Slashdot Mirror
NetBSD Packages Collection Freeze
jschauma writes "Starting Monday, October 6th, 2003, the NetBSD Packages
Collection will be frozen in order to stabilize pkgsrc on the various
supported platforms. As Alistair Crooks explains in his
message to the tech-pkg mailing list, this freeze is done so that the
pkgsrc team can shake out bugs, fix broken packages and close pkgsrc related
problem reports. If you want to help out, you can take a look at the PR database and
submit patches."
~~~
If I recall my Larry Niven correctly, a frozen corpse is called a "corpsicle".
eliminating all "broken" packages - a "broken" package is one that
does not build, install or de-install cleanly (as determined by bulk
builds on NetBSD/i386)..
Anyone have any details on this Bulk Builds? Is this like FreeBSD bento automated builds?
I, for one, welcome our *BSD frozen zombie overlords. Next time they are in town, I hope they drop by for a nice frozen treat and take advantate of the hospitality of our coffin-sized freezers.
What We Can Learn From BSD
By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.
It is common knowledge that *BSD is dying. We all know that ever hapless *BSD is 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 numbers. The loss of user base for FreeBSD continues in a 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
I think that bulk BSD builds might qualify you for a discount at the funeral home.
"Do not stand at my hard disk and forever weep.
I am not there; I do not sleep.
I am a thousand winds that blow.
I am the diamond glints on snow.
I am the sunlight on ripened grain.
I am the gentle autumn's rain.
When you reboot in the morning's hush
I am the swift uplifting rush
Of quiet birds in circled flight.
I am the soft stars that shine at night.
Do not stand at my hard disk and forever cry.
I am not there. "
All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
Mac OS don't fear the reaper
Nor do the windows, SUN or the rain..we can be like they are
Come on baby...don't fear the reaper
Baby take my hand...don't fear the reaper
We'll be able to fly...don't fear the reaper
BSD's bought the farm....
Distro is done
Here but now they're gone
Romeo and Juliet
Are together in eternity...Romeo and Juliet
40,000 server crashes every day...Like Romeo and Juliet
40,000 workstations reformatted everyday...Redefine happiness
Another 40,000 coming everyday...We can be like they are
Come on baby...don't fear the reaper
Baby take my hand...don't fear the reaper
We'll be able to fly...don't fear the reaper
BSD's bought the farm...
Love of two is one
Here but now they're gone
Came the last night of sadness
And it was clear she couldn't log on
Then the file was opened the wind appeared
The mobo blew then disappeared
The curtains flew then Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith appeared...saying don't be afraid
Come on baby...and she had no fear
And she ran to them...then they started to fly
They looked backward and said goodbye...she had become like they are
She had taken their hand...she had become like they are
Come on baby...don't fear the reaper "
Cells are destroyed by freezing.
Face it bitches - *BSD is dead.
I'd repost my usual troll about 10 things I know about *BSD but I'm far too lazy.
Note to Theo: Fuck You!
The Failure of *BSD
Of course we can all agree that BSD is a failure, but why did BSD fail Once you get past the fact that BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know BSD keeps losing market share but why Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players Or is it larger than their troubled personalities
The record is clear on one thing no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for BSD.
The End of FreeBSD
[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]
When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.
Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.
FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.
It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.
So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.
Discussion
I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.
From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.
There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.
Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.
Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?
Shouts
To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.
To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers
1. You can not play games on it.
2. It cannot be used by my grandma.
3. It lacks a GUI of any note.
4. There is no support available for it.
5. It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.
6. It cannot be run on the x86 platform.
7. You have to compile everything and know C.
8. Support for the latest hardware is always poor.
9. It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.
10.It is dying.
First problem is OpenOffice linux binary won't install
/var/db/pkg/package_name
at all. Something tells me this is too much a mess
to even bother with though.
I noticed in the bugs list someone has my pet peeve
mentioned, namly the updating packages suck. There's
nothing worse than updating libiconv and wondering
why gnome and kde collection has disappeared. I've gotten
to where instead of pkg_delete, I just do rm -rf
Hopefully this will improve.
and it's a pretty good indication that BSD is dead.
I didn't know you liked to watch that..
flask of ripe urine
pressed to bsd lips
bsd drink up
*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.
There have been more mods down (15) for this story than mods up (6). Pathetic.
So just remember, kiddies: *BSD is alive and well: AC trolls are a part of this BSD daemon's balanced breakfast...
No one talks about *BSD at my local LUG. Do you know why?
/. is anyone's guess.
Because it is fucking well dead.
Why this section exists in
Add me to another mod down... just like *BSD.
Will they be working on getting everything to compile with gcc 3 while they're at it?
Constitutionally Correct
Recently I had an experience to use NetBSD. I had heard many great
things about it, and was excited to replace a dead Linux firewall with
this OS. Unfortunately as things turned out, NetBSD proved to be more
nightmare than solution.
When not attending classes at my community college to get my
humanities degree, I work part-time at a printshop. Our Linux box
there finally gave up the ghost. I'd heard that NetBSD was incredibly
secure so I talked my boss into putting that on as a replacement.
Part of the appeal of NetBSD was its history. A fork of the Linux
kernel, it was originally intended for Steve Job's failed NeXT cube.
Recently, its found a home amongst the ignorant and easily-fooled as a
firewall OS (later on, we'll see how Job's reached back to use NetBSD
in OSX. This will be important later!) BSD was also famous for an
incident in the early 80s, where they were sued by Microsoft when the
BSD developers stole the TCP/IP stack from Microsoft's PC-DOS.
Once my boss gave approval, I quickly headed over to NetBSD.com and
downloaded the ISOs from the web site. Our box was pretty
state-of-the-art, a two-CPU'ed Pentium III. Installing it went pretty
flawless and I had high hopes for our new firewall.
Almost immediately however I began to have concerns. I noticed no
where did NetBSD display the terms of the GPL. Since its based on
Linux, this should be a requirement. Apparently the history of theft
amongst the BSD developers still continues!
I was even more shocked to learn that the ipchains rules we'd
carefully setup on our Linux box would not work on NetBSD! Perhaps
NetBSD is still using a SHARE-based networking security from the DOS
TCP/IP stack! Or more likely they just haven't caught up to Linux and
are still using iptables.
Whatever the case, almost immediately our box was rooted.
Later on I would find out that despite its claims of being secure,
NetBSD's default configuration appears to start up every service
known to man! I find it shocking that an OS commonly used for
firewalls would have BIND running by default.
Then there was the OpenSSH holes. I would later learn that NetBSD has
a history of remote exploits. Perhaps they should work with the team
at RedHat, as RH knows how to secure their distros.
After spending a week trying to patch a leaky firewall, I gave up. I
found an Mac SE/30 and put OSX on it. I then installed Norton Personal
Firewall. That became our firewall and I'm proud to say that its been
happily running for two weeks without a single incident. I find it
funny that despite NetBSD users arrogant claims of superiority, a
humble SE/30, running an OS that's loosely based on NetBSD, performed
much better. Perhaps its another failing of open source versus
commercial software. Whatever the case, its clear that NetBSD has a
long ways to go before it can be taken seriously.
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.
_d8b____________________d8b_______d8,
_?88____________________88P______`8P
__88b__________________d88
__888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b,
__88P_`?8b_?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b,
_d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b
d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P'
______d8b________________________d8b
______88P________________________88P
_____d88________________________d88
_d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888
d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__d8P'_?88
88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b
`?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b
I see this as another victory for OSS, by doing something like this we ensure functional software, thanks to the NetBSD team for keeping everything in working order.
Now for those *BSD trolls, this is why *BSD is alive and well, people still use, and are dedicated to producing the *BSDs
Error 407 - No creative sig found