In spite of myself, my cock began to swell.

    "Maybe we should have ourselves a little pecker pulling party." Ike slid his fingers back and forth on his expanding shaft and winked. "I may be old but I'm not against doing some little pud pulling with a friend."

    I shook my head.

    "Maybe I'll give my balls some air. Would you like a viewing of old Ike's hairy balls?"

    I swallowed hard and moistened my dry lips.

    He opened another button on his fly and pulled out his scrotum. "Good God, It feels good to set 'em free. Now let's see yours."

    "Why?"

    "Just to show you're neighborly," said Ike.

    "I don't think so." I buttoned up and moved into the potting shed.

    Ike followed, his cock and balls protruding from the front of his overalls. "Overlook my informality." Ike grinned. "As you can see I ain't bashful."

    I nodded and took my sandwich from the brown paper bag.

    "Yessir," said Ike. "I just might have to have myself an old fashioned peter pulling all by my lonesome. He unhooked a shoulder strap and let his overalls drop around his ankles.

    I took a bite of my sandwich but my eyes remained on Ike.

    "Yessiree," said Ike, "I got a good one if I do say so myself. Gets nearly as hard as when I was eighteen. You know why?"

    I shook my head.

    "Cause I keep exercising him. When I was younger I was pulling on it three time a day. Still like to do him every day I can."

    "Some say you'll go blind if you do that too much."

    "Bull-loney!" Don't you believe that shit. I been pulling my pud for close to fifty years and I didn't start till I was fifteen."

    I laughed.

    "You laughing at my little peter, boy?"

    "Your hat." I pointed to the soiled, brown fedora cocked on his head. That and his overalls draped about his ankles were his only items of apparel. In between was a chest full of gray curly hair, two hairy legs. Smack between them stood an erect, pale white cock with a tip of foreskin still hiding the head.

    "I am one hairy S.O.B.," said Ike.

    "I laughed at you wearing nothing but a hat."

    "Covers up my bald spot," said Ike. "I got more hair on my ass than I got on my head. Want to see?"

    "Your head?"

    "No, Boy, my hairy ass and around my tight, brown asshole." He turned, reached back with both hands and parted his ass cheeks to reveal the small, puckered opening. "There it is, Boy, the entrance lots of good feelings. Tell me, Boy, how would you like to put it up old Ike's ass?"

    "I don't think so."

    "That'd be the best damned piece you ever got."

    "We shouldn't be talking like this."

    "C'mon now, confess, don't this make your cock perk up a little bit?"

    "I reckon," I confessed.

    "You ever seen an old man's hard cock before," asked Ike.

    "My grandpa's when I was twelve or thirteen."

    "How'd that come about?"

    He was out in the barn and didn't know I was around. He dropped his pants. It was real big he did things to it. He saw me and he turned around real fast but I saw it."

    "What did your grandpa do?"

    "He said I shouldn't be watching him doing that. He said something like grandma wouldn't give him some,' that morning and that I should get out of there and leave a poor man in peace to do what he had to do."

    "Did you want to join him."

    "I might have if he'd asked. He didn't."

    "I like showing off my cock," said Ike. "A hard-on is something I always been proud of. A hard-on proves a man's a man. Makes me feel like a man that can do things." He looked up at me and winked. "You getting a hard-on from all this talk, son?"

    I nodded and looked away.

    "Then maybe you should pull it out and show old Ike what you got."

    "We shouldn't."

    "Hey. A man's not a man till he jacked off with a buddy."

    I wanted to but I was as nervous as hell.

    Ike grinned and fingered his pecker. "C'mon, Boy, between friends, a little cock showing is perfectly fine. Lets see what you got in the cock and balls department."

    In spite of my reluctance, I felt the stirring in my crotch. I had curiosity that needed satisfying. It had been a long, long time since I had walked in on my grandfather .

    "C'mon let's see it all."

    I shook my head.

    "You can join the party anytime, said Ike. "Just drop your pants and pump away."

    I had the urge. There was a tingling in my crotch. My cock was definitely willing and I had a terrible need to adjust myself down there. But my timidity and the strangeness of it all held me back.

    Hope you don't mind if I play out this hand." Ike grinned. "It feels like I got a winner."

    I stared at his gnarled hand sliding up and down that pale, white column and I could not look away. I wet my lips and shook my head.

    Old Ike's about to spout a geyser." Ike breathed harder as he winked. "Now if I just had a long finger up my ass. You interested, boy?"

    I shook my head.

    The first, translucent, white glob crested the top of his cock and and arced to the dirt floor. Ike held his cock at the base with thumb and forefinger and tightened noticeably with each throb of ejaculation until he was finished.

    I could not believe any man could do what he had done in front of another human being.

    Ike sighed with pleasure and licked his fingers. "A man ain't a man till he's tasted his own juices."

    He squatted, turned on the faucet and picked up the connected hose. He directed the water between his legs and on to his still dripping prick and milked the few remaining drops of white, sticky stuff into the puddle forming at his feet. "Cool water sure feels good on a cock that just shot its wad," said Ike.

    ***

    "Cock-tale telling time," said Old Ike. It was the next day and he rubbed the front of his dirty,worn overalls where his bulge made the fly expand as his fingers smoothed the denim around the outline of his expanding cock.

    I wasn't sure what he had in mind but I knew it wasn't something my straight-laced Grandma would approve of.

    "Don't you like taking your cock out and jacking it?" Ike licked his lips.

    I shook my head in denial.

    "Sure you do. A young man in his prime has got to be pulling his pud."

    I stared at his calloused hand moving over the growing bulge at his crotch.

    "Like I said," continued Ike, "I got me barely six inches when he's standing up." He winked at me. "How much you got, son?"

    "Almost seven inches . . ." I stuttered. "Last time I measured."

    "And I'm betting it feels real good with your fist wrapped around it."

    "I don't do . . ."

    "Everybody does it." He scratched his balls and said,"I'll show you mine if you show me yours." Then, looking me in the eye, he lifted his leg like a dog at a tree and let out a long, noisy fart.

    Denying that I jacked off, I said, "I saw yours yesterday."

    "A man has got to take out his pecker every once in a while." He winked and his fingers played with a button on his fly. Care to join me today?"

    "I don't think so."

    "What's the matter, boy? You ashamed of what's hanging 'tween your skinny legs?"

    "It's not for showing off."

    "That would be so with a crowd of strangers but with a friend, in a friendly showdown, where's the harm?

    "It shouldn't be shown to other people. My Grandma said that a long time ago when I went to the bathroom against a tree when I was seven.

    "There's nothing like a joint pulling among friends to seal a friendship," said Ike.

    I don't think so." I felt very much, ill at ease.

    "Then what the fuck is it for," demanded the old man. "A good man shares his cock with his friends. How old are you boy?"

    "Nineteen almost twenty."

    You ever fucked a woman?"

    "No."

    "Ever fucked a man?"

    "Of course not.

    "Son, you ain't never lived till you've fired your load up a man's tight ass."

    "I didn't know men did that to each other."

    "Men shove it up men's asses men all the time. They just don't talk about it like they do pussy."

    "You've done that?"

    "I admit this old pecker's been up a few manholes. More than a few hard cocks have shagged this old ass over the years." He shook his head, wistfully, "I still have a hankering for a hard one up the old dirt chute."

    "I think that would hurt."

    "First time, it usually does," agreed Ike. He took a bite from his sandwich.

    I looked at my watch. Ten minutes of our lunch hour had already passed.

    "We got time for a quickie," said Ike. "There's no one around to say, stop, if were enjoying ourselves."

    He unhooked the slide off the button of one shoulder-strap, pushed the bib of his overalls down to let them fall to his feet.

    "Showtime," said Ike. Between his legs, white and hairy, his semi-hard cock emerged from a tangled mass of brown and gray pubic hair. The foreskin, still puckered beyond the head of the cock, extended downward forty-five degrees from the horizontal but was definitely on the rise.

    I could only stare at the man. Until the day before, I had never seen an older man with an erection besides my grandpa.

    Ike moved his fingers along the stalk of his manhood until the head partially emerged, purplish and broad. He removed his hand for a moment and it bobbled obscenely in the subdued light of the potting shed. Ike leaned back against a bin of clay pots like a model on display. "Like I said, boy, it gets the job done."

    I found it difficult not to watch. "You shouldn't . . ."

    "C'mon, boy. Show Ike your pecker. I'm betting it's nice and hard."

    I grasped my belt and tugged on the open end. I slipped the waistband button and two more before pushing down my blue jeans and shorts down in one move. My cock bounced and slapped my belly as I straightened."

    "That's a beaut." Ike stroked his pale, white cock with the purplish-pink head shining. "I'm betting it'll grow some more if you stroke it."

    "We really shouldn't . . ."

    "Now don't tell me you never stroked your hard peter with a buddy."

    "I've done that," I finally admitted,. "But he was the same age as me and it was a long time ago." I though back to the last time Chuck and me jerked each other off in the loft of our old barn. Chuck wanted more as a going away present and we had sucked each other's dicks a little bit.

    "Jackin's always better when you do it with somebody," said Ike. "Then you can lend each other a helping hand."

    "I don't know about that," I said.

    Ike's hand continued moving on his old cock as he leaned over to inspect mine. "God Damn! Boy. That cock looks good enough to eat." Ike licked his lips. "You ever had that baby sucked?"

    I shook my head as I watched the old man stroke his hard, pale cock.

    "Well boy, I'd say you're packing a real mouthful for some lucky gal or guy." He grinned. "Well c'mon. Let's see you get down to some serious jacking. Old Ike's way ahead of you."

    I wrapped my fist around my stiff cock and moved the foreskin up and over the head on the up stroke. On the down stroke the expanded corona of the angry, purple head stared obscenely at the naked old man.

    Ike toyed with his modest six inches. "What do you think of this old man's cock?" His fist rode down to his balls and a cockhead smaller than the barrel stared back at mine.

    "I guess I'm thinking this is like doing it with my grandpa."

    "You ever wish you could a done this with your grandpa?"

    "I thought about it a lot."

    "Ever see him with a hard-on."

    "I told you about that!"

    "Ever think about him doing your grandma?"

    "I can't imagine her ever doing anything with a man.

    "Take my word for it, sonny, we know she did it or you wouldn't be here." Begrudgingly I nodded in agreement.

    "Everybody fucks," said old Ike. "They fuck or they jack off."

    "If you say so."

    "Say sonny, your cocks getting real juicy with slickum. Want old Ike to lick some of it away?"

    "You wouldn't."

    Ike licked his lips as he kept his hand pistoning up and down his hard cock. "You might be surprised what old Ike might do if he was in the mood for a taste of what comes out of a hard cock."

    And that is what he proceeded to do. He sucked me dry.

    Then he erupted in half-a-dozen spurts shooting out and onto the dirt floor of the potting shed. He gave his cock a flip and shucked t back into his overalls. He unwrapped a sandwich from its wax paper and proceed to eat without washing his hands. He took a bite and chewed. "Nothing like it boy, a good jacking clears the cobwebs from your crotch and gives a man an appetite."

    ***

    The following day, We skipped the preliminaries. We dropped our pants. Ike got down on his knees and sucked me until I was hard and good and wet before he stood and turned.

    "C'mon boy, Shove that pretty cock up old Ike's tight, brown hole and massage old Ike's prostate.

    Ike bent forward and gripped the edge of the potting bench. The lean, white cheeked buttocks parted slightly and exposed the dark brown, crinkly, puckered star of his asshole "Now you go slow and ease it along until you've got it all the way in," he cautioned. "This old ass craves your young cock but it don't want too much too soon. You've got to let this old hole stretch to accommodate you."

    "Are you sure you want to do this?"

    "Easy boy, easy," he cautioned. "You feel a lot bigger than you look. Put a little more spit in your cock."

    "It's awfully tight. I don't know if it's going to go or not."

    "It'll go," said Ike. "There's been bigger boys than you up the old shit chute."

    I slipped in the the last few inches.. "It's all in."

    "I can tell," said Ike. "Your cock hairs are tickling my ass."

    "Are you ready," I asked.

    "How are you liking old Ike's hairy asshole so far?"

    "It's real tight."

    "Tighter than your fist?"

    "Might be."

    "Ready to throw a fuck into a man that reminds you of your grandpa."

    "I reckon."

    "I want you should do old Ike one more favor."

    "What?"

    While you're pumpin' my ass, would you reach around and play with my dick like you would your own? Would you do that for an old man?"

    I reached around and took hold of his hard cock sticking out straight in front of him. I pilled the skin back and then pulled it up and over the expanded glans. I felt my own cock expand inside him as I manipulated his staff in my fingers. I imagined that my cock extended through him and I was playing with what came out the other side of him.

    "C'mon, boy, ram that big cock up the old shitter and make me know it. God Damn! tickle that old prostate and make old Ike come!"

    I came. And I came. Ike's tightened up on my cock and I throbbed Roman Candle bursts into that brown hole as I pressed into him. His hairy, scrawny ass flattened against my crotch and we were joined as tightly as two humans can be.

    "A man's not a man till he's cum in another man." said old Ike. "You made it, boy. But still, a man's not a man till he's had a hard cock poked up his ass at least once."

    Every time I think of that scene, I get another hard-on. Then I remember the next day when old Ike returned the favor.

    I never have managed to come that hard again. If only Ike were here.

  22. Re:ReiserFS tsarkon demands your blood. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    You know nothing tird [sic]

    At least he knows how to spell.

    You must be a product of public education.

  23. Re:UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everythi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    can you say GPL violation? using GPL code (XFS and JFS) under BSD...taints the BSD kernel with GPL fs code.

    Oh bullshit. Look at all the GNU userland tools already available in *BSD.

  24. Re:ReiserFS fucking fag cunt asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    you are a stupid pussy fucking asshole troll bitch. your fucking lame ass mentioning EXT3 or FUCK_RESIER makes me sick you fucker.

    i want you dead. i hate you. i never want to hear ext3 or reiser again .

    you are a fucker traitor and a pussy. i hate your fucking zealotry for shit.

    you like ntfs, ext3, resier, hfs. all faggit filesystems. fuckin faggit.

    look at your fag loving fag shit. your bitch faggit ass fucking homo LINUX loving fag. shut your fucking piehole you disgusting piece of SHIT.

  25. Re:ReiserFS tsarkon demands your blood. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    shut up you dumb fucking animal bitch. you are such a fucking piece of fucking carmelized dog shit. fucking sit.

    sit bitch. sit.

    you fucking pussy asshole cnut coming out of a festering quagmire, the asshole swamp.

    you fucking mushroom fungus blooming out of the fuck swamp. you cunt bitch.

    you fucking little bitch spore spawned fucking fungus asshole.

    i get sick looking at you, your writing, everything, the best part ran down the crack of your mommas ass and left a brown stain on the mattres, i think you were cheated! you fucking little chunky brown vaginal discharge FUCKER FUCK YOU FUCKER FUCK OFF!

  26. Re:ReiserFS fucking fag cunt asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Beavis, you'd had too much sugar again....

  27. Re:ReiserFS fucking fag cunt asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    you little bitch. shut up. diskiller sockpuppeting his own discussion thread you are a failure.

    you fucking ass. you fucking anus rim calamari licking sphincter licker. you lick sphincter like you eat calamari rings

    you fucking whore pussy bitch cunt roasted penis lipped fucker stain

    i see you glass

    glass

    i see thorugh you glass attacks your deprecations and malfuckinations you FUCKTARDION fucking fucktardion. peice of fuckng pussy yeast anus pie fucking RUMP PISS! diarhea rump piss you fucking faggit REISER locing fag

    reiser loving fucking faggit. FAG FUCK BITCH CUNT.

  28. Re:ReiserFS fucking fag cunt asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    ever considered switching to decaf?

  29. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers.Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  30. Re:UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everythi by battjt · · Score: 4, Funny

    I personally will not consider Reiser or EXT3 and could go into detail as to why. I have strong opinions as to what types of filesystems belong in production, and these will not qualify.

    How can a stupid statement like this get moderated to the top? Unsubstantiated claims like this should only be allowed to criticize Microsoft. Comments critical of Linux must be backed up with hard data.

    I personally will not consider this comment and could go into detail as to why. I have strong opinions as to what types of comment belong in /., and this will not qualify.

    --
    Joe Batt Solid Design
  31. *BSD is dying? - What? by endeavour31 · · Score: -1, Troll

    Obviously the poster has no real knowledge of *BSD or other OS. But, demonstrably he does have his head up his ass. Do we continue to see *BSD companies folding left and right? No. They just keep rolling along... ... Get a life and do try to learn something factual!

  32. Re:UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everythi by glitchvern · · Score: 3, Interesting
    with regard to XFS
    I have yet to see a lengthy FSCK or a corruption.

    Lord knows I have. I had a power outage at my house and got an error on boot for my /home partition. When I searched google with the non-unique part of the error message, the first link on google was a message on the xfs mailing list by one of the developers saying he corrected an endian bug that was probably causing people to have recovery failures. Ah, here it is. I couldn't find anything on the web/newsgroups about how to fix it. I think I eventually ended up using xfs_repair. It complained about the filesystem not having been unmounted cleanly and telling me to mount and then unmount the filesystem. Of course I couldn't mount the filesystem anymore. I can't remember what exactly it told me to do in the event that the filesystem could not be mounted, but it involved some scary warning about losing the filesystem. I think it was to use xfs_repair -L (zero out the journal log). I considered creating another partion (I don't need as much space as today's drives ship with so I leave space to create new partitions/grow old ones) and using xfsdump to back up the filesystem at that point, but there was nothing terribly important on there so I just went for it. It repaired the file system just fine. I've had it put stuff in lost+found for some of the other file systems on other power outages (yes, we have lots of power outages and I need to buy a UPS though we don't seem to have had one for 43 days at this point), but that's not really a big deal. It does mostly restore things to how they are suppose to be.
    The problem with xfs is that they don't release "stable" patches for 2.4 that often. Oh, they release snapshots for every kernel, but those are at the start of the branch to that kernel and not at the end of the branch. Other than that you can pull their linux kernel with xfs out of their cvs, but they do not have any sort of stable branch in their cvs that I can find. There were 9 months between the release of xfs linux release 1.1 and 1.2 during which time many important bug fixes went into cvs.
    Don't get me wrong. I still use xfs as my filesystem. Mostly because they have actual real acl's. I just wish they would release some sort of "stable", "blessed" version of their patches every now and then. Can't wait for 2.6 when it's just included in the stable kernel.
  33. please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by Bishop · · Score: 1

    I did not quite understand your second paragraph. Could you please explain the advantages of softupdates versus journalled again. thanks.

    1. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by plsuh · · Score: 4, Informative

      My understanding is that a journalled FS records every file block allocation and deallocation on the volume in a separate journal. This way, if an operation does not complete (say, due to a power failure), the disk can be restored to a known consistent state very easily. A consistent state is one where no blocks are allocated that should not be, and no blocks that are in use are listed as unallocated.

      Softupdates does a partial re-ordering of operations so that all allocations happen before deallocations. Thus, in the event of a crash there can never be any blocks that are in use but marked as unallocated. The only possible inconsistency is that there may be blocks that are unused but marked as allocated. In the event of a crash, no fsck is performed as a part of the boot sequence, but a special background version of fsck is run to find any blocks that unused but marked as allocated and mark them as unallocated, which is a safe operation.

      Comparing the two methods of operation, a journalling FS pays a speed penalty under normal operations, as it needs to do two writes to the volume for every write access from the application, one to write the journalling data and one to write the actual write. However, on a restart after a crash, the journal is just used to roll back the volume's allocations to a known good state and the OS continues on its merry way.

      FFS with softupdates is faster under normal operations, as there is only one write to the volume for every write access from the application. However, in case of a crash there is the potential for a large quantity of disk blocks that will need to be scavenged, thus making the volume look like it has less free space than it actually has, plus the background fsck needs to run and fix up the allocations.

      Read the Ganger and Patt and McKusick papers linked to in my original post for more details.

      --Paul

    2. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by Bishop · · Score: 1

      Ah thank you. That makes sense.

    3. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by LuckyStarr · · Score: 1

      great explaination. thank you.

      there is one thing i don't understand. when you do a freebsd installation, why is the default root (/) filesystem not marked automatically for using softupdates?

      is there a cause for not using it under special circumstances?

      --
      Meme of the day: I browse "Disable Sigs: Checked". So should you.
    4. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by plsuh · · Score: 1

      No idea. I'm not part of the FreeBSD team, and in fact I'm more of an OpenBSD user/sysadmin. Try asking on one of the FreeBSD lists.

      --Paul

    5. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by geniusj · · Score: 2, Informative

      This decision was made due to space concerns. For users with small filesystems, it was a common problem, during an installkernel, to run out of space on / because the previously unlinked blocks from things such as /modules/ or /boot/kernel/ were not deallocated yet (deallocation can take time using softupdates, but happens eventually). The solution to this problem was to have the root filesystem default to not having softupdates. This was just due to the fact that you do not want your root filesystem filling up, and this really made it a pain for many users to upgrade. Perhaps a better decision would be to have sysinstall toggle it based on how large the filesystem is, but it's really a tough call. But anyway, there's some fairly recent history for you :)

      Cheers,
      -JD-

    6. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it is considered to be a risk, even if just a theoretical one. You need / to do anything useful, thus the FreeBSD team has considered that a theoretical corruption on SU disks are higher as it's partial asynchronous writes, which is correct.
      You should ignore this if you have a live CD or a another form of boot device such as floppy.

      It really doesn't matter, your / should only be about 128Mb and practically NEVER be written to, unless modifying /boot or installing new kernel and modules. And since it is NEVER written to, SU really doesn't matter.

      I have been using SU on / since SU was released, and never had a problem, and mind you I only use it because of consistency in fstab :-)

    7. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I forgot, if you're that anxious you should also disable WC and TQ on your ide disks, you really don't want write chaching on sensitive data and tagged queuing is a complete fuckup on most disks (stupid hardware manufacturers, buy SCSI if you want TQ!).

      And while I'm at it, let's bash Linux ;-) -- asynchronous writes are a horrible idea, thank god we in the BSD developer community never got that uneducated as to make something as horrible.

    8. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by geniusj · · Score: 1

      Mm.. does anyone remember 4.4 (or was it 4.3?), when write caching was disabled by default? That was painful.. :)

    9. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might be painful, but not as painful as it will be when you have WC and a powerfailure during a write to a massive database; thankfully real databases have good correction and verification programs.
      Sometimes an UPS will not be enough, when the entire block is out of power for 2 days because of some asshole cutting the powerline in *8 places* when drilling the ground.
      WC is good for speed, but not good when something goes wrong.

    10. Re:please explain softupdates vs. journalled fs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a toggle for this.

  34. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    Elegy For *BSD

    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.
  35. GPL? by spectatorion · · Score: 1

    I thought that one of the biggest reasons that the BSDs had not incorporated the publicly available journaling filesytems (SGI XFS and IBM JFS, and to a lesser extend ext3 and reiserfs) was that all the code was GPL, not BSD. I may be revealing my gross ignorance of kernel programming, but it was my impression that having GPLed filesystem code in a BSD-based system would not really be possible. How do the developers plan to get around this?

    1. Re:GPL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      GPL'd code can be included in any BSD project, but it must not be statically linked.

      So, this means that your boot (root) filesystem can never be JFS/XFS/ResierFS/ExtFS enabled, since the code to read your boot filesystem must be statically linked into the kernel.

    2. Re:GPL? by MechaStreisand · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, the static linking restriction applies to the LGPL, not the GPL. The restriction in this case is that it can't be compiled in the kernel with the normal distribution, but they can include the source if they want, and you can compile your own kernel with any GPLed software linked in it.

      --
      Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
    3. Re:GPL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You've actually got it backwards. The difference between the GPL and LGPL is that the LGPL does *not* include the linking restriction. It was originally called the 'Library GPL' (now 'Lesser GPL'), and was designed to allow libraries under a GPL-like licence to be linked to code under other licences.

      Incidentally, Richard Stallman explains on the FSF web site that the idea behind the LGPL is to get programmers hooked on GNU/LGPL libraries, then switch to the full GPL to pull the rug out from under them and force them to either use the GPL for their larger works or go to the considerable trouble of either transitioning to alternative libraries or writing their own. The name change reflects Stallman's belief the GPL is now widespread enough that that it's no longer necessary to encourage libraries to be licensed under the LGPL instead of the full GPL.

  36. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official; Netcraft is confirming: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  37. JFS on Linux by Nickus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I recently tested JFS on a 2TB raid. In two days I got corruption in the filesystem and I was forced to switch back to ext3. This was with the JFS shipped with RH8.
    This doesn't mean anything except I won't touch JFS in a long time. When you need machines in production use you really want to be sure about the filesystems. Too bad the customer wouldn't go with FreeBSD.

    1. Re:JFS on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in other words, its a flying leap ahead of anything on BSD right now already.

    2. Re:JFS on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Too bad the customer wouldn't go with FreeBSD."

      I think FreeBSD is lucky NOT to have them as customers ;*)

    3. Re:JFS on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The version of JFS that RedHat ships is a hack based on an old release of JFS. I suspect RH has a case of ego and not invented here. They don't hilight or make it easy to install JFS, they don't provide anywhere near the latest code. I don't trust RH's version of JFS and I don't trust their motives for anything they do.
      I have used IBM's suplied JFS code on a half a dozen production servers for over a year. Prior to that I tortured it in a similar fashion to an earlier poster, heavy read writes to the fs and pull the hotswap drive and powering off the server. No data loss, no corruption, it just works.

  38. BSD is Dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling
    bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD
    market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of
    all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states
    that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've
    known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by
    failing dead last
    in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to
    be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's
    future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't
    be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very
    bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red
    ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having
    lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time
    FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point
    more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's
    keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there
    are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of
    OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are
    about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume
    of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put
    FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 =
    36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.


    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out
    of business
    and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI
    is also dead
    , its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major
    surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and
    its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will
    be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle
    could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.


    Fact: *BSD is dying

  39. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    An Elegy For *BSD

    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.
  40. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is extremely sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  41. Re:UFS2, XFS, JFS, Vinum, FreeBSD, JunOS, everythi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    The Elegy For *BSD

    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.
  42. So you prefer more restrictive licenses by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    GPL, for better or worse IS more restrictive then BSDL.

    GPL - Call it a virus if you like, or just 'good intent' but it is more restrictive, and *does* hamper commercial usage, even if you don't want to admit it or not.

    They do both have their place, but don't be going all out globally thanking your god for GPLized code instead of BSDized...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  43. Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some people prefer that the filesystem keep data integrity. Certainly not all applications can use database backends.

  44. Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Though BSD guys may say otherwise). The data will not be completely protected. Either files may have zero-ed out portions, or files may have uninitialized data. There is no way to get 100% data safety with soft updates.

    That isn't to say that it matters for most people. See a post above which says you should use a database if you care about data integrity. I personally wish that there was an option to do data journalling too...

    1. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're interested in a file system that supports data journalling (or logging), the 4.4BSD LFS has actually been revived in NetBSD, but it's still experimental.

  45. Developer lashes out: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The End of FreeBSD

    [Note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

    To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

    To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

    To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

    Future

    I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

    However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

    You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

    = Mike

    --

    To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
  46. what about dualfs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://ditec.um.es/~piernas/dualfs/

  47. *BSD is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers.Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

    1. Re:*BSD is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
      It is official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers.Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

      FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

      Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

      OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

      Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

    2. Re:*BSD is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fucking newbie! Shut-up and go sit in the corner!

  48. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Elegy For *BSD

    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.

  49. Developer lashes out: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The End of FreeBSD

    [N.B.: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

    To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

    To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

    To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

    Future

    I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

    However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

    You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

    = Mike

    --

    To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
  50. Developer laughs out: What Killed Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Endless, moronic, tedious, unfunny posts containing mind-numbing drivle from people who in their heart of hearts wish they had enough intellect do actually come up with a good zinger instead of posting the same tired old crap.

  51. Hmm by cstubbs · · Score: 1

    Oooo, FreeBSD with a decent filesystem finally, after how long ?

    Maybe it will finally be good for something other than routing the odd piece of network traffic about the place.

  52. *BSD is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a mere fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming close on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  53. soft updates? by RLiegh · · Score: 0

    Hasn't soft updates been proven "good enough" as far as data integrity goes, and slightly better performance-wise? If that's the case, shouldn't we (we=*bsd) be focusing on breaking new ground instead of trying to play catch-up with linux?

  54. I thought Greg Lemis did the JFS port to linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Grog did the port to linux for IBM, as a core member, we has he not proposed the idea to port to FreeBSD?

  55. LFS by britt · · Score: 1

    LFS (originally by Ousterhout, ported to 4.4BSD by Seltzer) writes everything in a log. Just write as much as possible in one long stripe to the disk (up to a meg in the initial designs.) This means blocks of data move each time they are updated, which means you always write new inodes with each data write which point to the old unchanged blocks, and the new changed blocks.

    Obviously once you hit the end of the disk, you have to wrap back around, and write some more, but where?

    LFS had a seperate backgroup process that went around and finds all the, now unneeded, old data blocks that have been rewritten somewhere else and cleans them up. This is called the cleaner. Once the cleaner has found more space you get to write there.

    The main positive point of the LFS design was very good write performance due to the lack of seeking needed to put little bits of data all over the disk.

    The main downside to LFS was the cleaner itself, which was costly to run.

    Margo Seltzer and Trevor Blackwell did some more work with the cleaner in this paper that shows that with the right timing you can get the cleaner to run efficiently.

    I'm not aware of this work having been implemented (at least not as of 2000 which I stopped working on it on BSDI where Margo had been keeping LFS)

    A good description can be found in the original papers, and the Pink 4.4 BSD book by McKusick, Bostic, Karels, and Quaterman.

    Britt

    --
    --Britt
  56. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the Elegy For *BSD

    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.