Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD 5.1 beta2 Now Available

Dan writes "FreeBSD Release Engineering Team's Scott Long has uploaded the 5.1 i386 Beta2 release of FreeBSD. He will be uploading the alpha release, work is under way to get a beta2 for sparc64 and pc98. Downloads for i386 are available here."

32 comments

  1. Of course... by Dimwit · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you wanted to be nice to those folks at the FreeBSD project, you could always use a mirror.

    In fact, in the future it might not be a bad idea to have Slashdot only link to freebsdmirrors.org. I know that the FreeBSD people have gotten pissed in the past about that...

    --
    ...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
    1. Re:Of course... by coughfeeman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um, I thought this was exactly what bitTorrent was for, as opposed to the animatrix series (which actually was fed faster by the originating servers).

    2. Re:Of course... by cpeterso · · Score: 0, Funny


      I thought FreeBSD liked to brag about how bad ass FreeBSD was on cdrom.com, the "busiest FTP server in the world." If they're serious about testing FreeBSD 5.1, their servers should be running FreeBSD 5.1 Beta 2 right now.

    3. Re:Of course... by Piquan · · Score: 1

      Is there a way to originate bittorrent from Unix? It looked like you needed Windows, and those of us serious enough about FreeBSD to care may not have Windows!

    4. Re:Of course... by edhall · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just because the server can handle the load doesn't mean that its network connection has the bandwidth. The OS is often irrelevent.

      In fact, in many cases of "slashdotting" the servers (whatever they're running) do fine, but the network "pipe" isn't big enough. There's a bit of a positive feed back loop as well, since the tiny bandwidth available for any given connection makes it slower, and thus take longer, and thus increase the number of simultaneous connections the server has to handle. The latter can be hell on database backends (a common failure mode when DB-driven sites are overloaded) and on a poorly-configured server can run it out of system resources as well.

      As for FreeBSD 5.1-BETA2, I'm sure it could handle the load, but it's not going to be as stable as FreeBSD 4.8, and the FreeBSD folks will freely admit as much. That's why it's "BETA," and it's also why the 5.x branch most likely won't be labeled "STABLE" until 5.2. Until then, the place to test it is as a member of a server farm, where if it does happen to have trouble the load will immediately be taken over by other machines. It really isn't appropriate to use beta software as a stand-alone FTP server. That doesn't mean that people won't try (just like there are servers out there running Linux 2.5). But it would be irresponsible to do this for any server that is mission-critical.

      -Ed
    5. Re:Of course... by eht · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the original client is python based and could be run under pretty much anything, freebsd even has it in their ports

    6. Re:Of course... by essdodson · · Score: 1

      FreeBSD 5.1 is not, and will not be production quality. Stick with 4.x for production machines for another 6 months or more.

      --
      scott
    7. Re:Of course... by MavEtJu · · Score: 1

      That's why it's "BETA," and it's also why the 5.x branch most likely won't be labeled "STABLE" until 5.2.

      Not completely true. It's called beta because it are the test-CD images for the 5.1 release.

      --
      bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
    8. Re:Of course... by edhall · · Score: 1
      Not completely true. It's called beta because it are the test-CD images for the 5.1 release.

      No; see the schedule. You're thinking of 5.1-RC1 (the "release candidate").

      -Ed
    9. Re:Of course... by MavEtJu · · Score: 1

      Aha, you're right. But still it's not beta because it's not yet -STABLE, it's because it's not -RELEASE.

      --
      bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
  2. Like Anyone Gives a Fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll



    LOL!

  3. e.printStackTrace(); by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    exception occured in
    slashdot.submitbutton... line 1

  4. Anatomy of failure: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    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'

  5. *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

  6. Heh all of *BSD is alpha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Tehy only tell you it is beta to get ya to download it ;)

    *BSD isn't dead - it isn't even out of nappies..

    P.S. I'm still waiting for PS/2 keyboard support

    1. Re:Heh all of *BSD is alpha by dadragon · · Score: 1

      P.S. I'm still waiting for PS/2 keyboard support

      That's what happens when you don't upgrade past 0.01.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
  7. 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.

  8. Most excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Cool. Does that mean I can download my warezfaster?

  9. Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    FUCK SCOTT LONG AND FUCK BILL FUMEROLA

    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  10. tag ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using cvsup, I suppose the tag should be RELENG_5_1. However, using this tag it just removes the contents of my /usr/src folder. It's an alpha machine, but that should not matter, I suppose.

    So hasn't it been tagged yet or what am I doing wrong ?

    1. Re:tag ? by stefanb · · Score: 3, Informative
      Using cvsup, I suppose the tag should be RELENG_5_1. However, using this tag it just removes the contents of my /usr/src folder.
      There is no such branch; snapshots are not branched. Nor are they tagged.

      Until -stable will be split off around 5.2 release, it's still HEAD, or for the purpose of cvsup, tag=.

    2. Re:tag ? by Groganz · · Score: 3, Informative
      Using cvsup, I suppose the tag should be RELENG_5_1. However, using this tag it just removes the contents of my /usr/src folder.

      There is no such branch; snapshots are not branched. Nor are they tagged.

      Until -stable will be split off around 5.2 release, it's still HEAD, or for the purpose of cvsup, tag=.

      There is already a RELENG_5_0 for 5.0-RELEASE patches. There will be a RELENG_5_1 branch created around the end of the month.

      5.1 Release Process

  11. Extended partitions by chrysalis · · Score: 1

    Is there any way to install FreeBSD on an extended DOS partition ? I've never been able to install FreeBSD 5 on my workstation because of this limitation.

    --
    {{.sig}}
    1. Re:Extended partitions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      type RIP at the command prompt.

    2. Re:Extended partitions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Type "dontknowwhatyouretalkingabout" at the command prompt.

    3. Re:Extended partitions by Arandir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's no way that I know of. Most operating systems cannot boot from anything but a primary partition, with Linux being the only exception that I know of. Slices are the BSD version of logical partitions, and from what I understand, they predate Microsoft's extended/logical partition scheme. BSD can access DOS logical partitions just fine, but it can't boot from them.

      There is a workaround though. Convert that logical partition to a primary partition. This will probably involve some shuffling around, so get a good repartitioner. Once you have a free primary partition, install away.

      Or do what I do, and use a separate harddrive. At one time this was prohibitive, but drives are so cheap now that it's the easy and simple solution.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  12. Anatomy of failure: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant
    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 w

  13. Not necessary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    You cannot kill the BSD project by slashdotting - it's already dead.

  14. Torrent for MiniDist ISO (please mod up) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
  15. 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.

  16. Developer rues aftermath: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    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

  17. Insider's scoop: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    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 go