Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD 4.9 Stability Update

Dan writes "FreeBSD Release Engineering Team's Scott Long would like to get a new poll on the stability and readiness of 4.9. The belief is that the last of the PAE-induced instability was resolved on August 31. Is anyone still experiencing unusual crashes, corruption, etc, on a system that is running with up-to-date sources? Now is the time to speak up and get the problems resolved. Scott is also requesting help with testing. In response to this, we are adding our own poll. Please vote and add comments as appropriate to help Scott."

117 comments

  1. What instability? by __past__ · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I'm running 4-STABLE on two servers, and 5.1 on some workstations, but I didn't notice any stability problems yet (and the STABLE boxes do identify themselves as 4.9-PRERELEASE, so I guess they should be affected). What is the problem?

    The PAE manpage says it's about having more than 4GB of memory. What does that have to do with USB support? If there are known problems, do they affect systems with < 4GB? Pointers to PRs and mailing lists appreciated.

    1. Re:What instability? by questionlp · · Score: 5, Informative

      Drivers and applications can run into some issues with the way memory is windowed and accessed via PAE. It could be that the drivers that have issues access memory in a way that isn't too friendly to PAE or things are hardcoded so that they could end up with memory violations.

      It's kind of like making drivers work properly in non-SMP and SMP mode, mostly how interrupts are handled. It can get even trickier when you throw in NUMA or ccNUMA found in the AMD64 architecture. /me shrugs

    2. Re:What instability? by tgreiner · · Score: 2, Informative

      From what I remember from the discussions on the mailing list the PAE import seems to have various instabilities even if not running PAE. This needs to be ironed out before a release. And seemingly this IS already fixed.

  2. Re:the BSD ghetto by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    though a troll, excellent song reference. =)

  3. Re:FIRST PROST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm with you 99%.

  4. Re:FIRST PROST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlimited moderator bitchslapping in progress. Set troll, flamebait, redundant and off topic modifiers to +6. Thanks.

  5. Stability by mediumgreen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I, for one, am very pleased to see the release team err on the side of caution and make sure that stability issues have been resolved before releasing 4.9. It seems that too much software is release way too early - and while not intended to be a troll - especially Linux with it's libc and kernel du'jour. I'll use Linux when I have no choice, but the stability and ease of use of FreeBSD make it my top choice for my x86 servers.

    1. Re:Stability by realdpk · · Score: 2, Funny

      MySQL's slogan. "Release early, release often". I'm not kidding.

    2. Re:Stability by Admiral+Llama · · Score: 2, Funny

      I felt some instability in STABLE so I switched to CURRENT. 5.2 is coming down the pipe, so I figured the "we thought we nipped this but it turns out we didn't" warning in the updating file was enough to prod me over to CURRENT.

      Maybe this is their secret way of getting more users to test out CURRENT?

  6. FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the love of GOD... why does there need to be soooo many morons posting "Yup, *BSD is dead!"

    I know these can't be linux zealots because, well, any linux zealot would be too intelligent to either post that rubbish nor care.

    Or, are these just a core of Mac haters?

    1. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So many morons? It could just be the same one who.

      As for 'can't be linux zealots', look at this post found on the 'net today:

      From: Ruben I Safir

      Both the Apple and the Sun FS offerings are worthless. In fact, Darwin is less
      than worthless.

      BSD is really bad, but it is supported and developed by idiots, and doesn't
      have enough protection
      of our Freedom, and is just abulutely unfriendly to users.

      It's going to the scrapheap of history, along with SCO.

      Ruben

      Brooklyn Linux Solutions
      __________________________
      DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS http://fairuse.nylxs.com

      http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Consulting
      http://www.inns.net -- Happy Clients
      http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
      http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive or stories and
      articles from around the net
      http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/downtown.html - See the New Downtown Brooklyn....

      1-718-382-0585

    2. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot.

    3. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's one guy, who was fired from Walnut Creek a couple of years ago when they still co-ordinated FreeBSD.

      He was caught stealing some equipment, and hasn't been able to get another job since.

      Rather than face his own stupidity, he's latched on to FreeBSD as the cause of his trouble, and keeps lashing out in an effort to deaden the growing hunger and misery inside himself.

      Or, at least that's what I've heard.

    4. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes

      I stole all the equipment

      and I know who you are

      expect to be erased soon

      ps BSD is dying

    5. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lmao

      us trolls would go away if you would deny our existance

      but the fact that you get so frustrated is what keeps us coming back

    6. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How old are you?
      Do you even know what BSD is?

      Why don't you try GROWING one instead of BEING one?

      I can only assume you get off on frustration as you have a lot of practice with that... alone in the bathroom, fantasizing about that girl from math class... hoping she will notice you. And she never will because you think posting anonymous crap on /. makes you something.

      Well, it does... an idiot.

    7. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh you want a crapflood you say? ok sure

    8. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please do. But keep it in the BSD section - slashdot management doesn't do anything about the crapflooding here.

    9. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by sirket · · Score: 1

      Wow, the folks who created ext2 and ext3 telling the BSD people that they do not know what a good file system is. It took me 10 minutes to stop laughing at this post.

      -sirket

    10. Re:FREAKIN' SICK OF THE TROLLS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were a-laughing ... feel free to call Rubin or send him e-mail and let him know his words have even been edited and reposted on /.

      Let him know how funny he is.

  7. AMEN! Why can't they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can't these Perl geeks figure out a way in slash to disable AC posting just in bsd.slashdot.org? Or even any topic that has the BSD topic assigned to it?

    1. Re:AMEN! Why can't they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol BSD lusers want special privileges

      typical "We are God" arrogance from the BSD community

    2. Re:AMEN! Why can't they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because we _ARE_ God, asswipe.

    3. Re:AMEN! Why can't they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sieg Heil, mighty BSD overlord!

      I bow in your presence!

  8. I hope you know what -STABLE means by dodell · · Score: 3, Informative

    Okay, education point here (if you know, then it's cool. If not, here's something you should know).

    The -STABLE branch is NOT STABLE! In the FreeBSD development cycle, the most stable systems run -RELEASE. Major development is done on -CURRENT. Working ideas are then moved into -STABLE (to stablize) -- a -STABLE system is a development system and is not guaranteed to boot. When the -STABLE branch proves itself to be very stable and contains enough new functionality, a -RELEASE snapshot is made. -STABLE should be renamed to -BETA or something similar (it actually was at one point, but this was retracted when a lot of people complained that they didn't want a -BETA branch, they wanted it to be stable).

    For more information, please read about -CURRENT and -STABLE and what they really are at http://freebsd.org/handbook/current-stable.html.

    Unless you're doing development and if these are production servers, I suggest that you run -RELEASE on them.

    1. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell named a non-stable thing "-STABLE" ? That seems more-than-slightly moronic.

      Perhaps they could have named is "-STABILIZING"...

    2. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by innosent · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think it's more like -MORESTABLETHANCURRENT. In other words, it's sort of like a point release (the xx part) in Linux's Stable tree (2.4.xx). It means something like "We've tested this, and it looks good, but let us know if anything breaks", as opposed to -CURRENT's "We've run this once or twice, still working on it, please help us get it to work correctly", and -RELEASE's "You didn't complain when it was STABLE, so we're not planning on fixing any bugs for a long time".

      So basically, CURRENT is like the 2.5.xx/2.6.xtest series of Linux, STABLE is like 2.4.xx, and RELEASE is more like 2.4.x9. Unless there are extreme circumstances, or important new hardware, RELEASE versions aren't put out that often. Hell, 4.7 and 4.8 were 6 months apart, and it'll be at least six months since 4.8 (April 3) before 4.9 is out.

      --
      --That's the point of being root, you can do anything you want, even if it's stupid.
    3. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by sirket · · Score: 1

      This is just plain wrong.

      -RELEASE is a snapshot of the -STABLE tree at the time of a particular release. -RELEASE is not updated or otherwise kept current. -RELEASE is what you would install when a new version comes out (As boot floppies are only available for -RELEASE). The only reason for releases is to serve as markers within the -STABLE cycle. It allows people to talk about a particular set of features and code.

      -STABLE is the stable branch of FreeBSD. It is a moving target and is constantly being updated to keep it secure and stable. Nothing gets introduced into -STABLE unless it has been tested thoroughly.

      -CURRENT is just that. It is the bleeding edge.

      If you run -RELEASE on your system, you may as well ask to get hacked. There are no updates to -RELEASE. When OpenSSH is patched, those changes are only available to people tracking -STABLE.

      Unless you're doing development and if these are production servers, I suggest that you run -RELEASE on them.

      Unless you are an idiot, I would suggest you actually track -STABLE and keep your boxes secure.

      -sirket

    4. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by Echo|Fox · · Score: 5, Informative

      Errr, no.

      The -RELEASE branches _are_ kept secured as a security branch for all currently maintained -RELEASE branches.

      Any time a vulnerability is found, the patches go into -STABLE, but are also added to all of the supported -RELEASE trees, which would then show as a patchlevel in the version. If you cvsup a 4.8-RELEASE box to RELENG_4_8 right now, you'd end up with 4.8-RELEASE-p7, which would include patches for all of the security vulnerabilities up till now (including the latest OpenSSH and Sendmail vulnerabilities).

      Personally, I find tracking the security branches of -RELEASEs to be safer and more convenient, since I always know what is running on a given server. Since new features _are_ backported from -CURRENT to -STABLE, I could end up with two 4-STABLE machines running different versions of software. The only time I'll run -STABLE on a production server is when there is a bug in a -RELEASE, or there is a new feature in -STABLE I really need. And frankly, that hasn't happened since the early 3.x days.

    5. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by sirket · · Score: 1

      That is entirely correct and I do not know what I was thinking. Brain death was clearly a problem this morning.

      -sirket

    6. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by essdodson · · Score: 1

      While it's true that RELEASE branches are considered the most stable, there's little worry with keeping up with the STABLE branch. I vote for no branch renaming, just education of users.

      --
      scott
    7. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by essdodson · · Score: 1

      As others have pointed out this is partially correct. Atleast with respect to the stability of the STABLE branch and RELEASE being a snapshot from the STABLE branch made ideally every 6 months (4 months?).

      However, RELEASE branches are kept up to date in relation to security. The only changes made to RELEASE branches are those made to provide security patches. Last time i checked the SA site all releases back to 4.6 were officially supported, and those prior to 4.6 are supported, though not officially.

      --
      scott
    8. Re:I hope you know what -STABLE means by essdodson · · Score: 1
      So basically, CURRENT is like the 2.5.xx/2.6.xtest series of Linux, STABLE is like 2.4.xx, and RELEASE is more like 2.4.x9. Unless there are extreme circumstances, or important new hardware, RELEASE versions aren't put out that often. Hell, 4.7 and 4.8 were 6 months apart, and it'll be at least six months since 4.8 (April 3) before 4.9 is out.


      This is a good way of looking at it. Though releases are made based on a timed release schedule optimisticly looking for one every quarter, however it ends up being every 6 months.
      --
      scott
  9. "our Freedom" and licenses by Ricin · · Score: 1
    Would that mean the Freedom of the end user from [insert thing you'd hate] or to [insert thing you'd like].

    Or perhaps the Freedom of a vendor/packager from [insert thing they'd hate] or to [insert thing they'd like].

    Or perhaps the freedom of a developer from [insert thing (s)he'd hate] or to [insert thing (s)he'd like].

    And how about a packager that also adds some code? Perhaps (s)he wants to sell addons. Perhaps (s)he wants to sell it the first year, then give it away unconditionally except for retaining copyright. To make a living by being able to gain financial reward for (apparently) being in the lead in some area or niche. A fool proof clickety GUI installer for example. Even LGPL could become tricky then.

    As and end user you're certainly not going to have any less freedom from using a *BSD product. Unless you perhaps find less hand holding or lack of persistancy or IQ an infringement upon your Freedom. Even Marx would have laughed at that.

    I am not an extreme evangelist(sp?) of the *BSD license, neither do I detest the GPL but we have gotten into a situation where people slap a GPL on it without really considering its fine print. It greatly restricts useful reuse of your sourceforge project. If you want that, fine, but do you?

    It's a "them vs us" (MS anyone, SCO?) emotion and they sell it very well, especially to young idealistic people who view the world from their social/economical perspective.

  10. Re:OMG! my BSD box keeps on CRAPFLOODING help! lol by Ricin · · Score: 1

    Real world example: Ask a few big pr0n sites. Many of them used FreeBSD when "the www" became big and they made money. They still do I think, though it might be less now. They knew back then they needed a robust OS (1995-ish), they still know now.

    You apparently don't though :)

  11. On what tune should this BSD Elegy be sung anyway? by Ricin · · Score: 1

    Is it an existing song or could we have a midi or something as to have a better idea. It might get less lame also.

  12. Re:What happens in a story like this... by Ricin · · Score: 1

    You're probably right. But please understand that it's not the smarter people making the stupid remarks/generalisations/1337ism.

  13. Whatever you've been smoking, gimme some by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Almost none of parent is true. If I had the time, I'd post links to rebuttals of each of the ten points in parent. Now won't the real trolls please shut up?

  14. Re:On what tune should this BSD Elegy be sung anyw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Although it is true that BSD is dying, there are some helpful steps you can take ease your sorrow:
    • deal with the inevitable.
    • grieve for your loss.
    • move on.
      Never let your emotions get mixed up with something as silly as a computer
      operating system. It isn't healthy. So BSD fails. Big whoop. Deal with it and move on.
      Hope this helps.

  15. IF BSD IS DYING.... by utlemming · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Tell me...if BSD is dying, then how come FreeBSD is running the top five internet servers in speed and reliability? According to Netcraft, which you so frequently post, the top fifty servers with the longest up time are running FreeBSD. And even your beloved Netcraft is running FreeBSD. Additionally, there is an estimated 2,000,000 websites running FreeBSD, and that does not include all of the work stations. You will note that Yahoo uses FreeBSD. All though just a small gallery, the FreeBSD website has a listing of people that are running FreeBSD and have registered it on the website. So forgive me for being cynnical, but to the person that has said repeatedly that there are only 36000 FreeBSD users, go to hell. Honestly, if you are going to post bad numbers, at least get some of them right. According to the gallery of people that announced their FreeBSD use, 3831 are servers if you believe the guy that has said that there are 36000 users. Second the moron that says that there are only 36000 FreeBSD users fails to realize that Usenet postings are not a reliable way of figuring out how many people are really using FreeBSD. Heck, using that logic, I would say that, by Usenet postings, Microsoft Windows is only run on 150,000 machines. Where did you get that 93% of developers have abandoned FreeBSD? If you are going to post give us some evidence.

    The SysAdmin magizine survey did not say that FreeBSD was dead last. Rather it said that FreeBSD is 6x slower than Linux in Disk IO functions, but is not nearly as bad as Solaris or Windows (which had a 10x improvment). The SysAdmin maginzine title was "Which OS is Fastest for High-Performance Network Applications?" and Linux won. It did not state that FreeBSD is falling in disarray -- that was a flawed conclusion reached by the annoymous coward. The article says that FreeBSD is not well suited for High-Performance Network Applications. Go to HELL bastard.

    Additionally -- how come all you trolls out there have to hide behind annoymous coward? Everytime there is some BSD news, you guys come out of the wood work, make some smart-allick remark and post the same trash. Look, FreeBSD is just as good as Linux and vice versa. FreeBSD has some strong points, and so does Linux. Just because you belong the cult of the Penguin does not mean that you have the right to use the same tactics as SCO -- FUD.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    1. Re:IF BSD IS DYING.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an AC linux geek, I... have to completely agree with you. FreeBSD is a great web server platform. Linux and FreeBSD are both great platforms with their own strengths.

  16. YHBT FOAD HAND by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, dont take the BSD trolls so seriously. They KNOW that BSD isnt dying.

    They prey on the common arrogance and over-protectionistic attitudes you guys have and it just FEEDS THEM TO POST MORE CRAP.

  17. A now hardened troll presents a response.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, now that I've stop laughing so hard..

    Of course it isn't dying in reality. Any fool can see that from Netcraft. Strangely enough, us trolls believe in the power of FUD. We aren't constrained by truth and facts ;)

    My only Sysadmin mag is a box of porn mags ;) Jesus, anything apart from Windows and Mac OS classic just has to be better. Most people wouldn't care.

    I am now going to insult your intelligence. Of course us trolls post as ACs because of the following benefits:

    1) You don't need to bother to login
    2) Your posts start at zero, which is cool because we know that often it goes unmoderated or quickly falls to -1
    3) Who can be arsed having to keep recreating accounts just for trolling?
    4) The AC is there to be abused - and trolls like to abuse stuff
    5) We don't want you to add us to your foe list
    6) Some trolls have real jobs and don't want to be identified for fear of having to explain our trolling to people who just don't get us

    Okay who says we must be linux zealots? I actually use Mac OS X!

    We have the freedom to post FUD. Once again if you don't like us then set your reading level to 1 or more and ignore us.

    LOL - every time I read one of these anti-trolling posts it encourages me to troll some more.

    Remember that an OS shouldn't be taken so seriously and that trolls like me like to think illogically and surprise, surprise we lie.

    P.S. *BSD is dying!

    1. Re:A now hardened troll presents a response.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

    2. Re:A now hardened troll presents a response.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So have you!

      FOAD.

      HAND.

    3. Re:A now hardened troll presents a response.. by utlemming · · Score: 1

      Well, at least that is out in the open. My main concern is that, like you and I both know that BSD is not dying, some person who might try it out would be deflected. That is why I posted. The other thing that burns me is that it is the same post over and over again. At least have the sense and the common curtisy (sp?) to vary your lies from time to time. At least entertain us folks. I think that I would not have gotten so miffed if you guys would post some stuff that has a hint of orginality.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
  18. Re:Diary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahahahaha...oh wait...that wasn't funny at all.

  19. Re:OMG! my BSD box keeps on CRAPFLOODING help! lol by Bigbambo · · Score: 1

    Folders? I could have sworn they were called directories. Are you sure you are not running Mac Os 8.6?

    --
    ***There is no point in asking, you'll get no reply***
  20. The BSD fanboy moderators are out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    censoring anyone who presents a valid opinion, but at the same time, modding anyone up who says what they want them to say

    1. Re:The BSD fanboy moderators are out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's true. And sad. In my original comment I wrote that I LIKE the BSD flavours (esp. NetBSD) and use them; they do exhibit plenty of technical excellence. I'm just pointing out that Linux isn't the slow/unstable/insecure OS that BSD zealots like to claim it is. Sure, a good FreeBSD 4.x release will be more reliable than bleeding-edge desktop-focused Mandrake installations, but that's not comparing like with like. Compare FreeBSD 4.7 with Debian 3.0, and there's practically no difference. Both enormously stable, both fast, both well put-together (and Debian's packages are more thoroughly tested than FreeBSD's Ports).

      BSD users seem to have an obsession with Linux - always talking about it, comparing it, working on the Linux emulation subsystem. Check out the mailing lists; constant rants and arguments about Linux. Some of us use Linux because it just works, and right now no BSD flavour is any more reliable or fast than Linux.

  21. Number #1 Reason for continued trolling: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You guys keep feeding the trolls!

    Everytime someone posts the same copy-and-paste bit for the 2334th time, some idiot responds as if the troll poster thinks what he is pasting is true.

    Want to make them go away? Then don't reply! Pretend they don't exist. Just let moderators take care of then and you'll have much less of a troll problem on your hands.

    1. Re:Number #1 Reason for continued trolling: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The crapflooding has been going on for 2 years. You'd think the crapflooders would have gotten bored or shutdown by management. So long as they keep in in the BSD section, management doesn't do anything about it.

    2. Re:Number #1 Reason for continued trolling: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you have any shitting clue what you're talking about?

      crapflooding occurs in all sections of slashdot. far more trolls get posted OUTSIDE the BSD section.

      get a clue

    3. Re:Number #1 Reason for continued trolling: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice Troll.

    4. Re:Number #1 Reason for continued trolling: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to a BSD user:

      Truth == -1, Troll

    5. Re:Number #1 Reason for continued trolling: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you actually believe that BSD is the only section that gets trolled?

      LMAO!!

      You need to get out more.

  22. YHBT YHL HAND. AGAIN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  23. On A Mobile... by OPTiX_iNC · · Score: 1

    I have it running on a Panasonic CF-35. The only problem that I have is that the PCMCIA support is nominal. The notebook will support CardBus, but FBSD will not, otherwise a solid OS. Just my thoughts, so disregard if necessecary.

  24. But repeating stuff is part of the troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only one person believes the FUD then it is a sucess for trollkind.

    Unfortunately, I don't have as much time free to come up with good trolls. I apologise in advance for my trolls that just come across as crapflooding.

    Also note that fellow trollers have been posting my own trolls. Alas, this is the nature of posting as an AC.

    P.S. *BSD is dying

  25. CardBus supported in 5.X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CardBus is supported in 5.1.

  26. A troll is trolled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOUTH. FOOT. EAA.

  27. Why? by 00_NOP · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK, Linux leads in the server world, but BSD is more stable and surely isn't any more difficult to set up and configure.

    What is the reason? All the effort that goes into security and stability in BSD doesn't seem to be getting it very far (in the sense it's mind share is probably falling if one ignores OS X), which is particularly odd when the core concept of the system - Unix - is through, OS X and Linux, reaching bigger and bigger audiences all the time - not bad for an OS that was pronounced dead when Win NT was launched more than a decade ago.

    Is it just the larger enthusiast base for Linux? Or what?

    I am a linux person, and when I switched from the beast's offerings I chose Linux because that was all I knew about and though I'd heard of BSD it was the BSD/OS... so is it just hype? Or is there something missing with the free BSDs?

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "BSD is more stable"

      Really? Can we see some stats? A report that says FreeBSD crashes on average 2.8731% less than Linux? Oh yeah, there's no proof whatsoever that BSD is more stable; just the usual rhetoric spread by BSD fans. You admit to being a Linux person, so where did you get the idea that BSDs crash less?

      For frig's sake, my Slackware boxes have never crashed on me. Never. Six years. A proper, stable Linux distro is just as robust as any BSD. But the BSD zealots don't have many arguments left...

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well last time I looked the longest running servers on the Netcraft survey were BSD

    3. Re:Why? by 00_NOP · · Score: 1

      Every one of the top 50 sites at Netscraft are running some BSD variant atm. See http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

      I know that is no scientific - but every one? Must tell you something.

    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netcraft's remote uptime detection wraps after 497 days for many OSes. Surprisingly enough, the only OSes in the top 50 are ones that can be accurately detected remotely. Read the FAQ on the page you linked. Amusingly enough, the top 50 makes it look like old versions of FreeBSD are more stable than new ones, since new FreeBSD's wrap just like linux does.

      So what it boils down to is that the numbers are not just unscientific, they're utterly meaningless for comparing stability via uptime.

      And that's ignoring the fact that real production servers have scheduled downtime for kernel patches/upgrades.

    5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See what the other poster said. Additionally, being in the top webservers list doesn't mean it has the best stability; operating systems like VMS and QNX easily rival Linux and FreeBSD for reliability. QNX in particular is used in nuclear power stations etc. Yet you won't see them on that list.

      All that tells us is that BSDs are very reliable (nobody doubted that), and are enjoying popularity in the Internet server market at present.

    6. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Indeed it is common knowledge that ever hapless *BSD continues to be mired in an irrecoverable and mortifying tangle of fatal trouble. It is perhaps anybody's guess as to which *BSD is the worst off of an admittedly suffering *BSD community. The numbers continue to decline for *BSD but FreeBSD may be hurting the most. Look at the cold numbers. The erosion of user base for FreeBSD continues in a dizzying, head spinning downward spiral.

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

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

      All major marketing surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among hobbyist dilettante dabblers. In truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

    7. Re:Why? by gfim · · Score: 1

      You might like to research the very first phrase of your post before you try to draw any conclusions from it.

      --
      Graham
    8. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      FreeBSD is getting its sorry ass kicked from here to eternity.

      That sucka be dead.

      Also, the FreeBSD release engineering team consists of ten to twenty individually caged chimpanzees with WebTVs that are captured, infected with rabies, and replaced promptly upon death. If no chimpanzees are available, a core team member interested in streamlining the bureaucracy is used.

      Deal with it. This is the truth.

  28. Ok then, how do you propose to generate the stats? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can we see some stats? A report that says FreeBSD crashes on average 2.8731% less than Linux?

    Then what would you consider to be a 'valid' test?

    A shell script that outputs 'hello' to the console every 10 mins?

  29. Re:Ok then, how do you propose to generate the sta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the point - there are no tests or stats. It's just hearsay and conjecture, with BSD zealots always ranting on about how their OS is somehow "more stable". In the real world, you talk to people who've run Linux for years and never had any crashes.

  30. Re:Ok then, how do you propose to generate the sta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the point - there are no tests or stats.

    Bawwwwk, bawwwk bawk bawk.

  31. Re:Ok then, how do you propose to generate the sta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSD users are mature when cornered with the facts.

  32. rappin' BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    BSD you grow in the ghetto, living second rate
    And your eyes will sing a song of deep hate.
    The places you play and where you stay
    Looks like one great big alley way.
    You'll admire all the numberbook takers,
    Thugs, BSD pimps and pushers, and the big money makers.