Slashdot Mirror
New Bootloader for FreeBSD
Dan writes "FreeBSD Release Engineering team's Scott Long has written a bootloader front-end script that allows one to enable/disable acpi, boot single users, etc. His primary motivation was to allow users to easily disable ACPI, since so many problems are popping up these days with it. He is hoping to have this be on at least the i386 bootcd for FreeBSD 5.1 scheduled for release June 2nd, and is looking for feedback."
Heh, great research. He's written a "bootloader front-end script that allows one to enable/disable acpi". Not a boot loader.
He says later that "[if] the script cannot start, it might leave your loader unable to load the kernel".
For people interested in actual boot loaders, GRUB is looking for people to work on the BSD loading code (it works but needs some updating).
Ciaran O'Riordan
Expert in software patents or patent law? Contribute to the ESP wiki!
You are one seriously dedicated troll...
It's not a new boot loader. It's a new interactive script that runs on the existing boot loader. The FICL (Forth-Inspired Command Language) based loader has always allowed you to do things like this. It's a nice addition anyway, although I'll probably disable it on my machine if it gets committed.
& afaik, scripts don't get bored
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Wow, pretty clouds.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Send patches or shut the fuck up.
Well, you can always dream. That's a prerogative of total losers.
Does this new boot loader finally allows to install FreeBSD on an extended dos partition ?
I don't understand why BSD never solved that issue. This is a serious showstopper for people who want to try FreeBSD and whoose hard disk already has other operating systems. I really don't want to backup and reinstall every partition of my hard disk just to see what FreeBSD 5 looks like.
{{.sig}}
Brett; it's people like you that made it clear to me that I was better off working elsewhere. You've been, at best, a pimple on the backside of the Project, so I can't say it's a surprise that you're still acting like this.
I really, really hate it when they post those slashdot bsd articles with links to bsdforums. We do not need this useless layer of indirection. Bsdforums do not have any ifnormation, just a link to the mailing list archive post. If I wanted to read basforums I would. I read slashdot and want a pointer to content, not to a place which has link to the content. This is breeding carma whores.
I passed the Turing test.
I'm not too clear on what does this do. My CURRENT is a couple of weeks old and I can just do unset load_acpi and it won't load it. The bigger problem is that boot process just hangs if I don't have ACPI loaded.
I passed the Turing test.
Almost everything in ACPI is transparent, until it does not work. That is usually when you as a user will know there is something not working properly.
Maybe more effort on diagnosis tools, rather than a script to turn it off, is needed.
First, to disclose, I'm a linux user (Hey! stop throwing things!) though I'm thinking of trying some *BSD flavor. I used to use LILO, it really sucks (I'm sure you guys are really going to argue that one, huh?), so I tried GRUB. It doesn't.
Now, as some pundits have said, GRUB does sort of render your box a tad inoperable if you remove the HDD or partition that contains GRUB. Now, that's not so fun, but it would screw you the same if you removed the HDD with the MBR you're booting from, even if you use a different loader, and that's a similar issue. And really, reinstalling grub on the new HDD isn't hard either assuming you're not swapping drives every day (at which point it might become tedious). So I don't think GRUB's immobilizing one of your drives is a big deal.
I like a few things about GRUB. First, it has no cylinder issues or boot partition size issues like some boot loaders (ahem: LILO!). Also, you don't have to reinstall the loader when you make a configuration change, which is nice if you're screwing with things. Changing the config file is sufficient. Configuration is pretty simple too. It just seems to have a good clean implementation of whatever you'd need to do - kind of like the opposite of sendmail, that's the best way I can put it.
Now, don't get me wrong - I don't LIKE that I like GRUB, as I also tend to avoid GNU software whenever possible (if not GPL software), simply because I consider Stallman to be an annoying turd. But all in all, I think GRUB's a pretty nice bootloader, especially for us poor linux hacks who get tired of mucking around with LILO.
Admittedly, I'm not the best person to be comparing GRUB to BSD bootloaders, but no one else seems to be sticking up for it at all. ;)
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
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
[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
Because I only have one OS and don't reboot it, you, insensitive clod!
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.