FreeBSD 5.1 Released

LogicX writes "FreeBSD 5.1 is now available. Mirrors and press release are at FreeBSD.org. Enjoy." Here are the release notes for this new version. Update: 06/09 18:15 GMT by S : Here's a BitTorrent link at scarywater.net, and another BitTorrent link from the original poster.

Comments

And still no Java

[kwerle]

I am so bummed. I really was looking forward to a release that included Java "out of the box."

Re:And still no Java

[Zenin]

Not that I'm against Java, but if you want Java included "out of the box" I'm afraid you understand neither FreeBSD's design or the fundamental issues of working with Java (on any platform).

Arguably Perl has a stronger basis for being in the base system, and even it was been taken out now.

Re:And still no Java

[Anonymous Coward]

You could always Switch to OS X. I hear it is a Free BSD based OS that has Java built-in.

Re:And still no Java

[dildatron]

Java is so easy to install, why don't you just install it yourself? FreeBSD is kind of a minimalist system, that you can customize how you want it. It's not a KitchenSink Distro.

Re:And still no Java

[d'fim]

What would really be cool is for native Java to be included as one of the packages in the disc-1 ISO.

Re:And still no Java

[Everlone]

I don't think Perl is out of the default install (I haven't done a fresh install for a while) but it was taken out of the base system ages ago.

For most people it probably won't cause a problem.

Re:And still no Java

[kwerle]

Java is so easy to install...

Afraid not. If I want to install it on 10 system, I have to log into 10 systems and interactively run the installer nightmare - and it takes a long time to run on each of those systems. Not to mention that you have to run the nightmare every time FreeBSD OR Java updates.

Re:And still no Java

[titzandkunt]

"Not that I'm against Java, but if you want Java included "out of the box" I'm afraid you understand neither FreeBSD's design or the fundamental issues of working with Java (on any platform)."

And yet /.ers still portray *BSD'ers as elitist assholes. How the hell can this be so?

T&K.

Re:And still no Java

[CAIMLAS]

I'd like to bring to your oblivious attention that FreeBSD (nor OpenBSD, etc) is not a distro at all, but in fact, a BSD variant.

So how would you know anything about how easy anything is on *BSD, exactly? You obviously don't use it.

Re:And still no Java

[dcs]

Err, no. You go through the annoying fetch/"I accept" process once, "make package" on one machine, put the resulting files in a ftp or web server, and then pkg_add from each machine.

Re:And still no Java

[Ded Bob]

If I want to install it on 10 system, I have to log into 10 systems and interactively run the installer nightmare - and it takes a long time to run on each of those systems.

You could compile on one box with "make package". On the other systems, run pkg_add on the built package. What do you mean by "installer nightmare"?

Not to mention that you have to run the nightmare every time FreeBSD OR Java updates.

Why do it every time you update FreBSD?

Re:And still no Java

[secolactico]

but it was taken out of the base system ages ago

Are you sure? The last fresh install I did was 4.7-stable and Perl was included. If you wanted 5.8, tho, you had to install it from the ports and "use.perl port".

Re:And still no Java

[kwerle]

Not that I'm against Java, but if you want Java included "out of the box" I'm afraid you understand neither FreeBSD's design or the fundamental issues of working with Java (on any platform).

Huh. Guess I'm a little slow.

But I do remember Java being announce "out of the box" for FBSD 4.5, and not being delivered.

Oh, and I know that Java ships on linux, Solaris, and OSX.

What are the problems with "FreeBSD's design or the fundamental issues of working with Java?"

Arguably Perl has a stronger basis for being in the base system, and even it was been taken out now.

Don't much care for that either, but at least there is a reason I can follow: what version of perl with which options do you want? There are a lot of 'em...

But there are only a few Java's(tm) that are worth mentioning: 1.1, 1.2.x, 1.3.x, 1.4.x. I'm willing to pass on 1.1. And I'm willing to ask for the latest and greatest by default.

Re:And still no Java

[Ded Bob]

I believe they wanted to take Perl out because it was simpler to manage via the ports. Any system upon which I use Perl, I use the port.

Re:And still no Java

[kwerle]

Err, no. You go through the annoying fetch/"I accept" process once, "make package" on one machine, put the resulting files in a ftp or web server, and then pkg_add from each machine.

I wonder if that's legal. Not that I care enough to look into it, mind you...

Re:And still no Java

[sander]

yeah, its a pity. hopefully in 5.2 / 5.3

Re:And still no Java

[Everlone]

It was removed from the 5.x base and kept into the 4.x base.

The changes to the few base utilities that used Perl were than MFC'ed into what became the 4.8 release.

That would probably explain why it was in 4.7 but not 4.8

Re:And still no Java

[sander]

huh? The thing that is holding Java back from being included "out of teh box" is the port being not quite ready to the extent that the java licence would let it be distributed as binaries, not some kind of vague fundametal issue you are hinting at (which is total crap). The FreeBSD foundation actualy specificly sought and got a licence to redistribute java, so there is no doubt it will be there one day.

And being available as a package always has and always will count as "out of the box" availability - just tick the box when doing the install.

Re:And still no Java

[LizardKing]

If I want to install it on 10 system, I have to log into 10 systems and interactively run the installer

Or adopt a more sophisticated approach. Have a reasonably well specced machine which has all the extra toys installed under /usr/local. Then get all your other machines to NFS mount that directory as their on /usr/local. This means upgrades only occur on one machine, and the others can be locked down as your users don't need to install anything locally.

Chris

Re:And still no Java

[phoenix_rizzen]

It's legal as long as you are the only one with access to it. You are not providing it for distribution, you are just installing it on multiple systems.

The current license from SUN prevents distributing the binaries to others. IOW, each person that wants to use it must build their own copy. Since you are the only one using it, there's no issues with you creating binaries for installation on the other systems you are using.

Re:And still no Java

[tigga]

I believe they wanted to take Perl out because it was simpler to manage via the ports.

The main problem was fact that full Perl was quite bloated. Any 'limited' Perl install was then not official Perl... And yes, it was not easily manageable.

Re:And still no Java

[ocelotbob]

Yeah, but OS X requires an ugly dongle built around a 32 bit processor when the modern computing world has access to 64 bit machines. Lemme know when OS X'll run on my UltraSparc, okay?

Besides, OS X is built around a BSD, but it sure as hell isn't FreeBSD. There are a hell of a lot of differences between the two systems. If anything, OS X is little more than OpenStep 5 with an overweight windowing system.

Re:And still no Java

[jo42]

You need to lobby Sun to make this happen. Check out Sun's licensing for "out of the box" Java distribution. Or, you might want to dig up a local FreeBSD jock that has already built 1.4.1 on FreeBSD and turned it into a "tar -x -f j2sdk-1_4_1_p3-bsd-i586.tgz" command...

Re:And still no Java

[Zenin]

Don't much care for that either, but at least there is a reason I can follow: what version of perl with which options do you want? There are a lot of 'em...

Well, the real reasons were other then this for most really. Almost no one needs non-default perl build options (I was one of those that did, but I'm a "freak" as described by my friends). Perl has a very clean dynamic loader system as well as sane package versioning. In contrast, Java has no package versioning whatsoever and AFAIK no plans to add it, sadly. I'm thinking of something at least equal to Perl's:

use My::Class 2.3; # Compile time error if My::Class isn't version 2.3 or better.

Ditto:
use 5.006; # I need Perl v5.006 or better

Simple, but highly effective. In the Java world to maintain any sanity I must keep a copy of each 3rd party package jar per application, even if they are all "identical". Nevermind the Java world rarely even puts version numbers in their .jar file names.

But there are only a few Java's(tm) that are worth mentioning: 1.1, 1.2.x, 1.3.x, 1.4.x. I'm willing to pass on 1.1. And I'm willing to ask for the latest and greatest by default.

Java tends to have pretty serious issues wrt jre/lib versioning (worse still that the Java world collectively doesn't give a damn). I could rant for ages about the broken "deprecation" design and such, but in short if you are running anything critical (basically, anything) on Java you'd do yourself a huge favor and install a JRE per-application as well as any/all 3rd party packages, completely ignoring whatever may or may not be installed in the base system. I say this from the perspective of a professional SCM; Java has one of the most unstable and problematic runtimes ever created. I personally wouldn't really care if Java was in the "base" system or not. Most of what I manage is on Solaris as it is now and we ignore /bin/java completely as well for our WebLogic servers. It wouldn't be any different on FreeBSD. At least with Perl on FreeBSD the only reason I ever built my own was to enable debugging options; All apps could reliably be said to run on the base install.

Maybe one day Java code will be able to do:

import java 1.4.1.03; // Must be Java 1.4.1 / 03 or better
import com.whatever.* 3.4;
import com.something.Barney 2.9;

But I'm not going to hold my breath.

Re:And still no Java

[r7]

• "Not that I'm against Java, but if you want Java included "out of the box" I'm afraid you understand neither FreeBSD's design or the fundamental issues of working with Java (on any platform)."

  And yet /.ers still portray *BSD'ers as elitist assholes. How the hell can this be so?

Disappointing this off-topic flame was scored 2 'insightful'. Reflects the bias and lack of professionalism on the part of many reviewers.

What the poster and reviewers probably aren't aware of is how little effort it takes to add the latest Perl via FreeBSD's ports: 1) cd /usr/ports/perl5, 2) make install. Even that is only necessary if Perl wasn't selected during system installation.

r7

Re:And still no Java

[Zenin]

Another, similar option but which removes the problems of high-use NFS links, is to use one "build/test" machine and use it to target installs via NFS to the /usr/local of your "client" machines.

If you have a huge number of machines to update, it's pretty simple to script such port upgrades either using "make install LOCALBASE=/mnt/nfs_other_usr_local", or pkg_add, or rsync. Portupgrade might likely have some tricks as well, haven't tried it myself yet. The point is, there are a dozen ways to handle mass-installs/upgrades cleanly and reliably. I would not however, recommend live network (NFS or whatever) /usr/local for a large install base for any OS, be it FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris, Windows, whatever. Diskspace is a hell of a lot cheaper/faster then running a fast enough network to deal with a single app install network mount not to mention the lovely "single point of failure" issues also associated.

Re:And still no Java

[TheCrazyFinn]

Ever heard of the PowerPC 970? There's a reason that OS X 10.3 (Panther) is going to be 64bit native.

Coming this summer.

And it'll eat your UltraSparc for lunch, being a Power4 core.

Re:And still no Java

[Jordy]

Repeat after me:

"OS X is not a *BSD-based OS. I will no longer refer to OS X as a *BSD-based OS."

Sure, there was some FreeBSD code pulled into OS X and quite a few of the utils themselves are the same as those in FreeBSD, but the kernel itself is in no way derived from *BSD. It is mach-based with a BSD personality tacked on.

Re:And still no Java

[ocelotbob]

Yeah, you've got to settle on having 64 bit support Real Soon Now. Meanwhile, I've got several 64 bit processors available right now to choose from: Opteron, which should provide a comparable bang for the buck as Apple's offering, the UltraSparc if I want insane scalability, the Alpha for if I want to run the insanely reliable VMS, the Itanium which looks to take over for the Alpha in the midrange datacenter department, or the MIPS line which is IMO one of the cleanest proc designs ever. All of which run unix today, and except for the MIPS, all of which run FreeBSD. I'd even run FreeBSD on the 970, seeing as how the mach-based core of OS X will hamper the performance of the 970 to a noticable degree. Microkernels are an interesting educational toy, but they just don't make sense in the real world.

Re:And still no Java

[merdark]

And yet /.ers still portray *BSD'ers as elitist assholes. How the hell can this be so?

And yet another linux fan gets moderated to funny making fun of another community! Wow! I am so surprised!

Oops, I forgot to swear in my post. Now I'll never be moderated as funny. Darn.

Re:And still no Java

[TheCrazyFinn]

I gotta agree on the MicroKernal part. I suspect it was done that way simply because they could re-use so much code (From mkLinux and NeXT/Openstep).

As to Real Soon now, well, I suspect I'll be seeing 64 bit Mac's before AMD x86-64 Desktops, since AMD pushed back that launch(Athlon 64). Apple's reportedly announcing the G5 or whatever it's actually going to be called, at the end of the month, likely with availability in August or early September.

Re:And still no Java

[ocelotbob]

Fuck consumer-grade hardware. The vast majority of my hardware is workstation-grade hardware. It's better quality and is better able to keep running the current software longer than consumer-level hardware. Besides, I doubt you're going to see the G5 for any cheaper than the current price of the Opteron anyways.

Re:And still no Java

[kwerle]

[stuff about how one java is not another java and that you should probably just install one JVM/app deleted]

Funny, we deploy mission critical apps on 2 platforms and develop on a 3rd, and we never have any of the problems you mentioned - with the occasional problem of a library jar being out of date.

But I could say the same of any number of "C" programs I've installed binaries of.

Re:And still no Java

[titzandkunt]

"And yet another linux fan gets moderated to funny making fun of another community! Wow! I am so surprised!"

Who mentioned Linux?.

You have the exasperating and exasperated tone of a proselytising atheist who's just been told that atheisim is a religion, just one that worships the absence of God. For "God and atheisim" read "Linux and BSD".

"Oops, I forgot to swear in my post. Now I'll never be moderated as funny. Darn."

Nope, you'll never be modded "Funny" for far more fundamental reasons than that.

T&K.

Re:And still no Java

[titzandkunt]

"Disappointing this off-topic flame was scored 2 'insightful'. Reflects the bias and lack of professionalism on the part of many reviewers."

Not a flame, just a perfectly valid response to the statement "I'm afraid you understand neither FreeBSD's design or the fundamental issues of working with Java (on any platform)." The guy could have said something about the BSD design philosophy, summarised the problems of Java on BSD or any platform, but no, "you just don't understand". Dismissive and elitist.

BTW, expecting professionalism on the part of /. reviewers is fairly naive: The pay is very poor.

"What the poster and reviewers probably aren't aware of is how little effort it takes to add the latest Perl via FreeBSD's ports: 1) cd /usr/ports/perl5, 2) make install. Even that is only necessary if Perl wasn't selected during system installation."

Great news! But wtf has this got to do with Java?

T&K.

Re:And still no Java

[Billly Gates]

That has to due with the sun EULA. Same is true for linux distro's. By default they will not install sun's java because Sun requires the user to click on an EULA.

Remember Java is not free for corporations. This is similiar to the nvidia licensing thing.

You can go to java.sun.com and download the FreeBSD jdk if you wish.

Re:And still no Java

[Billly Gates]

Ya but you need to buy a whole new computer to run it. Not to mention MacOSX is based on Mach and not FreeBSD. Only the userland utilities have been ported. ..and yes Java support is included within FreeBSD. Like Nvidia, Sun requires stupid licensing for all the users so the FreeBSD can not include it by default. You need to go to java.sun.com and click on a EULA and download it seperately. No different then installing the nvidia drivers.

Re:And still no Java

[bovinewasteproduct]

Don't much care for that either, but at least there is a reason I can follow: what version of perl with which options do you want? There are a lot of 'em...

Huh? Last time I checked there is only one stable perl and thats been 5.8.0 for a long time (maybe up to 5.8.1). Why install anything else?

BWP

Re:And still no Java

[titzandkunt]

" I guess the better way to say it is "Its in disagreement with FreeBSD's design and there are issues with working with Java (on any platform)".

Much better. I'm still (genuinely) interested to know how it disagrees with the *BSD way of doing things...

Peace back to yer, AC.

T&K.

Re:And still no Java

[kwerle]

Huh? Last time I checked there is only one stable perl and thats been 5.8.0 for a long time (maybe up to 5.8.1). Why install anything else?

Let's see. I'm using 3ish machines at the moment:

This is perl, v5.6.0 built for darwin
This is perl, v5.6.1 built for IP32-irix
This is perl, version 5.005_03 built for i386-freebsd

And those are only the version that are default on the path. As to why those particular versions are installed... I dunno. Some admin[s] seem to disagree with your view of what's needed, though.

Re:And still no Java

[TheRaven64]

The guy could have said something about the BSD design philosophy, summarised the problems of Java on BSD or any platform, but no, "you just don't understand". Dismissive and elitist.

Allow me to (try to) redeem my fellow FreeBSD users in your eyes. The reason Java is not included in the base install is that the base install is intended to be just that; a minimal set of closely linked packages that are required to make the system work. This includes the kernel, a shell, things like ls, rm etc and a few other bits of userspace. Everything else is (or should be) in the ports / packages collection.

It is perfectly possible to run a system run a happy system without Java. In fact, I am firmly of the opinion that Java should never be compiled. Java source code (when well written) can be crystal clear to read and beautifully structured, however it has a tendency to be painfully slow when run, detracting from the attraction of the language - a problem easily solved by removing the compiler, and leaving users to gaze in awe at the code (no one actually uses software do they? Oh, they do? Hmmm. Never mind).

This minimalist philosophy allows for a very clean userspace (ever installed 5GB of Linux and then wondered if you can delete some of it?) and enables the external packages to be maintained externally of the development of the official releases. It also allows you to do a complete install of the system from

A few notes about the FreeBSD package management system:

FreeBSD allows you to install programs from source (ports) or binary (packages). The terms 'port' and 'package' are often used interchangably, and either is used as a generic term for both, which can be confusing. The two systems are very similat, and can be mixed (I install more or less everything from ports, but installed the binary package of OpenOffice, since I didn't want to wait 2 days before using it...). In fact, you can build the binary packages from the ports, if you so choose. The ports collection is basically a hierarchy of directorys containing Makefiles, which contain instructions about where to fetch the source from, how to modify it to work on FreeBSD (if required) and how to install it. The cvsup utililty can be used to keep your copy of the ports collection up to date, and an example cvsup file is provided for this purpose. I run cvsup in a cron job, which keeps me synchronised. The previous poster stated that you could install perl by doing

cd /usr/ports/perl5
make install

but this seems like effort to me. If you install the portupgrade package (which can be done as part of the system installation, or through the ports collection) then all you would have to do would be type

portinstall perl

and it will give you a list of ports with the name perl (I think this is perl 5.6.1 and perl 5.8 at the moment, but I tend to avoid perl like the plague, so I'm not sure) from which you can select the ones you want.

The Java saga is a little longer, however. Sun have very strange license agreements for distribution of Java, which basically means that you have to download the source code yourself from sun, and then run the installer, which applies FreeBSD-specific patches to it and installs. Hopefully this will be sorted out soon.

Are all FreeBSD users elitist assholes? This cartoon (drawn, I must add by someone who has never met me) would indicate so in my case... I can't speak for the rest of the community, because I have had little contact with them. I am informed that they are more likely to tell you to RTFM than Linux people, but in my experience this is bacause you are far more likely to find the answer in FreeBSD documentation (there is a lot. No, really a lot. It's also very well written and concise) that you are with Linux. If you don't believe me read the handbook, which contains the answer to every question I've ever had about FreeBSD (which I now use as my main workstation and am far more comfortable with than Linux, despite less exposure).

Re:And still no Java

[merdark]

You have the exasperating and exasperated tone of a proselytising atheist who's just been told that atheisim is a religion, just one that worships the absence of God. For "God and atheisim" read "Linux and BSD".

Ok, now this really SHOULD be moderated as funny. You totally crack me up. :)

Oh, hey, big words don't make up for swearing. ;)

Oh hell. I'll bite. Guess what? I use Linux,and BSD, and Windows XP Yes, I actually have machines with each installed.

It's clear you haven't spent much time in the BSD community. I've yet to see a RTFM, or a 'why don't you code it' comment. There may be some anti-GPL comments, but that's another issue entirely.

On the other hand, whenever a story about BSD is posted here on slashdot, there are a dozen or so jokers like you who like to bad mouth the OS and/or it's users. Tell me, how many such wise cracks get moderated up to funny if they are about Linux? It's very obvious that this is mostly a Linux centric site.

If you happen to be one of the probably less than 20% of the readers who is *not* a linux fan, then I apologize for calling you one. Regardless, it's not funny to make fun of another community, especially one you haven't spent much time in.

And don't mistake my sarcasm for making jokes about the linux community. I am critisizing it in response to an uncalled for outburst.

Re:And still no Java

[titzandkunt]

"Ok, now this really SHOULD be moderated as funny. You totally crack me up. :)

Oh, hey, big words don't make up for swearing. ;)"

I don't apologise for a bit of plain anglo-saxon talking now and again - as long as they're used judiciously, like verbal condiments, to spice up the language.

"Oh hell. I'll bite. Guess what? I use Linux,and BSD, and Windows XP Yes, I actually have machines with each installed."

Well, I use NT, 98, Solaris, and very ocasionally VMS & LynxOs. They're all usable for what they do (although I never quite got on with VMS - it always seems very verbose in comparison to the *nixes).

"It's clear you haven't spent much time in the BSD community. I've yet to see a RTFM, or a 'why don't you code it' comment. There may be some anti-GPL comments, but that's another issue entirely."

That's a fair comment. After a day at the keyboard, I'm not too interested in coding for pleasure or perusing RFC and FAQs.

I say! You haven't been perusing my profile have you? I feel dirty and violated!

"On the other hand, whenever a story about BSD is posted here on slashdot, there are a dozen or so jokers like you who like to bad mouth the OS and/or it's users. Tell me, how many such wise cracks get moderated up to funny if they are about Linux? It's very obvious that this is mostly a Linux centric site."

My original comment was a response to a comment that read, to me at least, as a very condescending "you just don't get it" type of dismissal. I haven't been slumming it in /. for very long (just check out the user# in the high 6 figures), but I'm aware the BSD gets a rap as the elitist's OS. To go ahead and make the connection was obvious...

"If you happen to be one of the probably less than 20% of the readers who is *not* a linux fan, then I apologize for calling you one..."

I don't think it's really an insult to be called a "Linux Fan" (which I ain't). "Fanboy", on the other hand: Them's fightin' words!

I use Linux, I find it useful, and IMHO, the good about Linux far, far outweighs the bad. Nothing is perfect, however.

"Regardless, it's not funny to make fun of another community, especially one you haven't spent much time in."

Hm. I thought I was just pegging a post which typified a prevailing stereotype in this community (/.).

Maybe the OP's arms were tired from slapping people's heads all day while pointing at a section in the man pages, maybe he/her was having a bad day. I doubt if a throwaway comment in this of all places broke his/her heart.

"And don't mistake my sarcasm for making jokes about the linux community. I am critisizing it in response to an uncalled for outburst."

No explanation necessary - I'm from the UK. I might not get dental hygiene, but I'm well alongside the use of sarcasm.

Best,

T&K.

Re:And still no Java

[merdark]

My original comment was a response to a comment that read, to me at least, as a very condescending "you just don't get it" type of dismissal. I haven't been slumming it in /. for very long (just check out the user# in the high 6 figures), but I'm aware the BSD gets a rap as the elitist's OS. To go ahead and make the connection was obvious...

Yes, I kind of realized this after I first posted. The 'make fun of anything but linux' attitude of the slashdot community as a whole just really gets to me sometimes. It's simply very dissapointing to read comments on a very important release of an interesting operating system and have the first five to ten highlighted comments simply making jokes about it.

I agree the response you referred to was a little insulting. Mind you, the original comment on java was also very likely only made to make fun of BSD as well.

On a side note, you may be interested to know that BSD is *very* similar to Solaris in many ways. For instance, the disk slice editor, bad or good, is almost identical to Solaris'.

Anyways, forgive my overly negative initial response. :) It was only made out of frustration with the the very vocal portion of Linux community.

p.s. VMS? It's interesting to find someone still using it. I hear it has/had some *very* intersting architectural aspects. I've only breifly played with a VMS system. Back when the 90% of people didn't yet know what the internet was.

Re:And still no Java

[merdark]

Oh bother, forgot to close the italic tag. Can't I edit slashdot comments yet?

Re:And still no Java

[titzandkunt]

Interesting to hear about the BSD/Solaris commanalities. I've got to confess that my experience of most of the OS's I use don't stretch much further than the command-line tools - not much experience under the hood so to speak. It might be more interesting to some of the guys I work with who reckon that (for some of the apps we run) the sparc + Solaris is poor value for money. They'd love to switch to, well, anything if it can run on fast commodity hardware without them having to rip the guts of the app out.

BTW, you have nothing to apologise for. You're the kind of reasonable, level-headed downright pleasant guy/gal who I should have in my friends list.

The VMS thing? It's at least 6 months since I touched it. OpenVMS on a creaky old alpha box - so old that it's intel replacement runs rings around it - kept on mainly for a few internal legacy tools. Pretty soon, none of the users will use it, while none of the IT guys dare unplug it. A bit like that lost NetWare server.

Best,

T&K.

What?! Did Slashdot get it right?

[Anonymous Coward]

And not announce the release early thereby crushing the servers as in previous releases?

Re:What?! Did Slashdot get it right?

[LogicX]

Actually if you go to the link off my name in the post
I setup a Bittorrent server with links to the ISO Image before the FTP permissions were released.
If anyone cares to try out bittorrent for this one -- go for it!

Re:What?! Did Slashdot get it right?

[BigDish]

You know, this is 100% true. I'm an RIT student (Hey LogicX) and RIT gives SHIT back to the computer community. We don't have a private OSS archive, much less a public one. RIT is one big fucking leech.

Re:What?! Did Slashdot get it right?

[krisp]

csh has a linux kernel repository =p

Re:What?! Did Slashdot get it right?

[BigDish]

What's the URL? Thanks.

you might be laughing now

[andy666]

but if SCO wins we might all be using BSD!

Re:you might be laughing now

[Anonymous Coward]

The linux hippies would just fork it and call it LinuxBSD, thus disgracing the good name of BSD.

Re:you might be laughing now

[Dark Paladin]

Well, I just got another reason for using OS X then....

Re:you might be laughing now

[quigonn]

SCO won't win. SCO is dying (no joke; at least in Old Europe).

Re:you might be laughing now

[Cro Magnon]

Wrong! It's GNU/BSD!

Re:you might be laughing now

[dcs]

No, no, no, no!!! You got it all wrong! It's *FreeBSD* who is dieing!

Sheesh, can't people get even trolls right these days?

Re:you might be laughing now

[axxackall]

but if SCO wins we might all be using BSD!

Win what? Once SCO will finish with Linux (no matter with any success or without) they will begin with BSD. Somehow I am sure their developer have already submitted Unix IP code into every BSD tree that they could get an access. So, Apple with OSX (and probably Sun with Solaris) will be next after IBM with Linux.

Seriously, how can you be sure that SCO won't do it to BSD as well?

Re:you might be laughing now

[ryanvm]

but if SCO wins we might all be using BSD!

Feh - it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a civil suit in a U.S. court to make the world stop using ANY open source software.

Re:you might be laughing now

[tigga]

Seriously, how can you be sure that SCO won't do it to BSD as well?

Because BSD (UC Berkeley and BSDi) already got sued by AT&T. The lawsuit was settled partly because UC Berkeley contrasued AT&T for the reason that AT&T included some uncredited BSD code into UNIX.

Re:you might be laughing now

[Dark Paladin]

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I was responding to the "Why you may have to switch to FreeBSD instead of Linux because of SCO" the original poster was intimating, not the "OS X is better then FreeBSD - nyah!" that I think you were picking up on.

Re:you might be laughing now

[axxackall]

The act of the lawsuit long time ago in the past between ATT and BSDi/UCB doesn't guarantee that last year SCO employee were mimiqued as non-SCO developers and contributed such code to BSD CVS.

Is there any CVS moderator who checks offical IDs about all committers? Don't tell me that CVS moderators read all signed NDAs from all past and current employment places for every committers!

Is there any procedure to check any submitted code that it is not a part of SCO IP? Don't tell me that CVS moderators are sending all submitted code to every potantial similar IP holder to approve that they dont have it already done!

Face it - every open source project, if its CVS tree is developed by anonymous commiters, potentially can be a subject of lawsuit attacks by loosers like SCO. Especially when organized in a deep shadow conspiracy by sharks like Microsoft.

BSD, PostgreSQL, Mozilla, OpenOffice - you name it. Even a big company behind cannot guarantee such check procedures.

Only GNU/FSF supported projects have more chances to survive in such attacks as paranoid check procedures is exactly what RMS is trying to do for years.

Re:you might be laughing now

[Anonymous Coward]

Awww, give him a break. After a while all /. posts/stories start to look alike...

*BSD is dying
*SCO is lying
Bill Gates got a pieing
Soundex means trouble flying
RIAA is trying
ESR is whining
Hawkings brilliance is blinding
Survival in downturn means minding
Employers are spying
Employees are skying
Google is finding
Job market is diving
Hiku is rhyming
Key to success is timing
All your base are mining
On what is the cowboy dining
India's programmers are pining
Sysadmin is grinding
Cryptography is splining
Science says dark clouds have lining
Slashdotters without girlfrieds are crying
Motherboards are frying
KDE and Gnome are tying
Hackers exploit servers due to binding
My computer so old it takes winding

Re:you might be laughing now

[essdodson]

I'm missing how this somehow has a downside to it. I fail to see the problem, well, maybe that we'll be flooded with stinky RMS knockoffs who like to shove their views down everyone else's throats... that would suck. I guess I prefer Linux be around to keep those types away from FreeBSD.

Re:you might be laughing now

[dirkx]

You'd be surprized to learn how seriously some groups in the *BSD world and for example in the Apache Software Foundation take those things. And indeed at the ASF we go through the legal paperwork to make sure that every commit is accounted for, every change monitored. Every code donation is matched with the right paperwork and grant documents. And while it is certainly true that a single 'big company' may not be able to guarantee such checks and balances - a crowd or whole ecosystem does. In a very effective way. Ultimately I think we will all find that this is what is needed to keep this "open source' world healty and viable. It is just that perhaps the FreeBSD crowd found this out earlier, due to the AT&T/Berkeley lawsuit. Dw

Re:you might be laughing now

[tigga]

Actually CVS commiters are not anonymous in any of *BSD. People became commiters because they know each other for a prolonged time as code developers.

Well, it is possible somebody submitted piece of code ripped off SCO. But it's unlikely. One reason that you have to substantially rework piece of kernel code just to allow to compile it. (The utilities are less of a problem - but they are not so important). The second reason that some developers who review code before committing it really know guts of a bunch of different Unixes. So their question would be - why it looks so SCOish? OK, third reason is that because commiters are not anonymous and person in question signed NDA and stole code - that person would be lawsuit defendant and nobody else.

Only GNU/FSF supported projects have more chances to survive in such attacks as paranoid check procedures is exactly what RMS is trying to do for years.

Does it mean RMS have a copy of SCO source and he comparing code line by line?

Re:you might be laughing now

[DashEvil]

Oh fuck, BSD might become mainstream? Where will the BSD elites run then? I say we hijack HURD.

You seem to have missed the update

[Anonymous Coward]

It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is growing

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Windows community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has risen yet again, now up to more than 30 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has gained more market share , this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is sending other OSes into complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by topping the charts in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Daemon to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a long and prosperous future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Windows Server because *BSD is growing. Things are looking very good for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to gain market share. Red ink flows from Redmond like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most loved of them all, having gained 93% more core developers. The sudden and pleasant release of the long developed 5.0 only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is growing.

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

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 70000 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 70000/5 = 14000 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 7000 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (70000+14000+7000)*4 = 364000 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the release of OSX, cool new technologies and so on, FreeBSD is expanding into more desktops than ever. FreeBSD has become more than the sum of its parts.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily gained in market share. *BSD is very powerful and its long term survival prospects are very bright. If Windows is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to improve. The progress achieved is nothing short of a miracle. For all practical purposes, *BSD is alive and kicking.

Fact: *BSD will kick your ass

Re:You seem to have missed the update

[tuffy]

There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is growing.

Sounds like FreeBSD will be hearing from SCO's lawyers any day now...

Re:You seem to have missed the update

[AKAImBatman]

> Oh c'mon. SCO would never let inconvenient things
> like "facts" get in the way of a good lawsuit.

Except that *BSD has legal grounds for instant dismissal plus a counter suit for harrasment. The only way they could get around that little snafu is to release the offending code along with proof of origin as part of the legal filing. That would kind of blow the lid off their Linux efforts, wouldn't you say?

It's a great time. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

. . .to get a subscription to one or more of the BSD's at www.bsdmall.com.

Particularly in the face of 5.x being ready for production, and OpenBSD losing DARPA funding.

Re:It's a great time. . .

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

"Particularly in the face of 5.x being ready for production, and OpenBSD losing DARPA funding."

Do you know how long OpenBSD existed before the DARPA funding? Seriously, do a little research before posting. OpnBSD was around and going strong before the DARPA funding was even mentioned and it's still going strong after the DARPA funding was pulled.

Re:Incorrect

[Rotting]

We are talking FreeBSD here.... not Linux ;)

Re:Sweeeeeet!

[Palshife]

Does it run lunix?

I don't know what lunix is, but it does run Linux.

relnotes are ./ed

[Anonymous Coward]

The release notes for FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE contain a summary of recent changes made to the FreeBSD base system on the 5-CURRENT development branch. This document lists applicable security advisories that were issued since the last release, as well as significant changes to the FreeBSD kernel and userland. Some brief remarks on upgrading are also presented.

Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 What's New
2.1 Security Advisories
2.2 Kernel Changes
2.2.1 Processor/Motherboard Support
2.2.2 Boot Loader Changes
2.2.3 Network Interface Support
2.2.4 Network Protocols
2.2.5 Disks and Storage
2.2.6 File Systems
2.2.7 PCCARD Support
2.2.8 Multimedia Support
2.3 Userland Changes
2.4 Contributed Software
2.5 Ports/Packages Collection Infrastructure
2.6 Release Engineering and Integration
2.7 Documentation
3 Upgrading from previous releases of FreeBSD

1 Introduction
This document contains the release notes for FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE on the i386 hardware platform. It describes recently added, changed, or deleted features of FreeBSD. It also provides some notes on upgrading from previous versions of FreeBSD.

This distribution of FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE is a release distribution. It can be found at ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/ or any of its mirrors. More information on obtaining this (or other) release distributions of FreeBSD can be found in the ``Obtaining FreeBSD'' appendix to the FreeBSD Handbook.

Users who are new to the 5-CURRENT series of FreeBSD releases should also read the ``Early Adopters Guide to FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE''. This document can generally be found in the same location as the release notes (either as a part of a FreeBSD distribution or on the FreeBSD Web site). It contains important information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of using FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE, as opposed to releases based on the FreeBSD 4-STABLE development branch.

All users are encouraged to consult the release errata before installing FreeBSD. The errata document is updated with ``late-breaking'' information discovered late in the release cycle or after the release. Typically, it contains information on known bugs, security advisories, and corrections to documentation. An up-to-date copy of the errata for FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE can be found on the FreeBSD Web site.

2 What's New
This section describes many of the user-visible new or changed features in FreeBSD since 5.0-RELEASE. It includes items that are unique to the 5-CURRENT branch, as well as some features that may have been recently merged to other branches (after FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE). The latter items are marked as [MERGED].

Typical release note items document recent security advisories issued after 5.0-RELEASE, new drivers or hardware support, new commands or options, major bug fixes, or contributed software upgrades. They may also list changes to major ports/packages or release engineering practices. Clearly the release notes cannot list every single change made to FreeBSD between releases; this document focuses primarily on security advisories, user-visible changes, and major architectural improvements.

2.1 Security Advisories
A remotely exploitable vulnerability in CVS has been corrected with the import of version 1.11.5. More details can be found in security advisory FreeBSD-SA-03:01. [MERGED]

A timing-based attack on OpenSSL, which could allow a very powerful attacker access to plaintext under certain circumstances, has been prevented via an upgrade to OpenSSL 0.9.7. See security advisory FreeBSD-SA-03:02 for more details. [MERGED]

The security and performance of the ``syncookies'' feature has been improved to decrease the chance of an attacker being able to spoof connections. More details are given in security advisory FreeBSD-SA-03:03. [MERGED]

Remotely-exploitable buffer overflow vulnerabilities in sendmail have been fixed by updating sendmail. For more details, see security advisory FreeBSD-SA-03:04 and FreeBSD-SA-03:07. [MERGED]

A bounds-

Re:relnotes are ./ed

[xA40D]

Forsooth methinks I spy a troll.

Daemon of goodness castout this vile cur forthwith.

Avast ye evil fiend and trouble these good people no longer.

Virtual machine

[DreadSpoon]

Which virtual machine/emulator is best for running BSD5 on a Linux host on x86?

Re:Virtual machine

[Sheetrock]

Probably VMWare if you've got it. Failing that, bochs is likely to work but very slowly (OK for trying things out though.)

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Which virtual machine/emulator is best for running BSD5 on a Linux host on x86?

FreeBSD runs in native mode on an x86. There is no need for a VM or emulator. Just install it on a drive partition and it boots and runs.

What's your goal here? Trying to slow down FreeBSD so that it doesn't make your Linux OS look bad?

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

Too bad you aren't a very smart BSD supporter. Learn to read and realize how stupid your response was.

Re:Virtual machine

[Hobart]

No, idiot. [s]he obviously wants to try out FreeBSD to see if it's worth switching to, without making the commitment of formatting their already-running system. But, you got your score5-funny. Enjoy.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

No, idiot. [s]he obviously wants to try out FreeBSD to see if it's worth switching to, without making the commitment of formatting their already-running system.

You are obviously the idiot if you don't realize that hard disks are cheap and that partitions can be resized without reformatting the entire hard disk. What kind of cheap bastard doesn't even have a spare hard disk around to try an OS on?

How the hell are you going to evaluate the speed or stability of an OS when you are running it under a virtual machine on another OS? What's next? Running Linux on a VM under Windows 98 and then declaring Linux to be slow and unstable?

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Too bad you aren't a very smart BSD supporter. Learn to read and realize how stupid your response was.

I read well (I am a published author). I read the original post and my response. My response seemed perfectly reasonable when we live in a world where 7,200rpm hard drives can be had for $64 or even less if you want to play the rebate game. Most people have a few older drives kicking around anyway, so move a data cable and a power supply cable and you can install FreeBSD on a spare drive.

Since you can evaluate hardware compatability, speed, or stability of an OS when it's running under an emulator, what would you learn by such an effort? That grep and tar work the same under FreeBSD as under Linux?

Re:Virtual machine

[Furry Ice]

Have you ever tried VMware? It only emulates a few things, but for the most part apps run at native speed. I think this is the sort of answer the person was looking for, not "just install it on it's own partition." It's much easier to do than resize partitions or install a new drive. Granted, neither of these are hard to do, but it's an awful lot of trouble to just evaluate something, especially if you're not really planning on using it.

Re:Virtual machine

[tigga]

Ah, you being a bit too aggressive.

You don't know what circumstances are.. There are a lot of reasons to try out OS in emulator. Like the need to eliminate downtime or relabeling. And not all systems have space/controller/power for additional drive...

Since you can evaluate hardware compatability, speed, or stability of an OS when it's running under an emulator, what would you learn by such an effort? That grep and tar work the same under FreeBSD as under Linux?

Some folks just want to have 'a feel' of FreeBSD. And while grep and tar the same - awk is different for example and pkg tools are something to play with.

Re:Virtual machine

[DreadSpoon]

If you're truly curious why I want to run it emulated, it's because I don't want or need a full FreeBSD machine. I just want to occasionally compile/run some software in it for porting. Even _with_ a separate hard-drive, I'd need a whole separate case, CPU, display, mobo, memory, etc. in order to avoid shutting down my entire system just to do a quick check that app XYZ still compiles and runs natively on FreeBSD.

Unless of course you'd like to forward me a couple hundred bucks to pay for a test machine. ~,^

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

If you're truly curious why I want to run it emulated, it's because I don't want or need a full FreeBSD machine.

Thanks for the reply and explanation.

I know that it doesn't solve the rebooting issue, but I have found that most modern machines can be set to boot from any of multiple drives in them. For example, I have DOS on my second drive and I use that for programming E/EE/P/ROMS/CPUs (on my chip programmer) or for flashing. You also might consider a keyboard/video/mouse switch box.

I've got too many PC sitting around here (a few laptops and five in this room alone), so I don't always have a sense of perspective when it comes to computers.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Ah, you being a bit too aggressive.

You are right -- I usually am too aggressive.

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

You don't live in the real world apparently. Lot's of people run emulators so that they can test builds on multiple operating systems without having to have another machine running. I myself have run multiple operating systems under VMware on Linux. Your experience isn't the only experience and your claims of being a published author mean nothing. The very existance of WMWare and it's success show that there is a market for emulators.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

As a *BSD user you make me sick. Get the fuck out of the OSS arena, your type isn't welcome.

Yes, my "type" is welcome. It's pussies who post anonymous tripe who are unwelcome.

Re:Virtual machine

[character sequence]

in order to avoid shutting down my entire system just to do a quick check that app XYZ still compiles and runs natively on FreeBSD.

I haven't used it, but I think the Bochs PC emulator claims to do what you want. I've only heard of it because it has recently been in the sourceforge top ten downloads list. Here's a link to it.

Re:Virtual machine

[lactose99]

Does dual booting not work for you? Linux and FreeBSD can coexist quite happily together via multiboot.

Re:Virtual machine

[TheRaven64]

Another option might be to drop Linux, and move to FreeBSD, and do your Linux builds in the Linux compatibility layer. Just a thought.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

You don't live in the real world apparently.

Why? Because I have more than one PC? You can get PCs for $200 at Walmart. Or you can build them out of spare parts. Or use an older system that you're retired from being your "main" system. If, by "the real world", you mean "an impoverished, inner-city, subsidized housing complex", then I guess I don't,

Your experience isn't the only experience

Did I claim that it was?

and your claims of being a published author mean nothing.

Being a published author is a pretty good indication that someone can read -- rather relevent since I was countering your "learn to read" comment.

The very existance of WMWare and it's success show that there is a market for emulators.

I never said that there was not a market for emulators. But emulators are normally used to enable one to use an application not available for their OS. For instance, one might run WINE so that they can run a particular Windows program, but not so that they can evaluate Windows itself.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Wow an idoit like this gets +5 on slashdot.

If an idoit could get a +5 on lowercase-s-slashdot, your post would not still be at zero as I write this.

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

/*original post
>Which virtual machine/emulator is best for running >BSD5 on a Linux host on x86?

FreeBSD runs in native mode on an x86. There is no need for a VM or emulator. Just install it on a drive partition and it boots and runs.
*/

If you can read why are you telling he person that there in no need for a VM or emulator? Are you claiming to know that the person isn't aware of FreeBSD being x86 native? It's pretty obvious that they are asking a question about running FreeBSD under Linux, not about what architecture FreeBSD runs on.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

If you can read why are you telling he person that there in no need for a VM or emulator? Are you claiming to know that the person isn't aware of FreeBSD being x86 native?

Unlike you, I don't pretend to know what random strangers on Slashdot know, don't know, or believe. For instance, I don't know if they've considered just creating a partition for it on their disc or not. I don't know if they've only heard of it in the context of it being the basis for Apple's PowerPC OS-X.

It's pretty obvious that they are asking a question about running FreeBSD under Linux, not about what architecture FreeBSD runs on.

So I volunteered information in a way that let me express my opinions on the efficacy of evaluating one OS by running it under another OS. I don't have to answer every post in the way that the writer desired. If that was how Slashdot worked, your replies to my posts would never have seen the light of day.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Yeah, what kind of poor bastard doesn't have 5 laptops and 10 spare HDDs lying around.

Apparently, the same kind of poor bastard that doesn't have any spare question marks lying around.

What kind of cheap Scot doesn't have a spare fucking helicopter in the back yard in case the roads are a bit busy.

Used Helicopter: $150,000 and up (+ maintenance)
Used 3.2gig hard drive: $9

Yeah, that's a real fair analogy.

Remember Fresh Prince?

No. I never watched that. Nor have I watched Moesha, The Hughleys, Roc, or Family Matters. They are aimed at a different demographic than mine.

BTW I'm assuming you're female here, because, "I'm a published author," is the kind of false attempt to justify the sound of one's own whine that I usually only hear from women.

No, I am male. I've never been mistaken for a woman before. Have you ever been mistaken for a man?

P.S. When someone says "learn to read", replying "I'm a published author" is not a "justification" for anything. It's a reasonable counter to an obviously false implication.

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

Unlike you, I don't pretend to know what random strangers on Slashdot know, don't know, or believe.

Why did you respond with comments about not needing emulators then? The only logical reason for that is if you believed that they thought that FreeBSD needed to run under an emulator.


For instance, I don't know if they've considered just creating a partition for it on their disc or not. I don't know if they've only heard of it in the context of it being the basis for Apple's PowerPC OS-X.


You're being disengous, they asked a specific question, you could've responed with further questions if you were unclear.


So I volunteered information in a way that let me express my opinions on the efficacy of evaluating one OS by running it under another OS. I don't have to answer every post in the way that the writer desired. If that was how Slashdot worked, your replies to my posts would never have seen the light of day.

Your information didn't answer the question and was highly irrelevant.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Why did you respond with comments about not needing emulators then?

So I could comment on how silly it was to evaluate an OS under an emulator.

You're being disengous[sic], they asked a specific question, you could've[sic] responed[sic] with further questions if you were unclear.

Why? I had points to make and their question gave me the opportunity to do so.

Your information didn't answer the question and was highly irrelevant.

I pointed out that FreeBSD could just be put on a partition and that running it emulated would result in it being slow.

So what have your postings contributed towards this discussion? Just what insightful comments have you made about FreeBSD in this thread?

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Wow, a grammar Nazi's retort, on Slashdot! If in doubt, avoid the argument, attack the grammar, I guess.

I prefer to do both.

Reading a few style guides, oh Published One, will reveal differing opinions on what punctuation to use at the end of rhetorical questions.

Read a reputable style guide like The Associated Press Stylebook or, if you prefer an online reference on this issue, click here. You will find that such sources agree that it is not proper to end a rhetorical question with a period. Just because the style guide for the Appleton Shopping Gazette permits it does not mean that it is correct.

And here we have a published writer who understands neither basic punctuation, nor hyperbole.

You are getting in way over your head. Hyperbole is a figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in she ate a ton of cake. When you asked "what kind of poor bastard doesn't have 5 laptops and 10 spare HDDs lying around?", that was hyperbole. But your question "What kind of cheap Scot doesn't have a spare fucking helicopter...?" was drawing an analogy between having a spare hard drives and having a helicopter. Given how insanely cheap under-10GB hard drives have become, it was an absurd and flawed analogy, but it was an analogy nonetheless.

I damn well hope not, but I guess a criticism of women must mean I'm male, right? Wrong.

Gee, I guess neither of us is very good at identifying gender based on our preconceptions. Perhaps we should both stop trying to.

By the way, I'm sorry that the example I gave was targeted below you.

I did not say that it was "below me." I said that the show was aimed at a different demographic. To be blunt, it was created to appeal to a young, black audience. I am neither young nor black.

As a published author, would you prefer to be likened to haughty Shakespearean character?

Quit blowing one comment I made way out of proportion. I just mentioned that fact to refute the insinuation that my reading skills were below par. That's all. Period. Give it a rest.

But back to your argument that you want addressed: Just what was it? That I must be rich and insensitive to assume that the average Slashdot reader would have, or could afford, a spare hard drive? Come on! A used one big enough for a full install of FreeBSD can be had for under $10. Hell, for about $100, you can get a complete PC that would be more than adequate for running FreeBSD (Computer Geeks currently has a refurbished Dell PIII 500MHz PC with 128MB RAM, 10GB hard drive, and a CD-ROM for $99).

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

So I could comment on how silly it was to evaluate an OS under an emulator.


Your belief is irrelevant.


Why? I had points to make and their question gave me the opportunity to do so.


Your points are irrelevant, they didn't answer the question.


I pointed out that FreeBSD could just be put on a partition and that running it emulated would result in it being slow.


Once again, your reply was irrelevant.


So what have your postings contributed towards this discussion? Just what insightful comments have you made about FreeBSD in this thread?


My contribution was to point out that you made an irrelevant comment to the thread. The original question was emulator/VM to use to run FreeBSD on Linux, how did you contribute to a selection? If you really wanted to help you would've probed for more information. Please don't feign that you're being on the level.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Your belief is irrelevant.
{snip}
Your points are irrelevant, they didn't answer the question.
{snip}
Once again, your reply was irrelevant.

Go f*** yourself. Are you really are so stupid that you don't even understand how Slashdot works? It's an open forum. People are free to ask questions, answer questions, and offer opinions and observations. Since my posting (unlike any of yours) was related to the topic being discussed (FreeBSD 5.1 Released), it was relevent and on-topic and, thus, was not moderated down. A reply to a question that suggests an alternative is relevent. Period.

My contribution was to point out that you made an irrelevant comment to the thread.

Why do you think that posting you have a right to post your opinions on here and it's a "contribution" but when others do the same thing, it's "irrelevent"? Dumbass.

Here's a clue for you: As I write this, you have posted 130 comments on Slashdot while I have exceeded 2,200. I post with a +1 Karma bonus because my postings consistently get modded up. If you want to know how Slashdot works and what comments are relevent, ask me. Otherwise, keep your opinions about other people's postings to yourself.

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

Wow, struck a chord. Sorry you couldn't counter with logic and facts. The person asked a question, you not only didn't answer the question, you've started flailing about and frothing. Tell me, what books have you authored that were published? I'll see about browsing through them at the bookstore to see if you are as impotent in your published work as you are on here. How Slashdot works isn't relevant to straight facts and logic. Remember to wipe up when done manually stimulating yourself over your Karma.

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Wow, struck a chord. Sorry you couldn't counter with logic and facts.

I did answer you with logic and facts. Example:

Why do you think that posting you have a right to post your opinions on here and it's a "contribution" but when others do the same thing, it's "irrelevent"?

I note that you did/could not answer that.

The person asked a question, you not only didn't answer the question, you've started flailing about and frothing.

I proposed a viable alternative and then you jumped in and with your insulting comment: Too bad you aren't a very smart BSD supporter. Learn to read and realize how stupid your response was. (Had you said that to me in person, your ass would still be bleeding from having passed tooth fragments in your stool.)

How Slashdot works isn't relevant to straight facts and logic.

Try dabbling in facts and logic before spouting this stuff. How Slashdot works is completely relevent to evaluating whether a posting is appropriate for that forum.

Tell me, what books have you authored that were published?

I have not written books. I authored an editorial for Car Audio & Electronics (at the request of their editor). I wrote a product review for Computer Shopper. I co-authored a technical article about using the Hitachi HD64180 in embedded systems for The Computer Journal (defunct). I also co-authored several professional technical papers and served as a consultant to Time Life Books for several books in their Understanding Computers series. But the point of that comment was solely to refute your insinuation that my reading skills were sub-par, not that I am a major, important, recognized author.

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

Did you or did you not answer the original question or did you in fact spout something irrlevant?


Why do you think that posting you have a right to post your opinions on here and it's a "contribution" but when others do the same thing, it's "irrelevent"?

I note that you did/could not answer that.


Ohhh, I can answer it...

I didn't say that you don't have a right to post your opinions and you can't prove that I did. I think you do have reading problems as you won't find me writing any such thing. A question was asked, instead of giving an answer you provided opinion on something irrelevant to the question. Go back and show that I said you couldn't write your opinion, it's quite impossible because it's false. I think you should stick to technical writing. A lot of people have supported people like Hitler, Stalin, etc.... I suppose they would've had good Karma from their supporters too. Slashdot is a popularity contest, not a bastion of logic and reason. I'm still not impressed by your Karma, I'm more impressed by what you represent when you take somebodies question as an opportunity to cheap shot... after all it was implied that they would do it to only complain about how slow FreeBSD was. You didn't at all try to address the question but warped it around to provide grounds for an attack. You're not on the level at all.

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

Had you said that to me in person, your ass would still be bleeding from having passed tooth fragments in your stool.


virtual threats.... hmmm a real loser...

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

I didn't say that you don't have a right to post your opinions and you can't prove that I did. I think you do have reading problems as you won't find me writing any such thing.

Apparently you have the reading comprehension problems. Let's look at the sentence that's giving you problems:

Why do you think that [posting] you have a right to post your opinions on here and it's a "contribution" but when others do the same thing, it's "irrelevent"?
(Note that, through an editing error, I inadvertently left the bracketed word "posting" in the original message.)

Ignoring the aforementioned additional word, I asked why you felt that you had a right to post your opinions on here *AND* that those postings are "contributions" while others exercising the same right are considered to be posting "irrelevent" messages.

A lot of people have supported people like Hitler, Stalin, etc....

Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

A surer sign of a weak position does not exist.

after all it was implied that they would do it to only complain about how slow FreeBSD was.

No, I humorously (see +5 funny) asked

What's your goal here? Trying to slow down FreeBSD so that it doesn't make your Linux OS look bad?

Not real good at humor, are you?

You didn't at all try to address the question but warped it around to provide grounds for an attack.

This coming from someone whose initial message to me included you aren't a very smart BSD supporter...Learn to read...realize how stupid your response was. You are such a hypocrite.

Were you not humor-impaired, you would have recognized that it was good-natured kidding and, were you a little more astute, you would also have recognized that I was using a humorous remark to comment on the performance degradation that would occur.

From your other message: virtual threats.... hmmm a real loser...

Again, your apparently limited reading skills are causing you difficulties. A threat is an expression of an intent to do harm, not a claim of what someone would have done in the past had circumstances been different. "I will kill you if you eat that apple" is a threat. "I would have killed you if you had eaten that apple" is not. Are you even out of grade school?

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

LOL... should I clean you now?

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

LOL... should I clean you now?

Sure. What do you use for clean-up after your "Society of the Fist" get-togethers?

Re:Virtual machine

[SocietyoftheFist]

As in cleaning the fish you hooked...

Re:Virtual machine

[fmaxwell]

Sorry, but I wasn't trolling and you weren't baited. But if it makes you feel better to dismiss my postings that way, go for it.

Alan Eldridge

[noackjr]

This release is in memory of Alan Eldridge.

Re:Alan Eldridge

[dracvl]

This post to the FreeBSD ports list. Five days later, he is dead. Tragic.

Rest in peace, Alan. I know I appreciated your work, and so did a lot of other people.

Re:Alan Eldridge

[BlueShades]

The parent post only got a score of 4? Sheesh... I think Alan deserves his own story. What do you need a hot-shot (Bill, Steve, Linus, Richard) to pass away to get noticed. Bad /.

R.I.P Alan

Re:Alan Eldridge

[sander]

oh shit - is this for real? A great pity 8-(

Re:Alan Eldridge

[nutznboltz]

Wow, I had not heard. Near the end I was trying to help him as best one could over the Interenet. I sent him $200 and a copy of Pema Chodron's "When Things Fall Apart" but I guess it takes a lot more than that sometimes.

Re:Alan Eldridge

[essdodson]

You have earned my greatest contempt. People like you are the reason horrible things like this happen.

Re:Alan Eldridge

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in denver. The city has a higher suicide, murder, mental illness, etc... rate than the average city of its size.

Its not really surprising he commited suicide. Denver is shit if you need any help at all. He probably went to the welfare office, and they told him to go fuck himself.

re:alan eldridge

[Anonymous Coward]

well, from what i have read about the guy, he did a lot for the FreeBsd community as well as the Linux community and will be missed.

you can read his blog here >>
http://www.fruitsalad.org/people/alane/

and there's is a lot about him on google.
looks like he's another person screwed by the system.
but as he say's, what goes around, comes around...sometimes it just takes a little bit longer...
I sure there will be a lot of people out there waiting for that time to come...

Wow... 5.1 already?

[Sheetrock]

I've tried out FreeBSD a few times, having heard a great deal about its middle-of-the-road approach to things (freest license, OK server, workable desktop), and thought it was alright but in a lot of ways it seemed to be cursed in the same way as all BSDs in assuming it knew better than I did how I wanted my own system to run.

Ports worked out well until they broke during an upgrade. Switching terminals was just plain wierd, coming from the more logical Linux perspective, and I only had four of them (five with X-Windows when I could get it running.) I suspect I would have had a better time of it if I had gone scavenger hunting for that magical bit of hardware that wasn't too old or too new to work, but in the end I figured screw it -- just about any distribution of Linux seemed to install properly and run efficiently, so why torture myself?

So basically I've been running with Gentoo for the last couple of years. Has FreeBSD gotten any friendlier lately?

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[dcs]

Nope.

Then again, your experiences are rather singular, or rather a matter of taste. But if it was not for you then, for the reasons you mentioned, it is not for you now.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[jandrese]

4 VTYs out of the box? You must have used FreeBSD during the early 3.x cycle. The installer is pretty much the same, but a lot of the support stuff is better now. FreeBSD still defaults to a fairly conservative interface, without excess services or many userland apps to install. The ports tree is even better now, with the advent of portupgrade and other sophisticated port tracking mechanisms. It still blows RPMs out of the water (at least compared to RH9's RPM system). There are options to install a desktop (Gnome or KDE) from the installer, which makes the whole experiance a bit more Linux-like.

Honestly, if you're happy with your current OS, there's not a lot of reason to bother switching. The differences are mostly minor, even if they are in FreeBSD's favor. Linux still has better hardware support, but it's mostly in oddball hardware that only has vendor-supplied binary only driver support in Linux.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[Zenin]

Ports worked out well until they broke during an upgrade.

Install /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade, it makes managing ports much easier/cleaner/more reliable. Pretty much impossible to screw up installs using it, and even if you screw up installs when not using it (don't upgrade depends and sibling ports of those depends), portupgrade can fix them. The learning curve is pretty much nill as well. AFAIK it's only not part of the "base" system because it, like cvsup and other "must have" utilites, is written in Yet Another Funky Language that would also need to be added to the base.

Switching terminals was just plain wierd,

Er, virtual terminals? Alt-F#, just like Linux AFAIK? From XFree86 it's the same Ctrl-Alt-F# as Linux as well.

coming from the more logical Linux perspective, and I only had four of them (five with X-Windows when I could get it running.)

So you're bitching that FreeBSD has more enabled by default then Linux? (FreeBSD IIRC has 8 by default). Is this even an argument? Comment ones you don't want out of /etc/ttys if you really care that much (maybe the same for Linux, but honestly one of my major Linux complaints is that I can't ever find a "basic" Unix config where it's "expected" and it's likely different per distro anyway).

I suspect I would have had a better time of it if I had gone scavenger hunting for that magical bit of hardware that wasn't too old or too new to work, but in the end I figured screw it -- just about any distribution of Linux seemed to install properly and run efficiently, so why torture myself?

Hmm...if anything, FreeBSD tends to be leaps and bounds more compatiable on older hardware then Linux. "Bleeding edge" and "junk" hardware is another story, however. The FreeBSD world historically hasn't wasted too many brain cycles on making Joe's Fly By Night $5 eModem play nice, as it's mostly targeted at "power users" (server and workstation) that don't buy hardware based on what's available this week from Fry's for FREE (w/mail in rebate).

That said, FreeBSD's hardware support is within a percentage point or two of Linux (sometimes sooner, such as FreeBSD getting USB support ages before Linux did), and what is supported is often supported better.

So basically I've been running with Gentoo for the last couple of years. Has FreeBSD gotten any friendlier lately?

Depends. For a Unix system, FreeBSD has pretty much always been "friendlier" then most/all Linux distros. For a Windows desktop conversion/political statement system, stick to Linux. FreeBSD has Wine support and such, but it's really more of an afterthought and so far as politics go...M$ tends to like FreeBSD (witness Mono on FreeBSD).

In the end it's really a question of being an "anti" person or a "pro" person.

Linux: Anti-Microsoft
FreeBSD: Pro-Unix

Personally I want/need a Better Unix and I've got no problems keeping a Win2k box on tap to play games, deal with .doc files, run my AIW-TiVo, etc. If someone finds a way to make EQ, PlanetSide, Unreal II, etc run on FreeBSD that's great for someone, but myself and the vast majority of FreeBSD users won't really care; We'll still use our Windows boxes. In the Linux community however, it often seems like if the lastest game or whatever doesn't have Linux support (at the Windows level or better to boot), then it's some kind of personal afront to the entire Linux world.

Seriously, whatever. If/when I ever publish desktop software (games, whatever) it's highly unlikely I'll ever bother with a FreeBSD version, much less a Linux version. If I'd publish for a non-Windows system it would be OS X ages before Linux...and I don't even own an OS X system.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[$criptah]

it was alright but in a lot of ways it seemed to be cursed in the same way as all BSDs in assuming it knew better than I did how I wanted my own system to run.

Well, duh! Out of the box, FreeBSD has a standard setup that anyone can change if that person wants to do so. All you have to do is to read a well written tutorial located here. Same thing goes for upgrades and ports. Have you heard of getting the latest source via cvs and updating your system that way? I started running FreeBSD since version 3.something and I have never had problems updating the system; all I had to do was to read the docs and release notes.

Has FreeBSD gotten any friendlier lately?

FreeBSD IS friendly, its just picky about its friends. I've experienced almost every Linux distor and compared to FreeBSD they suck big time in terms of maintenance, updating, and management. Once you learn it, it will work for you forever! Finally, I it is X, not X-windows(!), and I do not know why you were not able to get it running. However, I know hundreds of people who run it with no problems.

I am sorry for sounding pissed off, but I hate when people start bitching about something without reading proper docs. I constantly meet people who don't read documents or install CURRENT branch and then complain about errors. If you really want to start a war "FreeBSD vs. Linux" please use some other facts to back up your statements.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[chefbimbo]

> and other sophisticated port tracking mechanisms Care to elaborate on those (aside of cvsup, I mean)?

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[Sean Riordan]

Excellent comment. I hadn't really thought of the Linux/*BSD comparrison that way but it really does seem to sum up the feel very nicely. The BSD's seem to be more content with making everything work flawlessly rather than playing politics and pushing the bleeding edge.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[secolactico]

assuming it knew better than I did how I wanted my own system to run

Hehe, you just reminded me of my first day in Gentoo: "Where on earth in the rc2.d dir!!???". For some reason that freaked me out. I didn't discard it and jump back to debian because I had just spent about three hours installing the system.

I still use gentoo (and debian and solaris and freebsd), but my point is, if you have the time and inclination to tinker with a system, don't give up just because it does not behave as you expect. Give it a while and it might grow on you.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[rtaylor]

It's still a major pain in the ass to downgrade something, but I suppose that is a rare event for most people.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[Zenin]

Moderation 0
50% Informative
50% Troll

Got to love the /. community. :-)

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[The Kiloman]

Come on, don't tell me you expected to make a blanket statment like 'I like BSD, so I'm a true
unix lover, whereas you heathen Lunax kiddies just hate MS', and escape without at least ONE troll mod!

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[nutznboltz]

Ports worked out well until they broke during an upgrade.

Never use ports without using the portupgrade port to do it. This is a lesson I learned the hard way. The portupgrade tool includes pkgdb and "pkgdb -F" is like fsck for the ports database. You know you can't last without fsck.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[nutznboltz]

Linux: Anti-Microsoft

That should read "GNU: anti-software-corporation. GNU is RMS's revenge against Symbolics Inc and anything like them.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[Microsofts slave]

Freebsd is an amazing system for those who want to run an Open source OS, but dont really want to get down and uber dirty during the install. I loved the install of freebsd, it was increddibly simple, and one of my favorite things that freebsd has to offer.

The support group surpasses any linux on i ever tried to use, (FreeBSD forums) and they have helped me with any problem i have ever had.

FreeBSD is becoming both more powerful and easier to use as it ages, (I point to devfs) and kicks any linux distro for ease of use. the major features that to me seperate the men from the boys here are ...

• Sysinstall- useless as you get better, but beautifull for the newb and install
• Devfs- I dont know how i would live without it
• The ports and packages system. I know debian systems have somthing simmilar, but i havent yet had the chance to use it. To me make install is a lot simpler than both rpms, and dpkgs.
• just the stability and compatability. I run linux binarys regualary and all but a couple run even faset on my 166 fbsd machne than my friends 200 red hat.

Try it again, and you like what you see.

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[essdodson]

Nothing you've said makes me think you've ever touched FreeBSD. Can you explain what your problem was rather than whacking off about Linux?

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[Eil]

Disclaimer: I like FreeBSD. It's a fine system, I plan on learning more about it some day. But I think you're selling Linux a bit too short. While FreeBSD is a stable, friendly Unix suitable for mission-critical systems and getting things done in general, I think the greatest strength of Linux is that it can do so much. From wristwatches to multimedia desktop systems to supercomputers, Linux has been hammered into a many more shapes and touched by many more people (each with a different agenda) than FreeBSD. So it might not be quite as consistent as FreeBSD, but it is more flexible.

Er, virtual terminals? Alt-F#, just like Linux AFAIK? From XFree86 it's the same Ctrl-Alt-F# as Linux as well.

On most (all?) Linux distros, you can also use Alt+LeftCursor and Alt+RightCursor to switch terminals. I think that's what the OP was talking about. To me, that causes a lot less finger strain than the LeftAlt+Fn contortion. Even better, many distros are also set up to use the Windows keys to quickly scroll through terminals. I think this should be possible to do in FreeBSD, but it definitely isn't the default. All said, this is really a minor gripe, however.

but honestly one of my major Linux complaints is that I can't ever find a "basic" Unix config where it's "expected"

What exactly is a "basic Unix config"? Do you mean the general configuration of a system after a fresh (default) install? If so, then every OS is guilty of this, even between different versions. BSD included. But like I said, the strength of Linux has been its flexibility and the way each distro does its own thing in regards to configuration is not an accident. You pick which distro you want from a multitude of options and everybody's happy except those who want to complain about having too many options.

The FreeBSD world historically hasn't wasted too many brain cycles on making Joe's Fly By Night $5 eModem play nice, as it's mostly targeted at "power users" (server and workstation) that don't buy hardware based on what's available this week from Fry's for FREE (w/mail in rebate).

You're missing the point by a long shot here. Different people use Linux for different things. I myself use Linux as a desktop workstation. I like being able to use Linux for everyday tasks like web browsing, email, printing, scanning, 3D video gaming, video editing, word processing, burning CDs, you name it. Lack of support for common desktop and laptop hardware (things like video chipsets, sound cards, and PCMCIA bridges and cards) has always been the biggest thing keeping me away from trying FreeBSD for desktop use. However, FreeBSD has more than proven itself in the server market and I'll always recommend it in addition to Linux in that specific situation.

For a Windows desktop conversion/political statement system, stick to Linux.

I don't see what Windows and Linux have in common other than the fact that many novice Linux users have a Windows-only background. The desktop environments that try to reproduce a Windows look and feel are available for FreeBSD as well. And I also don't see why Linux is a "political statement system." I have the feeling that you're referring to the GNU license of the Linux kernel. Without getting into yet another GNU vs. BSD debate, Linus chose the GNU license because it allowed his work (the source code) to be distributed freely no matter who might get their hands on it.

Linux: Anti-Microsoft
FreeBSD: Pro-Unix

Funny you say that. In my online social circle, there is a group of FreeBSD users who are not just advocates but plain zealots. They gave me the same two lines as you wrote above. In trying to defend my choice of operating system (which I had no obligation to, I was just feeling punchy), I asked them why one had to be Anti-Linux in order to be Pro-Unix. They had no answer for that.

In the Linux community however, it often seems like if the lastest game or whatever doesn't have Linux support (at the Windows

Re:Wow... 5.1 already?

[jandrese]

Mostly stuff like pkgdb and the pkgtools. pkg_version is very handy for keeping a system up to date, especially when combined with portupgrade.

They better get careful...

[aTMsA]

announcing themselves so much, else SCO could give a look to their code, and find it strickingly similar to their own...

Re:They better get careful...

[dcs]

Which would be so bad with the deal that settled AT&T suit against BSD... :-)

FreeBSD in Surround Sound

[Anonymous Coward]

5.1 speaker support has been lacking from FreeBSD for years. I'm very excited this added this feature, since I can now using my speaker set-up to the fullest.

Re:FreeBSD in Surround Sound

[Zenin]

The funniest part of reading good jokes on /. is that there will always be somebody that just doesn't get it. Very amusing.

Yep. :-)

But there are times when a good in-joke can humor the clueful, and shake out the humor impaired. :)
-- Randal Schwartz

When the sandbox just isn't enough

[burgburgburg]

Enhanced "jail" management, allowing one server to provide many different "virtual machines" with reduced administrator workload.

/. should provide bittorrent trackers...

[Ron Harwood]

...whenever they announce the release of free software distributions (or large applications).

That would be a nice value added service.

Re:/. should provide bittorrent trackers...

[sporty]

Note: you typically install/upgrade freebsd via either

1. cvs (cvsup). It only gets the newer files.
2. The tarball packages. (i.e. bin.aa.gz or something like that)

ISO's don't usually get made every waking moment. It's more FBSD culture to use cvs..., so bittorrent wouldn't excel here, unless someone tarballed the distrib..

Re:/. should provide bittorrent trackers...

[Ron Harwood]

Heh... look at the comment below ours...

Re:/. should provide bittorrent trackers...

[sporty]

Yes you can.

Update your cvsup source tree to 5.1. Before doing a "make world" etc.. look for files such as README, UPDATING etc.. they are in all caps.

They should tell you things like, binary incompatabilities.

BunDirty

[AKAImBatman]

Does anyone know if they managed to nail the BunDirty problems with UFS 1.0? I have a FreeBSD 5.0 machine I'd like to upgrade, but every time I installed a 5.1 kernel and world via CVSup, it would crash with a "BunDirty" error on boot.

Re:BunDirty

[kin_korn_karn]

wipe will solve all your BunDirty problems

Re:BunDirty

[AKAImBatman]

"man wipe"
"wipe not found"

No, I don't think you're funny. NEXT!

Re:BunDirty

[TCM]

What problem are you referring to? I googled for "bundirty" and all I could find were code snippets. You did mail the problem to one of the lists, didn't you? I'm not trying to deny that you actually had a problem. I'm merely interested in details as I couldn't find any myself. Thanks.

Re:BunDirty

[AKAImBatman]

You're looking on the wrong lists. I didn't have to report it, because others have already reported it to the "current" mailing list. Thanks for asking tho. :-)

Re:BunDirty

[AKAImBatman]

It got a +3 funny last time (for some bizarre reason), so let's try this again:

No, I don't think you're funny. NEXT!

Re:BunDirty

[Arandir]

The correct response on FreeBSD 5.x is:

$ man wipe
No manual entry for wipe

I think that about sums it up...

Whew! Squeeked in under the line...

[iiioxx]

I just finished downloading my copy, seconds before this story posted.

Re:Its based on unix, you know

[vuud]

Can anyone post press releases here or just Microsoft?

BIT TORRENT!

[Anonymous Coward]

HERE

Re:BIT TORRENT!

[yppiz]

I believe CVSup is not recommended for upgrades from 4.x. ISOs are the right way to upgrade in this case.

--Pat

hehe, FreeBSD didn't get SCO's letter?

[akiaki007]

And if they didn't, I suspect that they will have one mailed to them today... ;)

Re:hehe, FreeBSD didn't get SCO's letter?

[phoenix_rizzen]

And ... why would that matter?? All of the claims against any AT&T code in BSD was settled many, many, many years ago, including a nice little clause saying "You can't come after us later regarding issues like this."

BSD has nothing to fear from SCO.

Re:hehe, FreeBSD didn't get SCO's letter?

[TheRaven64]

BSD has nothing to fear from SCO.

No, I'm sure FreeBSD will get a letter from SCO about their Linux distro soon. A few weeks and the application of several Big Foam Clue-Bats(tm) later SCO will realise that FreeBSD is not a Linux distro, and try to think of something else to sue them for.

First VMWare/net install!!

[RLiegh]

w00t! I'm sure it will take ages since I'm on dialup, but I'm still excited!

Wish me luck! [booting FreeBSD floppies on vmware has been flaky last few times I've tried it. :(]

Re:Its based on unix, you know

[bwhalen]

essentially free, r u on crack? The os is in the 250 buck range, then all the apps cost dough too. The other cashcow, MSOffice is several hundred dollars if you want the full deal.

This is either troll, or a pseudotroll

[dmelomed]

You can read wscons documentation, then edit the config file, reboot and you have more virtual terminals. You obviously didn't read the docs, or you're just trolling.

simple

[SweetAndSourJesus]

Because I can build a headless FreeBSD box for a few hundred dollars.

I run a Mac desktop and laptop, but I don't have the bread to buy myself an XServe. FreeBSD on a cheap x86 handles all my server needs. Life is good.

FreeBSD 5.1 vs 4.x

[ikewillis]

If you are interested in the respective merits of FreeBSD 5.1 over 4.x and are unsure which one to install, you might want to see the Early Adopter's Guide for FreeBSD 5.1-RELEASE

Re:Sweeeeeet!

[Cheesy Fool]

LUnix is an operating system created for the Commodore line of computers.

Re:NETCRAFT NOW CONFIRMS: *BSD IS DYING!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Then someone should tell netcraft. . .

they're running it.

The site www.netcraft.com is running Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) mod_perl/1.27 on FreeBSD.

and take a look at the uptime list.

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

there's one linux box and 49 *bsd boxes.

BSD isn't dead???

[Anonymous Coward]

...what???? AAAaaaaauuugggghhhhhhh .... !!

*runs screaming from slashdot*

Re:BSD isn't dead???

[sander]

Beware, it is the night of the walking dead BSD-s 8-D

Re:What a pointless announcement,

[NecroMancer]

I work at a place where we use Linux and FreeBSD servers, and I can tell you that sometimes we forget the BSD servers ever exist... It is so much more stable than Linux for *real* network servers! Of course I use Linux, just because the hardware support is much better, but if I can have a choice and FreeBSD has all I need for a particular use, I go with FreeBSD.
And don't forget: if it weren't for BSD, we would not be having this discussion!

No wonder you post anonymously.

[fmaxwell]

My fucking god. The mind boggles.

Yes, it does. How could anyone could be so stupid as to not get the "5.1" joke?

Meanwhile proper sound support, proper SMP support, proper thread support, etc. ad nauseum, has been available in Linux for fucking YEARS.

Why do you fucking poseurs continue thinking you're lee7 running FreeBSD on your Pentium 3? Someday hopefully you'll find yourself in the real world.

In the "real world", you will find many ISPs like UUNet, Compuserve, and Mindspring, running their servers on BSD variants. Yahoo! uses BSD. Hotmail used(uses?) BSD. Why? It outperforms Linux and has greater stability. In the "real world", you will find BSD variants in many embedded applications because it is not saddled with the hobbyist-oriented GPL license that forces companies to part with their intellectual property. If Linksys had built their routers around BSD, they wouldn't be facing a legal mess that might force them to give away their source code.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[ctid]

If Linksys had built their routers around BSD, they wouldn't be facing a legal mess that might force them to give away their source code.

I think you meant to say, "if Linksys had taken the trouble to read the licence of the code they wanted to use, they wouldn't be facing a legal mess...".

The GPL doesn't force them to give away their code. They chose to use software which has a licence which requires them to make their code available if it is linked to the GPLed material. The key thing is the choice that they made. One of the provisions of the GPL is that the Licence itself should be provided with the software, so that someone who wishes to use the SW will not be in any doubt about their obligations. They had the Licence; if they ignored it, that was their choice and any problems they have now are their fault.

None of this is to doubt the quality of FreeBSD, and nor would I want to criticize people who want to distribute their software under a BSD-ish licence. It's up to the copyright-holder - anyone who wants to use the copyright-holder's material has to abide by the licence they chose. It's very simple really.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[jo42]

"5.1" joke

That's because some of us are already past 6.1 on to 7.1 with 'ex' and all of the other Dolby/DTS marketing pablum plastered on the receiver... :)

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[fmaxwell]

I think you meant to say, "if Linksys had taken the trouble to read the licence of the code they wanted to use, they wouldn't be facing a legal mess...".

No, that's not what I "meant to say." If Linksys routers were built around BSD, they would not be facing the legal mess -- regardless of whether they read the licenses or not.

The GPL doesn't force them to give away their code.

Good. They will be relieved to hear that.

The key thing is the choice that they made.

No, it probably is not a choice that they made. It's more likely that their routers were developed by some firm over in Asia (like SMC's are). The people at Linksys may have been completely unaware of the code in their routers. I know that I surprised SMC when I informed them that their routers were hard-coded to get time from a couple of educational institutions in Australia -- institutions that had to shut down their time servers because of the SMC traffic.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[mcgroarty]

Previous poster called:

" Bullcrap "

on another anonymous poster's claim that Yahoo's continued FreeBSD use is merely a legacy decision.

In all fairness, that article appeared in issue one of the FreeBSD News, circa 1997. That's not a good or honest way to disprove that Yahoo's ongoing use of FreeBSD is a legacy decision.

Reading FreeBSD postings from a Yahoo engineer's blog is an excellent way to understand FreeBSD's strengths and appeal, however. Doesn't look to me like they're itchy to migrate.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[ctid]

Are you serious? They want to sell routers, but you think that it's not their fault if their technology-supplier breached a licence? What are you talking about? What do you think would happen to them if their suppliers had appropriated Microsoft's copyrighted material and put it into their routers? Are you suggesting that an organization that buys technology without checking its provenance is deserving of sympathy or support?

All of this is supposition of course. As I stated, they are only obliged to distribute their source under the terms of the GPL, if they chose to use GPLed software. Arguments about where they obtained the software are completely irrelevant.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[fmaxwell]

They want to sell routers, but you think that it's not their fault if their technology-supplier breached a licence?

No, I did not say that it was not their fault. I said that they may not have made a conscious choice.

Are you suggesting that an organization that buys technology without checking its provenance is deserving of sympathy or support?

No, I am not suggesting that at all. All that I am stating is that, had the product been based on BSD, they would not be in the legal mess that they are now. Is that true or not? That's all that I stated. I did not say that we should feel sorry for them.

As I stated, they are only obliged to distribute their source under the terms of the GPL, if they chose to use GPLed software.

And, as I stated, they may not have made a conscious choice to use GPL software. They may have purchased a product engineered in Asia, slapped it in their case, and then sold it, completely unaware that it contained GPL software. So they are obliged to distribute the source code, simply because the product contains GPL software. It has nothing to do with choice.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[ctid]

You're right that you didn't say they deserved sympathy. I inferred that from the phrase, "saddled with the hobbyist-oriented GPL license that forces companies to part with their intellectual property". I was reacting (over-reacting, if you like) to the word "forces".

This is what you said originally:

If Linksys had built their routers around BSD, they wouldn't be facing a legal mess that might force them to give away their source code.

What I am trying to say is that this was a choice that they made. Either they chose to create the product using GPLed code, or they chose a supplier which used GPLed code. If they have to give away the source code, that is because of a choice they made. It is not the licence that forces them to distribute the source code (assuming that a breach of the GPL has indeed taken place); it is their decision to use material that is released under a licence which requires this.

Re:No wonder you post anonymously.

[fmaxwell]

I was reacting (over-reacting, if you like) to the word "forces".

I probably should have said "obliges" since it clearly has not "forced" them to do anything.

it is their decision to use material that is released under a licence which requires this.

We are arguing semantics at this point. As we both know, whether they chose Linux, whether their vendor chose Linux, and whether they even knew about the choice is immaterial to their legal obligations.

Had the product been based on BSD, by choice or by chance, they would not be obliged to give away their source code. That's all.

I don't feel sorry for them. In fact, if they "outsourced" engineering jobs to overseas firms, I would be amused at their predicament. I hope that they get raked over the coals for violating the license, regardless of their intentions. I'd love there to be an open-source router. Actually, if they were smart, they would release the source code in a minute and then rake in the bucks selling the hardware to people who wanted to roll their own router.

Peace.

Distro problem

[The Creator]

and even it(perl) was been taken out now.

This seems to make it harder to install/use the system. I understand there's a bunch of politics involved in making the main distrubution, but whouldn't FBSD have a better chance of wide adoption if there was at least one other distro that was based on efficiency rather than politics?

Re:Distro problem

[Tyler Eaves]

But that's exactly the point. The less the system depends on/ has 'built in', the smaller, faster, and more efficient a minimal install can be.

Re:Distro problem

[LizardKing]

whouldn't FBSD have a better chance of wide adoption if there was at least one other distro that was based on efficiency rather than politics?

Perl wasn't removed from the base system for political reasons, but for technical ones. Keeping the included Perl in sync with the official releases was a pain in the arse, and few things if anythiing depended on it. Frankly, there is already a good scripting tool in FreeBSD, and that's the Bourne shell.

Chris

Re:Distro problem

[TheBracket]

I think you misunderstand the reasoning behind removing Perl from the base system (as well as not including Java, Python, etc.). You gain nothing but bloat and insecurity from having features you don't want/need installed on a server!

You are never far away from an up-to-date, zoomy version of your langauge of choice - simply go to the ports tree, and make install clean (or install a package, in most non-Java cases; Java admittedly requires an additional fetch/I Agree step because of Sun's licensing requirements, but it is easy - and you can make package for additional machines), but many users do not want/need these languages. Additionally, portupgrade makes it easy to update your packages without needing to update the base system.

Re:Distro problem

[The Creator]

Can't it be on the distro without being installed when someone wants a minimal install?

Re:Distro problem

[jsprat]

Frankly, there is already a good scripting tool in FreeBSD, and that's the Bourne shell.

Actually bash is not part of the default install, you have to install the port. FreeBSD uses csh by default.

Re:Distro problem

[TCM]

bash is the bourne again shell. the bourne shell is simply sh(1), which is included of course.

Re:Distro problem

[jsprat]

No, sh is not the bourne shell.

According to man sh,

This version has many features which make it appear similar in some respects to the Korn shell, but it is not a Korn shell clone like pdksh(1). Only features designated by POSIX, plus a few Berkeley extensions, are being incorporated into this shell.

You are right that it is not csh. For some reason I thought sh was a symlink to csh. It's not.

Re:Distro problem

[Nugget]

1. FreeBSD is not a "distro" it is an "operating system"
2. You've just described exactly how it does work

Re:Distro problem

[Cro Magnon]

IIRC, root uses csh as the default, but the regular user gets sh.

Re:Distro problem

[dcs]

sh(1) is Bourne shell. We call it "Bourne" shell because it was originally written by Steve Bourne. As it was originally named simply "sh", when distinguishing between sh(1) and the other shell (csh(1)) was necessary, one referred to sh(1) as being "Bourne Shell". Things got complicated with Korn Shell, then Bourne Again Shell, etc, etc.

FreeBSD's sh(1) is compatible with the original Bourne shell, but has many features of korn shell. It is not a ksh because it doesn't have the features that make ksh _incompatible_ with sh(1).

Alas, with POSIX standard to guide one by, these days, maybe we are not actually 100% compatible with the original bourne shell, but...

If you doubt me, just google it.

Re:Distro problem

[jsprat]

Here is the relevant line from adduser.conf:

defaultshellpref = ('csh', 'sh', 'bash', 'tcsh', 'ksh', 'no', 'date')

The default shell is csh.

Re:Distro problem

[The Creator]

Keeping the included Perl in sync with the official releases was a pain in the arse

I'm sure lots of people whould be fine with not having the latest version, but just want an easy way to get a system running. For these people another kind of distro might be better suited.

Frankly...

When ever someone uses that word on slashdot...

Re:Distro problem

[jsprat]

Thank you. You are right (you already knew that though ;)

Re:Distro problem

[The Creator]

1. FreeBSD is not a "distro" it is an "operating system"

How does it get to the user?

2. Y...

Hmm oops then :)

Re:Distro problem

[aelfwyne]

It gets to the user through normal "distribution channels"...

However, the term "Distro" in common usage does not refer to "distribution channels", but rather, to versions of Linux...

FreeBSD is not by any means a version of Linux. And therefore, it is not a "Distro".

(That also means that FreeBSD is not a target of SCO's legal actions.... a good thing)

Re:Distro problem

[Tyler Eaves]

Distro is a term unique to linux. Linux is self is just a kernel. A distribution packages the kernel with the GNU Utilities and (optionally) other various an sundry packages. What makes a distro a distro is how and what it collects. It's just one orginizations idea of how to put linux togethor.

On the other hand, FreeBSD is FreeBSD is FreeBSD. It's not like you've got "Fred's FreeBSD" and "Ted's FreeBSD". There's just one canonical distribution. It is no more accurate to refer to FreeBSD as a "distro" than it would be to refer to Windows XP as one.

Re:Distro problem

[phoenix_rizzen]

The default shell for root is actually tcsh (csh symlinked to tcsh).

The default shell for normal users is sh.

When in doubt, read the source: /usr/sbin/adduser Note the line: DEFAULTSHELL=/bin/sh

Re:Distro problem

[bovinewasteproduct]

That is one of the real nice things about the ports system. When they are installing it, they just tell the installer to add perl to the mix. (you can also add other stuff to auto installed also). After install you just run use.perl port and it's just like it was in the base system.

I'm the one that added perl to the 2.X to start with and I have no problems with that extra 20 seconds it takes to add perl to the port install segment...:)

BWP

Re:Distro problem

[Billly Gates]

Then install bash. Its in the ports and also you can select it within sysinstall after the base is installed.

Just make sure when you add a new user from sysinstall to point to /usr/local/bin/bash and not /usr/bin by default. I have no idea why its installed there but you can do that.

According to the FreeBSD manual the original sh shell was chosen due to posix requirements. Infact Linux is not posix compliant at all because sh is not installed by default. I find the shell scripts in FreeBSD much easier to read because of this.

Re:Distro problem

[TheRaven64]

Just make sure when you add a new user from sysinstall to point to /usr/local/bin/bash and not /usr/bin by default.

It's also a good idea to symlink /usr/local/bin/bash to /bin/bash for the large number of scripts written by Linux users which start with the line

#/bin/bash

Okay, it's a better idea not to run these scripts at all, but sadly Linux is used as a development system by a lot of people these days.

Re:Distro problem

[SirGeek]

Perl was removed in favor of using the Perl from ports. When they did a base install, Perl was /usr/bin/perl, when you install a new version via the ports it is /usr/local/bin/perl so that you would have 2 copies installed on your system.

Re:Distro problem

[Arandir]

I have no idea why its installed there but you can do that.

Because it is a port. /usr is for the base operating system, while /usr/local is for stuff installed after base operating system is installed, like ports. The exception is XFree86 and X toolkits, which goes into /usr/X11R6 for historical reasons.

Re:Distro problem

[The Creator]

However, the term "Distro" in common usage does not refer to "distribution channels", but rather, to versions of Linux...

Well, "law" in common usage refers to "legal laws", does that mean that we cannot have laws of physics?

Re:Distro problem

[The Creator]

There's just one canonical distribution.

QED

Re:Distro problem

[Billly Gates]

I tend to agree. FreeBSD users are quite happy to help and not say something on the grounds like "well it worked on my system...or your stupid if you can't get that to work".

The elitest thing has to do with the closed nature of kernel development and its not as flashy as Linux distro's because the goal is on quality and stability. Its open to download of course but to commit you need permission and a good name to actually be a member of the team that has the write permissions on cvs.

But they will help you or point you in the right direction.

BSD users want to keep standards like the previous poster said in regards to keeping ports in /usr/local/bin instead of /usr/bin. Keep in mind most professional versions of Unix like Solaris do this anyway and infact sh scripts might run better on FreeBSD then Linux unless the author put some linux specific code in the installer.

Re:Distro problem

[ftvcs]

What does BSD stand for?

Re:What a pointless announcement,

[Geekboy(Wizard)]

How can the linux hardware support be so much better when freebsd is more stable?

Unfortunately...

[mckeever]

It's too bad, but I won't be able to use this release for the projects I've had on the go (closed source - sorry) that run off of FreeBSD.

For some reason, the bktr driver used for TV tuner card and some other hardware hangs seconds after activiation on FreeBSD 5.x. I'll likely have to rewrite the driver anyway at some stage to fix some issues I have with it, but this is preventing me from upgrading past FreeBSD 4.8.

The efforts required to get Darwin running for at least one of these projects is starting to look like less and less of a pain. Time will tell...

Re:Unfortunately...

[nutznboltz]

Read the Fine Early Adoptor's Manual.

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.1R/early-adopter .html

Section 4 - Drawbacks to Early Adoption.

Along with the new features of FreeBSD 5.1 come some areas that can cause problems, or at least can lead to unexpected behavior. Generally, these come from the fact that a number of features are
works-in-progress. A partial list of these areas of difficulty includes:

• A number of features are not yet finished. Examples from the
  feature list above include SMPng and KSE. While suitable for testing
  and experimentation, these features may not be ready for production
  use.
• Because of changes in kernel data structures and ABIs/APIs,
  third-party binary device drivers will require modifications to work
  correctly under FreeBSD 5.1. There is a possibility of more minor
  ABI/API changes before the 5-STABLE branch is created.
• Several parts of FreeBSD's base system functionality have been
  moved to the Ports Collection. Notable examples include Perl,
  UUCP, and most (but not all) games. While these programs are
  still supported, their removal from the base system may cause some
  confusion.
• Some parts of the FreeBSD base system have fallen into a state of
  disrepair due to a lack of users and maintainers. These have been
  removed. Specific examples include the generation of a.out-style
  executables, XNS networking support, and the X-10 controller
  driver.
• A number of ports and packages do not build or do not run
  correctly under FreeBSD 5.0, whereas they did under FreeBSD
  4-STABLE. Generally these problems are caused by compiler toolchain
  changes or cleanups of header files.
• Many FreeBSD 5.1 features are seeing wide exposure for the first
  time. Many of these features (such as SMPng) have broad impacts on
  the kernel.
• A certain amount of debugging and diagnostic code is still in
  place to help track down problems in FreeBSD 5.1's new features. This
  may cause FreeBSD 5.1 to perform more slowly than 4-STABLE.
• Features are only added to the 4-STABLE development branch after
  a ``settling time'' in -CURRENT. FreeBSD 5.1 does not have the
  stabilizing influence of a -STABLE branch. (It is likely that the
  5-STABLE development branch will be created sometime after
  5.2-RELEASE.)
• Documentation (such as the FreeBSD Handbook and FAQ) may not reflect changes recently made to
  FreeBSD 5.1.

Because a number of these drawbacks affect system stability, the release engineering team recommends that more conservative sites and users stick to releases based on the 4-STABLE branch until the 5.X series is more polished.

FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[Teckla]

I've always wondered why embedded device makers choose Linux over FreeBSD. Does anyone know why?

I'm curious because using Linux (which is GPL'd) seems a bit risky. It seems every other week some poor embedded device company is being tarred and feathered for allegedly breaking the terms of the GPL.

Why do companies run the risk of Linux/GPL license problems when FreeBSD is available? This is not a troll, I am genuinely curious.

-Teckla

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[ctid]

It seems every other week some poor embedded device company is being tarred and feathered for allegedly breaking the terms of the GPL.

But there's no risk really. Any professional organization will read the licences of any copyrighted material they want to use in their products. If there's a problem with what a professional organization wishes to do with GPLed material, they will decide not to use it and look elsewhere. That is their choice.

A company that gets into trouble for using GPLed software without releasing the source is not "poor" in the sense of deserving sympathy.

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[Teckla]

You're ignoring the possibility that companies will be accused (in the court of public opinion) of violating the GPL when, in fact, it hasn't been violated.

Did you read the recent Slashdot story regarding Linksys and Linux/GPL?

Overall it seems safer for a company to take the safe road and choose FreeBSD for their embedded devices. I can only imagine there is a technical reason embedded device companies choose Linux/GPL over FreeBSD/BSD, a reason so overwhelming that they're willing to risk accusations of violating the GPL (whether they are justified accusations or not).

-Teckla

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[Quill_28]

A better question might be why isn't netbsd used in more embedded devices than linux.

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[salimma]

I can only imagine there is a technical reason embedded device companies choose Linux/GPL over FreeBSD/BSD

Over FreeBSD, yes: platform support. Most embedded device companies that use BSD, prefer NetBSD - it simply runs on many more platforms, more than Linux, in fact.

Just ask Wasabi...

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[stienman]

This one's easy, so I'll answer it.

Companies don't have to announce that they use freebsd in their embedded devices. All they need to include is the following statement somewhere in their documentation:

Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.


That's it. Since it looks like a fairly standard copyright and is fairly small (compared to nearly any other common license today) then it's easy to miss.

There are devices out there that use BSD derivatives for their firmware, and often it is used for precisely the reasons you give.

-Adam

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[overbom]

Howdy, Teckla.

It's not really a question of choosing Linux vs. FreeBSD because FreeBSD isn't designed to be a good embedded OS. FreeBSD is designed primarily to function as a workstation or server OS. As far as Linux over BSD, my thought is that it's generally a name-recognition thing, or they're trying to capture the 'geek' or 'hacker' audience. If you tell someone "it runs on NetBSD" or "it runs on Linux", one of them will strike a familiar chord and one of them generally won't.

If a company wants an embedded BSD, NetBSD is a much better choice for embedded functions. Their motto is "Of course it runs NetBSD" because they've ported to just about every architecture I've ever heard of and then some, and their porting code base is incredibly good. Wasabi Systems, the main protector of NetBSD, ports it to different architectures specifically for embedded functions.

You don't hear much of where NetBSD gets used in the embedded space, least of all on slashdot. You can find out more where NetBSD is used embedded here if you're interested:
http://www.wasabisystems.com

Long story short, FreeBSD isn't really contending for the embedded space. That's what NetBSD is for. :-)

Hope this helps...

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[Magura]

Actually, I'm currently in the process of writing a device driver for a hardware product we are developing, and our first target platform is FreeBSD. Why? Well there are a few reasons, but not least of them is that the BSD licence is so much nicer to work with.

As it turns out, we won't be doing anything that would cause complications with the GPL (and so it looks like one of the next platforms I'll have to look at is Linux - or Solaris, depending on where demand is) - but the GPL does cause some trepidation up amongst the pointy-haired types. Maybe the Microsoft FUD has been successful.

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[supaflah]

Actually NetBSD(wasabi) is capitalising on the fact that they are GPL-free.

A quote from their website.
NetBSD is free of the GPL. Its BSD license is the most flexible, business-friendly license available. Users may change the kernel or add drivers while keeping the changes entirely secret. With NetBSD, OEM's IP is secure and protected. /end of quote

It's that classic battle of GPL vs BSD licensing. There are now, today, more people running BSD,if you consider Darwin(osX,etc) BSD.the core sure is,but the mac os addon is not free...
What will win in the end (abstract as the "end" be)? licensing that protects/supports the interests the developer(GPL)or the consumer (BSD)? So far, surprising as it may sound, BSD is leading in user base, but GNU/Linux is far ahead with the developers(more applications made "for Linux").

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[Steven Blanchley]

NetBSD is free of the GPL. Its BSD license is the most flexible, business-friendly license available. Users may change the kernel or add drivers while keeping the changes entirely secret.

RTFL: This is also allowed by the GPL and always has been. You only have to distribute source if you distribute binaries. In fact, licenses that don't allow private modifications to be kept secret are not free software licenses.

Re:FreeBSD & Embedded Devices

[supaflah]

RTFL yourself.
"you only have to distribute source if you distribute binaries"- that means "if you sell (give away) a compiled program (binary executable),you must include it's source."
How do you keep source secret? That's the thing businesses have problems with. They want to bake the cake, sell it, and keep the recipe.
BSD licensing allows them to do that. GPL does not. Two different approaches.

Re:To the tune of "The Candy Man"...

[Sophrosyne]

don't quit your day job... oh wait a minute you're retired... never mind

Re:What a pointless announcement,

[fmaxwell]

How can the linux hardware support be so much better when freebsd is more stable?

Linux supports more varied hardware but FreeBSD crashes less. What's so complicated about that?

Windows 98 supports more hardware than Linux, so it must be more stable, right?

Re:And still perl is a port now and java builds

[Zeio]

Man, does anyone who criticizes FreeBSD ever use it? Because I use it and like it quite a bit, and everyone I know who uses it likes it.

On Perl: Perl is not in the base install, it's a port installed by default, So What! It was moved to ports because people want to have a lot of flexibility when it comes to what version of perl they run. The FreeBSD team was doing just what the users wanted. And I would like to know how to install FreeBSD without that Perl port installed. You would have to go out of your way in every install method to take it out. Big deal it moved from /usr/bin to /usr/local/bin (they even put symlinks for you in /usr/bin) So as far as I can tell, FreeBSD 5.1 comes with perl 5.6.1 in the "default install." The only ramification is simply this. If you for some reason want to upgrade perl, you use ports and you don't have to wait for the FreeBSD team to update it, because rightly so, they see no reason to do it. Also note that why would you want perl scripts in an OS? Shell is perfectly adequate for the scripting needs of the base system, perl is something users use.

On Java: Sun is being an idiot with regards to Sun on anything but Solaris, Windows and Linux. They make it very hard to include the JVM in binary form in a "default install." They have a ridiculous license on they source code that makes it hard for FreeBSD to do much of anything about this. By they way, if you use ports the JVM 1.4 builds nicely and works rather well. I have personally written to Sun complaining about this - as have others, but they aren't willing to focus on FreeBSD. BTW, FreeBSD runs linux binaries and the Linux JVM works on that compatibility layer.

NVIDIA: Nvidia builds binary drivers for FreeBSD. Hardly 'niche.'

SMP, scheduler: SMP is vastly improved, scheduler and VM is very very good. This OS is very competitive with Linux, and despite what you may have heard, it is capable of outperforming it without sacrificing quality.

Matched c-library, GCC, userland and kernel: One must appreciate that the FreeBSD team is a very thorough. They are obsessively concerned with coherency and quality. This is not some slapped together random miasma in every incarnation, this is a well thought out combination of the vital system components. It works. Trust me, it works. If you want military grade, use 4.8+, if you want rock solid, use 5.1. Frankly, where FreeBSD-current is, is where most linuxes start in terms stability/coherency/usability. It is quite useable in its "unstable" form.

Polling Support: One of FreeBSD's best features is polling on networking devices to prevent interrupt driven livelock.

Proof in Pudding: Think of heavy iron appliances with various free operating systems in it. I can think of two for FreeBSD. The godly Juniper routers and the F5 BigIP. These are serious pieces of networking equipment and they chose FreeBSD for a reason - its far more pleasant to deal with commercially, its fast stable and coherent and the license permits modifications without divulging them to the world.

One project, one c compiler, one c library, one coherent userland, 5 different architectures, great portability, stability and commercial viability.

logistics

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason Perl was taken out was because of logistics: it's 54MB of source that's a moving target. Very hard to keep backward compatibility.

And backward compatibility is very important to FBSD: you can still run 2.x and 3.x binaries on a 5.x box. You can still run a.out binaries on a 5.x box.

If you want Perl, you can easily install it yourself by doing a: cd /usr/ports/lang/perl{5,5.8} && make install. You're done. (Or install a pre-compiled package.)

I fail to see the issue here.

Re:BIT TORRENTS!

[Ragica]

I was thinking of putting up a torrent for this, but figured i'd look around and see if anyone else did first. Besides the one on this thread, i found this useful site which creates torrents for slashdot linked files in general (and already has the FreeBSD 5.1 discs up), worth noting: http://f.scarywater.net/

No floppy drive :-(

[jabbadabbadoo]

From the home page:

"Easy to install
FreeBSD can be installed from a variety of media including CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, floppy disk, magnetic tape, a MS-DOS partition, or if you have a network connection, you can install it directly over anonymous FTP or NFS. All you need is a pair of blank, 1.44MB floppies and these directions."

Oh, well. I have a ultra-modern portable that doesn't ship with a floppy drive. Easy? Not for me.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[AKAImBatman]

I realize this is probably a joke, but bootable ISOs have been available for FreeBSD since the dawn of CDROM time. The text that you are referring to is back from the days of floppy disks being more common than CDROM drives. Ah yes, back then we did FTP installs of BSD and we liked it. And for some reason we dragged our PCs uphill through a blizzard. Don't ask me why, because I haven't the foggist. ;)

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[SirSlud]

If you can boot via CDROM, you dont need a floppy.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[phoenix_rizzen]

Boot the mini-ISO CD-ROM, then. Or, use an external floppy.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[Sean Riordan]

That doesn't keep you from doing a CD based install. Or even making a bootable CD to do a NFS or FTP install.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[sander]

Umm... The iso images are bootable - so just download it, burn a cd, pop it into the drive and boot from it. Problem solved.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[Mooncaller]

Whats a Foggist? Is it someone who follows the philosophy of a guy named Fogg? Or is it a profesion that is endemic to San Fransico?

P.S. I'm realy not one to whine abot speling, just reed any of my posts! I just had fog on my mind as it is a cold foggy day in Northern Cal, and I miss my home in Phoenix AZ ( not much fog there in June).

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[Arandir]

It said you needed floppies, not a floppy drive, can't you read! You boot from the CDROM then juggle the floppies while you install. It would be too hard to juggle three floppies, so FreeBSD makes it easy for newbies by only requiring two.

Seriously, if you read the instructions carefully, including the commas, you'll see that the floppies for are installing over anonymous FTP or NFS. You could still boot from the CDROM in such a case, but if you have a CDROM then you don't need to install from a network.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[Tenebrious1]

I realize this is probably a joke, but bootable ISOs have been available for FreeBSD since the dawn of CDROM time

Ultra portables don't come with CD's either. Mine won't boot off an external (USB) CD drive... but hey, I paid the extra $100 to get an external USB floppy, which is bootable and loads via FTP just fine.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[hmallett]

Are you trying to make me feel inferior? I installed 5.0 from floppies and anonymous FTP. It took a while over dialup, but faster than downloading the mini-ISO.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[Hal-9001]

All you need is a pair of blank, 1.44MB floppies and these directions.

Oh, well. I have a ultra-modern portable that doesn't ship with a floppy drive. Easy? Not for me.

You are misinterpreting that statement. Having a pair of blank 1.44MB floppies for making boot disks is a sufficient, but not a necessary, condition for installing FreeBSD.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[zcat_NZ]

Apparently (someone mentioned this on IRC the other day) you can PXE-boot the installer. I'm not sure how, it's not the kind of thing I've ever needed to do..

Happy now?

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[AKAImBatman]

Are you trying to make me feel inferior?

Nope. Just goofing around a bit. :-) You know, the old "we had to walk uphill through snow both ways" skit.

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[TheRaven64]

It would be too hard to juggle three floppies, so FreeBSD makes it easy for newbies by only requiring two.

Speaking as a FreeBSD user, I would like to point out that juggling 3 floppys is actually easier than juggling 2, due to the more rhythmic nature of the process. Actually, the fact I use FreeBSD has nothing to do with that, never mind. Juggling hard disks is easier than juggling floppy disks, although they are less likely to work afterwards (especially if you drop them).

Re:No floppy drive :-(

[jabbadabbadoo]

I know, I know. It was a joke from my side because of the stupid, ambigious formulation on the front page.

Re:NETCRAFT NOW CONFIRMS: *BSD IS DYING!!!

[PhoenixK7]

You know I think this has more to do with the frequency of updates being made available for the linux kernel as compared with actual stability issues. I've NEVER had any linux servers crash on me or otherwise require a reboot due to something becoming irrecoverable.

Sure wish...

[msimm]

One of the Linux distros (cough, Mandrake) would cop the subscription system. FreeBSD is right on with this method, the price is reasonable, its a great cause and satisfying as hell to receive the disks as your reading about the new release.

Paying $60/$120/$600 up front is a little steep (at least for some of us) but paying $25 per release (or something similar) is a very nice approach.

Re:Sure wish...

[JimDabell]

I seem to remember that Slackware had a subscription option, I don't know if they still do. Ahh yes, here it is.

Re:Sure wish...

[Arandir]

The old FreeBSD and Slackware subscriptions were through the same company, Walnut Creek. That name is long gone, but the company lives on in FreeBSD Mall and Slackware Inc. Two companies with the same physical address.

Re:Sure wish...

[(startx)]

Slackware has been selling subscriptions since way, way back in day, when it and FreeBSD were both distributed through wccdrom.

amd64 support

[edhall]

The release notes mention that an experimental amd64 release is available, but don't mention that it can be downloaded from here, including ISO images.

Most of the credit for its rapid development goes to Peter Wemm, who nearly single-handedly took the X86-64 architecture from "it can't even mount the root filesystem or exec init" to a nearly-polished release in little more than a month. (And, no, it wasn't just a matter of copying what NetBSD did; the processor-specific parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD are quite different.)

-Ed

YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE. CEASE AND DESIST

[oliphaunt]

Dear Free Software Zealot,

WE the undersigned have reason to believe that the software referred to as *BSD contains source code ("Code") that is the Intellectual Property ("Stuff") of the SCO Group, Inc. Or maybe the SCO Group Stuff contains Code that is the property of *BSD, we're not really sure. But we want your money, either way.

Please stop using *BSD until our lawyers are able to send you an invoice for the Code you are using. If it is easier for you, you can just mail us a check in advance and we'll subtract it from your balance.

Best regards,

D. Boies
Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe
Attorneys for the SCO Group, Inc

Nope!

[FreeUser]

you might be laughing now but if SCO wins we might all be using BSD!

How this could be modded up as insightful is indicative of how uninformed some people with moderator priveleges are with respect to SCO, Linux, FreeBSD, free software in general, and the US legal system.

1) SCO isn't going to win. They are dying, and doing so loudly, flailing about and spreading as much FUD as they can in the meantime, and the very people who ran the company into the ground are being paid off handsomely by Microsoft for the fit they are throwing but, in the end, they are a dead company. There lawsuit has no legal merit whatsoever, as demonstrated repeatedly by their reticence in backing up any of their wild and absurd claims with a single shred of evidence.

2) If SCO's tactics of unsubstantiated accusations and/or stealing code from one project and then accusing their victims of their own crimes and/or poisoning the well by releasing their own code, then disavowing the action and claiming copyright violation, and/or any number of other unpleasant extrapolations based upon their ever morphing and ever more shrill accusations, then there is nothing to prevent them from doing the same the FreeBSD, or any other project (free or proprietary). This isn't about Ye Olde AT&T code, which the BSD lawsuit cleared up years ago and which the FreeBSD license makes transferable to Linux[1], this is about unsubstantiated claims and FUD which IBM has the money to defend against, but which many other software projects, both free and small-time proprietary, do not.

If this were to ever be successful (something I find to be laughable even with the current, extreme dysfunction of the American legal system) it would represent a clear and present threat not just to Linux, but to FreeBSD, to free software in general, indeed, to proprietary software, to all software developed under any paradigm which isn't defended by a multimillion dollar company (and even those that are, for if absurdity were to ever be successful against the likes of IBM, it would pretty much spell the end of software development in the United States by anyone other than Microsoft or the US Government, and I'm not even sure how well the US Government would fare).

Dismiss the SCO issues as absurd if you wish (they certainly are), but do not dismiss the tactic being used. Were it to stand in any way, shape, or form it would be profoundly dangerous to all software development in the United States of every kind, with the possible exception of that done by monopolists with deep pockets such as Microsoft and entities with lots of guns, such as the US government. Do not be so foolish as to assume FreeBSD would fare any better against such baseless accusations as Linux or anyone else.

[1]The FreeBSD license is compatible for inclusion into GPLed software, so any AT&T code in FreeBSD can be legally used in the Linux kernel as is, SCO's ranting notwithstanding. The inappropriate use of trade secrets by a code contributer, or the use of copyrighted code in violation of copyright law that postdates the BSD v. AT&T trial, could as easily be done by FreeBSD, Microsoft Windows, or Joe Blog's NewOS as it could be by Linux, as could any number of "poison well" scenerios.

So, in short, the allegations are absurd, the method of attack disingenuous and despicable in the finest FUD tradition, and the immunity of FreeBSD against similiar forms of attack exactly the same as that of Linux.

The openness of free software provides an interesting opportunity for pre-emtive defense against this sort of nonsense, and we should be brainstorming effective means for doing so in the future. Some (by no means exhaustive) ideas include:

• Signed affidavits by all contributors as to the legality of their codes
• A less draconian alternative: a simple notice and affirmation in a comment associated with the code.
• Incorporating such a feature into CVS, subversion, bitkeeper, and other revision contr

Re:Nope!

[dcs]

"then there is nothing to prevent them from doing the same the FreeBSD"

Yes, there is. The settlement between AT&T and Berkeley. The question has already been settled.

Re:Nope!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh great- some more Open Source, socialist RMS diarrea. Clean up on aisle 3! Clean up on aisle 3!

As to your claims:

There lawsuit has no legal merit whatsoever, as demonstrated repeatedly by their reticence in backing up any of their wild and absurd claims with a single shred of evidence.

You mean like this? In fact, Paul Murphy thinks that SCO has a slam dunk case. Your zealotry is blinding you of the possibility that SCO might just be right after all. And if they are right, and their code was stolen and added to the Linux kernel, don't they have a right to be pissed off?

there is nothing to prevent them from doing the same the FreeBSD, or any other project (free or proprietary).

SCO's claims about Linux are not unsubstantiated, and if they do find evidence that FreeBSD contains stolen code as well, they have every right to pursue that matter as well.

Here is some free advice: the "evil corporations" are not conspiring to take away your rights, and RMS is just a stinky whacko with bad teeth. You would do yourself much better if you climbed out of your mom's basement every once in a while to get some sun and try to talk with some girls. Hanging out with the other pasty-white, pear shaped losers is really distorting your sense of reality.

Re:Nope!

[FreeUser]

Yes, there is. The settlement between AT&T and Berkeley. The question has already been settled.

No, it hasn't, and your insistence to the contrary shows you to be profoundly ignorant both of the AT&T v. BSD case and the accusations being levied against IBM by SCO.

Hint: they are not the same. They are not even related.

SCO is accusing IBM of having leaked trade secrets to the Linux community WRT multi-processor support (highly unlikely as Linux is vastly more advanced than any of SCOs products on that front, but that is the accusation). This code was not, let me repeat that for those still to dense to get it, was not a part of AT&T Unix system V, and is thus inapplicable to the BSD settlement. The code was written in later years, and would be as illegal in FreeBSD as it would be if it were in Linux.

The accusation would therefor be equally potent against FreeBSD, particularly if someone will ill intent, or innocently and then had their company purchased by those of ill intent, had contributed the code years earlier (as Caldera may well have done with Linux).

FreeBSD, and every other project, has exactly the same vulnerability to the kind of FUD, innuendo, and misinformation Microsoft's proxy (SCO) is committing against Linux.

Live in denial of that if you wish. Assume a case with absolutely nothing to do with SCO's current accusations or tactics somehow magically protects you if you so desire. But in the end, that won't protect you from this sort of behavior, and you can rest assured if such an approach is successful against Linux, FreeBSD stands a very good chance of being next. (After all, Microsoft can get at Apple that way, and remove the last of the free alternatives from their radar screen.)

Re:NETCRAFT NOW CONFIRMS: *BSD IS DYING!!!

[Jordy]

www.google.com, slashdot.org, www.amazon.com, www.redhat.com, www.cnn.com and any other major Linux host I can think of have no uptime charts whatsoever while www.freebsd.org does.

The only Linux uptime host I could find was www.debian.org with about a year uptime.

Besides that, their FAQ says that Linux boxes will cycle whatever number they measure after 497 days, so it is impossible for Linux to be in the top 50 since all of the hosts on there have been up greater than 497 days.

FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[chrysalis]

Unfortunately, once the system has been installed, I can't boot it. The kernel always crashes during the bootup phase on my ASUS A7V8X motherboard :(

Maybe it has something to do with USB2 and my CD burner (Plextor S88TU). I had similar crashes with NetBSD and old Linux kernels.

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[Leimy]

Funny... it runs great on my A7N8X-deluxe. I just started working with Soren Schmidt to try and support the SATA chipset on this motherboard for future releases of FreeBSD also. I run FBSD-CURRENT and it seems fine to me.

I started with the RC and CVSup'd to the latest last night.

Is that an nForce2 chipset?

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[chrysalis]

A7V8X, not A7N8X. This is not the same chipset at all.
A7V8X is based upon a VIA chipset.

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[nutznboltz]

What NIC does your A7V8X have?

---

Newsgroups: sol.lists.freebsd.current
Date: 21 May 2003 19:00:59 +0000
Sender: news@ns.sol.net
Approved: news@ns.sol.net
Organization: sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI
References:
X-To: stark@jeamland.ca
X-Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
From: se@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Help with 5.1-beta snapshot
Message-ID:
Lines: 19

On 2003-05-21 11:14 -0400, stark wrote:
> > I have the same mobo but I've never put extra NICs in it.
> > Have you tried it with just the built-in bge? (I know it
> > works fine for me.)
>
> It's failing for me :(

The Broadcom BCM550x Gigabit Ethernet chips are suppported,
but the BCM4401 Fest Ethernet chip is not.

The ASUS A7V8X exists in many variants including some with
either one of the above Ethernet chips. (I've got the 4401
on mine.)

Regards, STefan
__________________________________________ _____
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/fr eebsd- current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[chrysalis]

My NIC is BCM5702X.

Here's my exact hardware if it can help :

00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8377 [KT400] Host Bridge
00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8235
00:07.0 FireWire (IEEE 1394): VIA Technologies, Inc. IEEE 1394 Host Controller (rev 46)
00:08.0 RAID bus controller: Promise Technology, Inc.: Unknown device 3376 (rev 02)
00:09.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5702X Gigabit Ethernet (rev 02)
00:0c.0 Multimedia audio controller: Ensoniq 5880 AudioPCI (rev 02)
00:0d.0 Ethernet controller: 3Com Corporation 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] (rev 74)
00:0e.0 Multimedia video controller: Brooktree Corporation Bt878 Video Capture (rev 02)
00:0e.1 Multimedia controller: Brooktree Corporation Bt878 Audio Capture (rev 02)
00:10.0 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 80)
00:10.1 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 80)
00:10.2 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB (rev 80)
00:10.3 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB 2.0 (rev 82)
00:11.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8233A ISA Bridge
00:11.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C586B PIPC Bus Master IDE (rev 06)
00:11.5 Multimedia audio controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8233 AC97 Audio Controller (rev 50)
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon VE QY

My experiences with this mobo :

- Linux - old versions (don't remember which ones exactly, I tried a lot of kernels and various patches) : audio detected, but not working. Kernel freeze as soon as my CD writer is accessed.

- Linux 2.4.21_rc6-gss (Gentoo stable) with Alsa, ehci + uhci (not usb-uhci that crashes) : everything finally works.

- NetBSD-current : kernel freeze.

- OpenBSD 3.2-current with original BIOS : nothing worked, even disk I/O was flaky.

- OpenBSD 3.3 & current with updated BIOS : kernel freeze unless I manually disable auvia* drivers. Once auvia drivers are disabled, everything works fine except USB2 (unsupported by OpenBSD) and sound. The promise SATA controler also works in parallel mode.

- FreeBSD 5.0 and 5.1 : kernel freeze, even with the latest BIOS revision.

Fortunately, FreeBSD 5 works well with VMWare 4 on Linux.

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[nutznboltz]

You should ask here:

http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd- current

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[Billly Gates]

Have you had trouble with usb keyboards as well. My A7V8x and FreeBSD do not like my Microsoft USB keyboard.

Also I had sevre problems with the ide channels doing strange things and just dieing. I recieved a signal 6 and signal 10 errors as well as kernel messages stating that my hard drive could no longer run in dma mode. Then my whole system just died.

I wonder if its a powersupply problem?

Re:FreeBSD 5 + A7V8X = kaboom

[new-black-hand]

Switch off plug and play in your BIOS.

Re:NETCRAFT NOW CONFIRMS: *BSD IS DYING!!!

[daserver]

and that linux box used to run BSD but for some reason they now use GNU/Linux. Looks like they had a good run with BSD, ohh well

ftp2 traffic

[semanticgap]

... is always fun to whatch when a new big release comes out.

Features and bloat.

[MrHanky]

I currently use FreeBSD 4.8 on my old laptop, a 133 MHz Pentium Classic with 40 MB RAM. It's mainly a typewriter and ScummVM box, and FreeBSD 4.x is very nice, fast, and lightweight for the hardware (compared to Debian and Slack). But I love features as much as the next geek, so I'd like to know how 5.x compares to 4.x with regards to consumption of my precious RAM and disk space.

And I'd also like to know if there are any special features to drool for. Come on, just convince me to upgrade. I know I want to. :-)

Re:Features and bloat.

[josepha48]

ditto here..

My question is why should I go from 4.8 to 5.1? I am already using ipfw2. Of course my box is a gateway / router / dns server.

Re:Features and bloat.

[essdodson]

The main advantages to the 5.0 series will be better threading and SMP support. Additionally it uses GCC 3.2.2 and the 5.2 release will more than likely see GCC 3.3.x. It is larger, it is slower in some things. There's really no advantage to moving small firewallish boxes to 5, especially if you're already using ipfw2. If you do, I'd suggest waiting until 5 goes stable, probably with 5.2 release. Also, 4.9 will be coming out soon, six months or so and this will probably be the last release of the 4 series but will remain supported more than likely for up to a year after release.

Re:Features and bloat.

[TheRaven64]

My question is why should I go from 4.8 to 5.1?

There are only two real reasons for going from 4.8 to 5.1:

1. It's new and shiny and you want to play with a new toy (real reason)
2. You feel like contributing some testing time and will submit bug reports when it breaks (boring reason)

If you are actually using your FreeBSD box for anything important to you then you should stick with 4.8. Hopefully 5.2 will be tagged -STABLE, and then upgrading will be sensible.

Re: JOKE - YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE. CEASE AND DESIST

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

I know this was a joke, but some people may think this is true. FreeBSD (and Net and OpenBSD) are indemnified against UNIX claims from SCO or anyone else. They've already gone through their hell (daemon mascot pun intended) and came out legally unscathed, though pushed back in mindshare that they still haven't recovered from.

D. Boies
Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe
No Mr. Howard, Mr. Fine, Mr. Howard?

Re:What a pointless announcement,

[tigga]

How can the linux hardware support be so much better when freebsd is more stable?

Because in more code you have more bugs? ;)

I have actually seen "hardware support" in Linux which was a major headache to force to work. Linux guys are just being too optimistic - if it looks like works - than it works! If it blows out later -it's a pilot error than ;)

Stupid meta-moderation

[The Kiloman]

... ate my Troll rating. I stand by it none the less!

Re:Get your Republican head out of your ass.

[senrik]

~He wasn't impeached because he got a blowjob and lied about it. He was impeached because he deliberately attempted to circumvent the civil rights of another person.

And this is worse than Bush's Contempt of Congress (think WMD), Which is BTW Considered a High Crime, carrying a long prison term?

Re:More stupid Republican tricks.

[senrik]

~I said that the tax cuts are for the rich, which they are.

You are wrong. Bush has done much to help the poor get out of taxes. After all, those that have been unemployed for more than a year and thus have no income can pay no tax, right?

It brings to mind the question "are you better off today than you were four years ago?"

Re:What a pointless announcement,

[Cro Magnon]

Here's how it works:

Windows supports everything but crashes at the drop of a hat - any hat.

Linux supports supports most hardware and is usually stable.

FreeBSD supports some hardware and is very stable.

OpenBSD doesn't support anything, but it doesn't ever crash!

Broke support for Sun Ultra-2 with ISP SCSI

[nutznboltz]

get:


Starting background file system checks.

Mon Jun 9 14:57:37 EDT 2003
panic: initiate_write_inodeblock_ufs1: already started
cpuid = 1;
Debugger("panic")
Stopped at Debugger+0x1c: ta %xcc, 1
db> t
panic() at panic+0x134
initiate_write_inodeblock_ufs1() at initiate_write_inodeblock_ufs1+0x32c
softdep_disk _io_initiation() at softdep_disk_io_initiation+0x80
spec_xstrategy() at spec_xstrategy+0x134
spec_specstrategy() at spec_specstrategy+0x8
spec_vnoperate() at spec_vnoperate+0x1c
bwrite() at bwrite+0x3b8
vfs_bio_awrite() at vfs_bio_awrite+0x1a0
vop_stdfsync() at vop_stdfsync+0x120
spec_fsync() at spec_fsync+0x20
spec_vnoperate() at spec_vnoperate+0x1c
ffs_sync() at ffs_sync+0x348
sync() at sync+0xcc
syscall() at syscall+0x2a8
-- syscall (36, FreeBSD ELF64, sync) %o7=0x105e44 --
userland() at 0x10e4c8
user trace: trap %o7=0x105e44
pc 0x10e4c8, sp 0x7fdfffff311
pc 0x1001f0, sp 0x7fdfffff3e1
pc 0, sp 0x7fdfffff4a1
done
db>


FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE-p7 works OK though.

Re:Broke support for Sun Ultra-2 with ISP SCSI

[nutznboltz]

Been posting it for months. Almost got Kirk Mckusic to work on it but he said he had not time since he was going out of the country on vacation. He forwarded it to two people who I never heard a peep out of.

I'm thinking that I could give access to the box to a developer. Maybe take it home from work and hook it to my network there where it can't be a problem for work.

Re:Alan Eldridge -- Call a friend

[dinotrac]

This very sad news should remind us that many very good people have been hurt in the last few years by the IT implosion.

Sometimes nothing we do can make a difference. Sometimes the tiniest gesture can save a life.

Please remember to say "Hi, how are you?" to someone who might need it.

Awesome!

[msimm]

I wish more distro's would do it. I love the idea of supporting my favorite distro by automatically shelling out a very reasonable fee everytime they release. Wish I used Slack.

Re:Awesome!

[lactose99]

This was my exact same thought when I got both my FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE and Slackware 9.0 subscription copies THE SAME DAY.

Re:It is not dead,

[Trolling4Dollars]

don't forget "...pinin' for the fjords" as well.

Re: JOKE - YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE. CEASE AND DESIST

[Tenebrious1]

I know this was a joke, but some people may think this is true. FreeBSD (and Net and OpenBSD) are indemnified against UNIX claims from SCO or anyone else. They've already gone through their hell (daemon mascot pun intended) and came out legally unscathed, though pushed back in mindshare that they still haven't recovered from.

And this will stop SCO from sending cease & desist letters or filing lawsuits? You don't know much about the legal system, do you? They can send as many letters as they want, until someone files a restraining order against them. They can file any lawsuit they want, it doesn't matter if it has no merit if they're expecting it never to go to trial. That's exactly what the RIAA did with the RPI student. If you threaten enough you might just make some money in the process. As long as you don't let the case get to court and be thrown out...

Re:What a pointless announcement,

[Centinel]

grow some sack and quit posting AC

Re:The Truth!

[senrik]

~The poor vote for Demoncrats because they believe the Demoncraticly controled media. They have no incentive to believ anything else.
Let me think about that a moment ABC (owned by disney, if i remember correctly has a strict anti-union policy) NBC (Owned by GE, very conservative company that contributes to GOP causes and pollutes the hudson river) CBS (Owned by Viacom, member of RIAA and MPAA) CNN (Owned by AOL/TW, who is trying to out fox FNC) Fox (Owned by Rupert Murdoch, member of the birch society)
um which democratic media are you referring to?
I would refer you to the myth of the liberal media

Someone should write up

[Anonymous Coward]

a brief document explaining in simple terms what the differences are between Linux and BSD and why anyone should care which one he uses. From the point of view of someone who is not doing systems hacking, all versions of Unix look pretty much the same, with mostly the same commands and system calls.

Re:Someone should write up

[kirkjobsluder]

This is an good request. Briefly:

Package philosophy

Most linux distributions seem to be leaning towards a complete desktop in a box approach. The BSDs lean more towards a minimal unix with everything else helpfully provided by packages and ports. (For example, bash is not installed by default, but adding it is trivial.)

Install

I found the default FreeBSD install to be a bit tricky. (Partly because I ran out of disk space and had to start again from scratch.) The FreeBSD install assumes that you know a bit about Unix and can read the instructions carefully. I'm told that Linux is an easier install.

Speed and power

YMMV. FreeBSD allegedly can take higher network loads. But, MySQL historically has not run as well under FreeBSD. (I've also ran into problems with threaded apache2.) Some anecdotal reports claim snappier desktop performance under FreeBSD.

Hardware support

Linux is ahead on new hardware. NetBSD runs on more platforms.

Community

Linux has a wider community. I've found support from FreeBSD groups to be pretty good.

My personal opinion is that I went with FreeBSD because of the better security record. With the exception of some minor glitches getting apache2 to run, I've been happy with it.

Re:Someone should write up

[Quill_28]

Funny, I used Linux off and on for a couple of years.

I then switched to FreeBSD and I thought the install was so much easier and ports was so much easier I never went back, and never plan to.

Not saying folks should switch just that I much prefer freebsd over the lini I have tried. I just found it to be much easier in almost everyway.

Re:Someone should write up

[RazzleDazzle]

You should try Gentoo. The install is definitely not as easy as openbsd or freebsd or mandrake or redhat but using Gentoo is such a breeze compared to them. It has a next generation ports system called portage. It is wonderful. Get some cheapy hardware and try it out.

I still use openbsd for my servers and firewall though.

Re:Someone should write up

[UncleVanya]

A very coherent speach, thank you.

My roommate, who is a bit out of touch with the whole "inter-net thing" needs a free version of Unix for the software for his classes, and this has helped me codify which version of BSD we'll use.

Thank you again.

Mindshare

[Voivod]

I work in the embedded industry and I can tell you why: people have heard of Linux. Almost all of the people calling me asking about running Linux on embedded hardware are doing it for the first time, and they've never heard of BSD.

Re:And still perl is a port now and java builds

[DoXaVG]

Proof in Pudding: Think of heavy iron appliances with various free operating systems in it. I can think of two for FreeBSD. The godly Juniper routers and the F5 BigIP. These are serious pieces of networking equipment and they chose FreeBSD for a reason - its far more pleasant to deal with commercially, its fast stable and coherent and the license permits modifications without divulging them to the world.

Hrm, actually, the BigIP versions 4.0-4.5 run on BSDi. F5's 3DNS version 3.x ran on FreeBSD, but they migrated it to BSDi in version 4.0. ISMan might run on FreeBSD though - it comes as an ISO.

--Dox

Re:Now playing catchup with Linux

[tigga]

You are referring to some limited features set which not very important for most folks..

PAE (36bit memory addressing)
It needed on i386 boxes with more than 4GB RAM. It's usefulness is limited - you can't have process with more than 4GB size anyway. You better use real 64bit hardware.
* DevFS
?? Devfs was supported since 2.0. It became MANDATORY in 5.1.
* Name Service Switch
FreeBSD used host.conf switch which was adequate for most users.. It's kind of nice to have it and it was available for couple years as patch for people who really wanted it.
* USB 2.0 support
Hmm, Linux has it only for a year - not for "quite while".
* Basic HTT (HyperThreading) Support
It's usefulness is not proved - you can gain and lose with it.
* ata driver flushes at shutdown
* >2TB block devices
How come Linux had it for quite while and just recently get rid of 2GB file size limit?
* Filesystem volume labels
Not very usefull, unless you have a lot of partitions/disks and then you're better off with vinum volume manager
* O_DIRECT support
?? It was in FreeBSD since 4.4...

You may also say that FreeBSD does not have dir command and Linux had it for ages...Or colored ls output is a must on any server ;)))

Alpha

[porkface]

Needs a BitTorrent for the Alpha release.

Re:Now playing catchup with Linux

[tigga]

It is an OS for people who want to be 1337, who don't want to use the same OS as someone who doesn't want to learn C.

Sorry, it is bullshit. FreeBSD is for people who want their work to be done. Linux is often used by "kewl dude" crowd.

MOD DOWN!!!

[koko775]

parent is a very offensive post.

Re:The Truth!

[Mooncaller]

Oh boy, I don't even know weer to start on this one. Lets just say that every one of your exampls is lame. For example, the RIAA and MPAA support the Demoncrates more then the Republicans. GE also is a major supporter of the Democratic canidates during times of military build up. Every CNN artical follows one of two standared rehtorical formats.

Demon talking about GOP:

"The GOP canidate is racist and only helping the poor" states a resent study by the Democrats.

Repubican talking about a Demon:

The republican canidate in a partisan statement accused the Democrates of porkbarrelling.

Disney, despite its anti-union policy, is a libral leaning company that donates hevily to Democratic canidates.

Back to AOL/TW and Fox. This is an interesting subject. Time-Warner has always had a moderate componet and a larger liberal componet. AOL is somewhat right winged ( from its small new tech buisness origins). Fox has resently taken a somewhat rightwinged stance, in a in your face sort of way. This has resonated with their audience, reaching a peak during the resent Middle-East coverage. Foxes right wing stance is in complete contrast to the decietfull techniques used by the normal liberal writers. These types try to fool their audience into believing that they are unbiased. Regardless, AOL/TW has seen the commercial success of Fox and has decided to expand the middle of the road coverage. Time-Warner also has a history of jurnelistic entegrity even in their liberal publications, ie, everyone knows Time Magazine is liberal, and the publishers do not try to hide the fact.

As a side note, I tend to lean towards the Republican ideal. Despite this, I much perfered the CNN coverage of the "Alliance of The Willing"s activities in Iraq. I found Foxes coverage a bit offensive. My 20 year old son and all his buddies, on the other hand watched Fox, and they are all from left leaning backgrounds. Go figure!

OOPS

[Mooncaller]

Should have proofread.

Should have been " ... and only helping the rich."

I Just followed you link.

[Mooncaller]

I'm sorry after reading such a compellingly logical and well researched peice, I think I'll revise my opinion ...NOT!!!

This reminds me of the time the Microsoft lackey in my company were strying to get me to soften my anti Microsoft/Windows stance and prove that the T&M industry was going to Windows based instrumentation because that is what the customers wanted. They showed me a study from a company that has already been taken over by MS, and had no history of Unix support( i.e. all there customers were already 100% Windows). Further investigation showed that the study was done at MSs request.

If you want to convince me, youd better do better then bartcop!!!

Still not stable

[Billly Gates]

Please do not be burned and read the whole release notes. Its still beta quality and I am sure some of the ports might still be broken.

I assumed FreeBSD 5.0 was stable because everyone here mentioned how ready it was. It ruined my whole system.

Just a reminder to take a look at FreeBSD 4.8 if you use a server or workstation with critical work on it.

5.1 release directory not readable until release

[Michael Wardle]

After the problems that occurred when the last release was announced early, the FreeBSD release team created a new permissions scheme so that only mirror admins could access the 5.1 release directory before the official release. If anybody else tried to access the 5.1 release directory (even on a mirror site), they would get a 403 (access denied) error.

In this case, clearly it was of little use for Slashdot to announce the availability of FreeBSD 5.1 early.

great way to see latest GNOME and KDE as intended

[Michael Wardle]

As the release notes state, FreeBSD 5.1 includes the latest stable releases of GNOME and KDE, 2.2.1 and 3.1.2 respectively.

Getting FreeBSD 5.1 would be a great way to easily get the latest stable versions of these desktop environments as they were intended to be (without all the distribution-specific customizations made by Red Hat, SuSE, and so on).

Granted, you could also use Gentoo current or Debian unstable, but FreeBSD 5.1 is likely to be more stable (in the sense of not frequently changing) and you can get it on CD.

Re:great way to see latest GNOME and KDE as intend

[Gracchus]

Ummmm....actually, you needn't install 5.1-RELEASE to get the latest KDE/GNOME versions. 'Portupgrade' is your friend....;-)

FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE
XFree86 4.3.0
GNOME 2.2.1/KDE 3.1.2

....and still my favorite WM: WindowMaker 0.80.2 (who needs a dot.oh release anyway???)

Re:great way to see latest GNOME and KDE as intend

[Gracchus]

Ummmm....actually, you needn't install 5.1-RELEASE to get the latest KDE/GNOME versions. 'Portupgrade' is your friend....;-)

FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE
XFree86 4.3.0
GNOME 2.2.1/KDE 3.1.2

....and still my favorite WM: WindowMaker 0.80.2 (who needs a dot.oh release anyway???)

Re:NETCRAFT NOW CONFIRMS: *BSD IS DYING!!!

[TheRaven64]

and take a look at the uptime list.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

Did you notice www.hs.sll.se, which claims to be running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on FreeBSD? Is this even possible?

Re:Now playing catchup with Linux

[TheRaven64]

Sorry, it is bullshit. FreeBSD is for people who want their work to be done. Linux is often used by "kewl dude" crowd.

This is just plain not true. I use FreeBSD and I have no intention of getting any work done...

Re:More stupid Republican tricks.

[taxman457f]

-I said that the tax cuts are for the rich, which they are

you're right, but not for the reason you think you are. It's not because the republicans want to shower benefits on the rich. It is because the rich are the only ones that even pay any significant amount of taxes.

you cannot lower someone's taxes that pays none. Well, you can, but then its just welfare.

54% of income tax revenues come from the top 5% of income earners. (which is only about 130k as of recently). the bottom 50% of income earners pay about 4% of the tax revenue.

I have clients that pay more taxes in a year than most people make (and one that pays more than just about anyone reading here makes). Therefore almost any tax cut is going to put more money back in their pocket. But lets think about that for a minute. Is letting someone keep more of their own money that they *earned* showering tax cuts on them?

Wealthy people make more money because they have learned how to create income and wealth. They also employ most of the rest of us (directly or indirectly) so we can eat, feed out children, and go to schools.

Notice I am not wealthy yet, but I will be. Wealth /= evil, nor does one have to be the least bit dishonest to accumulate it.

Re:Now playing catchup with Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you want it done fast or do you want it done correctly? You can't have both.

Because....

[bsd troll]

Sadly because software is being designed to run on Linux, not generic Unix or with a focus on POSIX compliance. The focus used to be on transmitting data as plain text, interoperability, and portability. Now it's just "does it compile on my Redhat box?"

Re:Now playing catchup with Linux

[Arandir]

From the man page: "The devfs file system first appeared in FreeBSD 2.0. The devfs manual page first appeared in FreeBSD 2.2."

grub and UFS2

[azaze1]

I made the mistake of replacing the MBR that freebsd installs with that of grub from my gentoo install and realized after that it looks like grub 0.93 from gentoo cannot read or mount the UFS2 filesystem from my 5.1-RELEASE install. How can I fix this/boot back into freebsd now? And does anyone know if installing grub from freebsd's ports will support UFS2? Or am I just going to have to reinstall fbsd with UFS1. -Robert

Re:grub and UFS2

[1s44c]

Chainload the FreeBSD partiton.

Or to put it another way RTFM.

Re:grub and UFS2

[azaze1]

I chainload my windows install after having read the fine manual a few years ago, but it first must be able to read the filesystem, which apparently grub can't do with UFS2, rtfp.

Re:grub and UFS2

[ffsnjb]

You can use sysinstall to load the mbr without trashing the disk with a newfs. Boot from a CDROM built with the ISO from the release installed on the machine.

Re:grub and UFS2

[dinivin]

This is completely incorrect. In order to chainload an operating system, grub does not need to read the filesystem. I am happily chainloading FreeBSD 5.1 on ufs2 with grub.

Dinivin

Re:And still no Java (key technical leader quit)

[billhuey]

It also helps if the FreeBSD Foudation doesn't piss off the main HotSpot VM lead in the FreeBSD. Much of 1.3.1 was mine from the days when I was at BSDi, J2SE 1.4 wouldn't have been possible without work on the threading system and the massive job of porting the HotSpot VM in J2SE 1.3 to FreeBSD. It's a major feat for the BSDs overall and is one of the main bug complains on Sun's site.

Basically, the FreeBSD Foundation paid another lower level engineer to do work that was pretty much in my technical domain without consultation with me asking if this was ok or not, etc.. and other things that go with having the responsibilities of being a technical lead of a project. It undermines the nature of how volunteer organizations work. Pretty ridiculous, since I'm effectively the technical lead of the project until this event. By doing this, they undermined my status within the group, pissed me off and effectively took over the entire FreeBSD Java effort without crediting me for my work over the last 2 years that stemmed originally from my BSDi day as a JVM internals engineer.

I busted ass for these folks the first half of last year and they basically blew me off because of these "elists" actions. It's difficult to interpret it any other way from my point of view.

The flames are thick and I got really pissed off from how they treated me, "you're annoying and threaten my status within the FreeBSD Foundation. Dipshits.

Original archived thread:
http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/archive/2003 /freebsd- java/20030209.freebsd-java.html

Supporting emails:
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fe tch=42987 9+0+archive/2003/freebsd-java/20030209.freebsd-jav a
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=39 387 9+0+archive/2003/freebsd-java/20030209.freebsd-jav a

Reading the CVS log in the patchset will reveal what I've done. An unfortunate set of circumstances.

I stil haven't gotten an apology from them yet, 4 months have past.

Re:And still no Java (key technical leader quit)

[benedict]

I'd apologize to you, but I have no standing.

I doubt that the slight was intentional. Remember
Hanlon's Razor.

syscons

[dmelomed]

My bad, it's 'syscons'.

MTA

[Mourgos]

Will sendmail ever become a port?

SCHED_ULE

[Groganz]

Just tried out the new SCHED_ULE scheduler and so far it is awesome on my SMP machine. XFree86 uses half the CPU it used to and it was very smooth running other apps whilst rebuilding the kernel with -j6, eg. FXTV.

Re:And still no Java (key technical leader quit)

[Zenin]

Much of 1.3.1 was mine from the days when I was at BSDi,

Many thanks; every little bit helps.

Basically, the FreeBSD Foundation paid another lower level engineer to do work that was pretty much in my technical domain without consultation with me asking if this was ok or not, etc..

I'm not upto date on the particulars, but perhaps the fact that Java on FreeBSD was happening so slowly that it might as well not have been happening at all have something to do with it? Personally I love FreeBSD, but since most all my work switched from Perl based to Java based I could no longer advocate my beloved OS. Sure, Java kinda, sorta, maybe was available on FreeBSD...enough that I coded on a FreeBSD work station...but nothing close to something anyone could resonablly present to a client as a "good idea to run this project on FreeBSD". No way in hell, period, when Sparc hardware was/is so cheap and actually supported today.

By doing this, they undermined my status within the group, pissed me off and effectively took over the entire FreeBSD Java effort without crediting me for my work over the last 2 years that stemmed originally from my BSDi day as a JVM internals engineer.

Java on FreeBSD was going no where, fast. Maybe they, like myself and pretty much every FreeBSD user that longed for Java to be supported well enough on FreeBSD to use it for professional work, just got sick and tired of the snails pace that Java on FreeBSD was going. Maybe they thought FreeBSD, effectively having been a non-player in the Java world from the get-go, needed to try a different tactic, some freash blood, because obviously whatever had been happening wasn't good enough by miles.

Seriously... For a modern IT setting Java is very often a primary focus for new development of server apps. FreeBSD will simply get left in the dust as a "Serious Server OS" if it doesn't have rock solid Java support upto and including the latest versions available for Linux/Solaris/Windows.

You can't just be getting 1.3 to laughably be called "production ready" when 1.4 is production ready everywhere else... Hell, I'm not even sure what's available for Java on FreeBSD these days because I gave up watching the grass not grow. I know a great many that are pretty much in the same boat.

You couldn't hack it for whatever reasons, so they went looking for someone who maybe could. Boo-who they didn't coddle you more before looking.

Re:So you're a computer janitor.

[Trolling4Dollars]

Dudes... settle down. This is ONLY Slashdot after all.

Uhhhm

[xaoslaad]

A little lost. Where is Sparc64 Disc1? I have downloaded Disc2, but Disc1 is nowhere to be found. I am assuming (yea I know) that there is a Disc 1 as ver 5.0 had a Disc 1 and in 5.1 i386 has a Disc 1 and 2....

The README says look in the distro/floppies directory for a README.TXT with more information. Doesn't exist and can't find anything on the site...

hints?

Re:The Truth!

[KevinIsOwn]

Thank you for proving to me that you are in fact the biggest dumbass in the world. Please, take your ridiculous political ideas and jump off a cliff so nobody else becomes as stupid as you.

BSD?

[kamukwam]

You mean BSOD!

Re:And still no Java (key technical leader quit)

[billhuey]

Alexey Zelkin is doing a good job, but needs help since this stuff is way beyond any single person. If the project was more organized and politically clear, there might have been a better effort for corporate out reach, which would have set a a positive example in the BSD for this kind of organization. Currently, you just have old school advocates that don't really understand why these issues are significant (political and technical) and why they need to change, be more politically inclusive and step out of the way of folks when then need to. Linux, on the other hand, is too decentralized to have any politics really effect it. It's definitely more of a meritocracy.

IMO, the open sources BSDs might collapse if this does get corrected. The money being shoved into Linux is enormous.

My time with this project has past. It was kind of a painful experience overall, but I've moved to the Linux community doing RTOS work instead and have found it to be much more reasonable and accepting community. There's really no reason for me to go back to FreeBSD. :\ /me wishes the *BSD Java project luck

bill

What i like about *BSD and dont like

[felix9x]

I been using NetBSD on my laptop and on some servers lately and its so fat satisfied all my expectations except a few exception.

The port/package system is great and it works perfectly 99% of the time. The 1% of the time it does not work is because the package is not up to date or the build fails for some reason or the package conflicts with another package. When this happens there is no automatic fix you have to usualy modify the Makefile yourself or email the maintener and wait for fixes to be made.

What i also love and cant live without in package system is that it installs things in expected places and sets up and postinstallation steps specific to the OS that need to be done that otherwise would have to be done in a time consuming maner by hand.

What i dont like about the ports/package system is that its not intuative when custom modification need to be made. Its pretty much automatic as far as installing what is offered by the package but if one needs special config options or special needs then there is no uniform config file to modify and you never know where in the Makefile the change you need can be baried.

I cant speak for FreeBSD since i have not used it but i am sure alot of the general things apply to them also.

Let me give an expample in Netbsd where packages dont live up to their expectation and that is when dealing with packages with intall systems that dont fit the standard open source build system. NetBSD is not to blame here but the companies who release this software.
Example 1. OpenOffice.
First there is only Linux Binaries because the source can not realy be build for the new version of OpenOffice. Ok this is not a huge problem since Linux emulation is pretty easy to set up. What realy upset me is that since i didnt have the /proc filesystem the OpenOffice crashed without explanation. There was only one way to determine what caused the crash and that is to do trace of the program. Why would i not have /proc filesystem because i like the simple philosopy of BSD that if its not needed dont put it there.

Example 2.
Sun Java SDK
This is another broken and annoying thing to install. First you need to download binaries yourself. Then you have to also enable Linux Emulation. Then you can install but it will be unstable for some reason. Version 1.3 runs stables but Version 1.4 causes strange lockups. Again this is Sun to blame for not making it easy to adopt their software to BSD.

Overall the install systems is clean. It seems that Gentoo linux has developed a install system similar to this and i hope to explore it.

Next thing that i love about Netbsd is its clean rc.d system. Basicaly not runlevel nonesence and very uniform implementation of all the start scrips. The package software also provides an start scrip.

Last thing i love about NetBSD is that its inovative. Yes maybe not at a frantic pace like Linux or a faced pace FreeBSD but its not sitting around idly either. New exciting features to come in next version like scheduler activations.

Ok i had enough to say for now.

Bought the CD

[bigjnsa500]

I bought the CD yesterday at USENIX (being held in my home town of San Antonio) for $5 at the Houston users group table. I hope this release is better than the 4.7 I have on my Dell laptop now.

Has NVIDIA released 5.x drivers yet?

Re:Bought the CD

[azaze1]

their drivers work for 4.7 through 5.1 beta2, beyond that (which includes this release) the drivers wont compile =\

Re:and the linux section is.. where?

[Thornae]

Although it's no longer necessarily true (heard rumours that corporate windows users are skewing the figures away), it's still assumed that the average /. user runs some form of linux, or at least is aware of linux. Therefore, linux news generally is Main Page stuff that gets its own sub-category per-story.
Free-, Net- and Open-BSD, OTOH, are still used by a minority, and are (very loosely) analogous to three seperate linux distros. There's enough interest in them to warrant a section for those stories that don't make it to the main page, whereas linux (and individual distros) tends to be main page news all the time.

HTH.