Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD 4.8 Released

Dan writes "FreeBSD's Murray Stokely announces the long awaited availability of FreeBSD 4.8, the latest FreeBSD-stable release, which has dealt with known security issues, and added initial support for Firewire, HyperThreading, and other new hardware technologies. Murray says that the new release is also the result of conservative updates to a number of software programs in the FreeBSD base system, see FreeBSD 4.8 release notes for more information."

7 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. Newbie question by ichthus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I just decided to try FreeBSD a few days ago. I downloaded it, and the name of the file is 5.0-RELEASE-i386-disc1.iso. I thought (from the file name) that this was v5.0. Am I wrong? Is 4.8 really the latest?

    --
    sig: sauer
  2. BitTorrent? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anyone going to be "torrenting" this one?

    I've been thinking of trying FreeBSD, and I definately will grab it if it's torrented. :)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  3. Re:STOP!! by jhines · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is silly, all you need is the floppy image, and MFS disk image, and then it will fetch the rest over the net.

    Why DL an ISO image, when you can be up and running in the time that takes?

  4. Re:STOP!! by Daimaou · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because I, for one, do not have any floppy drives in my machines.

  5. Re:Wondering about those P IIs by elemur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This probably falls into the "whatever" camp.. I don't keep that close of a watch on hardware, and don't remember what processor I have in the server beside my desk off hand... It may have been Pentium Pro's or Pentium I's for all I know off the top of my head.

    The main point is that FreeBSD is stable and fast, and has been for quite a while.

  6. Re:Hmmmm... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How long has Mac OS supported Firewire? 15 years or something like that?
    Not 15 years, since the tech's not that old. Considering Apple invented the technology, it's reasonable that they had an implementation fairly quickly. FireWire is actually an Apple trademark, the generic term is IEEE1394.

  7. Re:What about.. by MrChuck · · Score: 2, Insightful
    When I first got a Motif "hello world" program (open a window with hello world in it), I was stunned.
    about 3 pages of muck.

    Motif failed. It never caught on. Dare I say it helped windows get the desktops.

    I view KDE (based on QT which has both GPL or "pay us" licenses if you want proprietary) and Gnome as the answer by kids who grew up with GUIs (I grew up with vt52s and vt100s) who perhaps thought: Hey, unix doesn't have to suck to use.

    I've run huge networks on Motif desktops and it was a bitch. Tools weren't there, programs were impossible to write. Hell, TK (with tcl or perl) were a godsend to slap up a quick X gui thing at t he time.

    OSF gave us the now dominant (*cough*) counter to Sun+ATT's SysVr4 and Motif. And few higher end widgets and no design dictates such as "Every App Shall Have a File Menu Item and Open/Save/Save as/Quit as Options".

    No, in this program, you type q in the window, in that one you hit something else. It's like DOS 3.3 (Lotus 123: "/qyy", WordPerf: "[F7]y", dbase: .quity"

    That motif came up as (1) proprietary (open motif is too little too late) and (2) during the Lotus/Apple look and feel lawsuits to make up for their lack of innovation make them an interesting footnote in the history of Unix.

    Perhaps the X developers (1987 or so) made MISTAKES and KDE and GNOME manage to recover from them nicely. QT is both programmable, usable and popular. Motif was close to unprogrammable, could be usable if you did lots of work - hardly innate, and was popular as the only thing out there.

    The replacement of CDE (Commitee designed environment) with GNOME by vendors is just another brad in the coffin of motif and XWindows-classic. For FreeBSD users, KDE/Gnome are not part of the OS. They are a port that lives on TOP of the OS. In BSD, we don't shove every damn addon into /usr/bin/. We do generally have a man page for about every file on the system. (openbsd is anal about it, netbsd is pretty good, freebsd is good; but I use redhat and find something like 5 man pages and 40,000 files :).

    Oh, and I can build from source! remember source? Yeah, I don't trust joe-random "I have an RPM for you" builder on my own.