Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FreeBSD 5.2-RC1 Released

Posted by michael on from the try-and-die dept.

Dan writes "FreeBSD Release Engineering Team's Scott Long has uploaded ISO images and FTP install bits for FreeBSD 5.2-RC1. i386, alpha, and pc98 are available now, amd64 will be available shortly, and sparc64 will be available shortly. Please test this as much as possible so that the FreeBSD Team can release a good 5.2-RELEASE next week. Testing focus for 5.2-RELEASE relates to PCM locking and performance issues, ATA driver improvements, GPT support for sysinstall, ATAng disk corruption issues, SMP and random_harvest panic, vinum data corruption, ACPI kernel module and reported NFS failures."

5 of 116 comments (clear)

  1. Don't use it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    Back in the day, around FreeBSD 2.2.8, it was a very nice operating system. However, when RELENG_5 was branched, a lot of wrong decisions were made, most of them by people with zero clue about how to implement proper SMP (e.g. John Baldwin). Matt Dillon tried to fix the situation, but all he got in response was a commit bit suspension, which later lead to his expulsion.

    You can thank assholes like: Poul-Henning Kamp (POT, KETTLE, BLACK), Greg Lehey, Dag-Erling Smorgrav, Mark Murray and Bill Fumerola for kicking him out and making sure that, thanks to overengineering, RELENG_5 will never work.

    Further proof, FreeBSD recently went 100 1011ynamic to allow the use of NSS switch system. John Dyson, who did most of the VM work back in the day pointed out how wrong this decision was. Dillon also jumped in and offered a better solution. What he got as reward was Scott Long telling him to go away. Listen Scott, YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT. Not only you don't even know how to quote, but you also managed to fuck 5.1-R isos twice. I wonder how can you be in re@, that sure has lead to the piss-poor quality of the last 2 or 3 releases.

    Joseph Mallett, an ex-committer.

    0
  2. Don't use it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    Back in the day, around FreeBSD 2.2.8, it was a very nice operating system. However, when RELENG_5 was branched, a lot of wrong decisions were made, most of them by people with zero clue about how to implement proper SMP (e.g. John Baldwin). Matt Dillon tried to fix the situation, but all he got in response was a commit bit suspension, which later lead to his expulsion.

    You can thank assholes like: Poul-Henning Kamp (POT, KETTLE, BLACK), Greg Lehey, Dag-Erling Smorgrav, Mark Murray and Bill Fumerola for kicking him out and making sure that, thanks to overengineering, RELENG_5 will never work.

    Further proof, FreeBSD recently went 100 4192ynamic to allow the use of NSS switch system. John Dyson, who did most of the VM work back in the day pointed out how wrong this decision was. Dillon also jumped in and offered a better solution. What he got as reward was Scott Long telling him to go away. Listen Scott, YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT. Not only you don't even know how to quote, but you also managed to fuck 5.1-R isos twice. I wonder how can you be in re@, that sure has lead to the piss-poor quality of the last 2 or 3 releases.

    Joseph Mallett, an ex-committer.

    0
  3. Just the facts, ma'am by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant
    Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? 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 personas?

    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.

  4. Re:Don't use it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant
    You don't keed to be Kreskin to look into FreeBSD's future. Even a child knows that FreeBSD is dying. All major marketing surveys show that FreeBSD has steadily declined in market share. FreeBSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim.

    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 yve you ever seen an animal backed into a corner and fighting for its life? That is the situation OpenBSD finds itself in. The OpenBSD fans are in a state of desperation, and even the mildest criticism of their hobby horse results in wild and paranoid outbuet another charnel house.

    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. In truth, for all practical purposes FreeBSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.

    It is a fact: FreeBSD is dying.

  5. 10 Facts about *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    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.