Slashdot Mirror


Depenguinator "Upgrades" Linux to BSD

cperciva writes "Many systems around the world have been possessed by penguins and dead rats. It would be nice to exorcize these evil spirits, but this can be difficult without physical access to the machines in question. Thanks to a new depenguinator, it is now possible to upgrade Linux systems to run FreeBSD 5.x without requiring anything more than an SSH connection." Clever idea.

616 comments

  1. You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by diersing · · Score: 5, Funny
    I'm now scared.

    The next root kit is announced and within days all machines have been *upgraded* to BSD. Argh

    1. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by skaffen42 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think we finally have proof that BSD is dead. I mean, this is the clearest attempt at daemonic possession I have ever seen.

      --
      People couldn't type. We realized: Death would eventually take care of this.
    2. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I'd really like is something to *upgrade* my SCO Unixware to Linux or FreeBSD... Thanks.

    3. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by EvilAlien · · Score: 3, Funny
      I'm really dissapointed that nobody got around to writing a Welchia variant that upgrades vulnerable Windows boxes to Linux. It would have been a business move to gain desktop market share that even Bill Gates would have applauded.

      Oh well, snooze ya lose.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    4. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by KilobyteKnight · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm really dissapointed that nobody got around to writing a Welchia variant that upgrades vulnerable Windows boxes to Linux

      People would be calling MS tech support in droves:

      "I knew something was different because I haven't seen that comforting blue screen in a long time."

      "I'm glad those ugly colors are gone now, but I can't find Freecell anymore"

      "The paperclip is gone and I don't know how to get it back"

      "When I try to run the email attachments it just doesn't work"

      --
      When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
    5. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by Oopsz · · Score: 2, Informative
    6. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by DeKoNiNG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You have been rooted, welcome to BSD
      From the Depenguinator site: it requires quite a lot of RAM (512MB is enough; 256MB might be, but I'm not sure)

      Please give it a try on my Linux Box, 120 MHz and 48 meg RAM, running Slackware 9.0 hehe...

      --
      Troll: Large Giant, 63 hp, AC 16, Usually chaotic evil.
    7. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      I believe there was once an outlook email worm that installed slackware... anybody have a link? (Better yet, source code?)

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    8. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by David+McBride · · Score: 1, Funny

      Thus I suspect "BSD is undead" would be a more accurate moniker.

    9. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to BSD by macdaddy357 · · Score: 0, Troll

      I don't get it! Didn't Netcraft confirm that BSD is dying?

      --
      How ya like dat?
  2. Hmm... by RobKow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How do you moderate an entire article as flamebait? ;)

    Cool stuff, but the write-up is a little, uhm, polarizing?

    1. Re:Hmm... by the+uNF+cola · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yup. No different from the linux polarized messages we see from time to time. Nothign to see here.. just some people proud of their work :)

      --

      --
      "I'm not bright. Big words confuse me. But Wanda loves me and that should be enough for you." - Cosmo

    2. Re:Hmm... by technoid_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just think, if it was about "upgrading" windows boxes to Linux it would not be considered flamebait. It would be applauded by the slashdot sheep.

      Gee, could it be that we have some double standards...naah, couldn't be that....

      technoid

      --
      Two wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do - Lew of GO magazine
    3. Re:Hmm... by sempf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Could be worse, we could be talking about a package to upgrade Linux to Windows 2003.

      --
      /usr/bin/grep -i -E meaning life.txt
    4. Re:Hmm... by codepunk · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The download would be to large, 10000 patches plus the service packs plus windows. After a 6 day download all you would be left with is a useless baseline os that can do nothing but catch worms and virus. So to make this cool new OS do something you pull out the ole checkbook and stroke a large one to ole bill.

      --


      Got Code?
    5. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Could be worse, we could be talking about a package to upgrade Linux to Windows 2003.

      Upgrade?

    6. Re:Hmm... by richie2000 · · Score: 3, Funny
      upgrade Linux to Windows 2003.

      You are upside-down - up has become down and down is up. Please turn yourself over.

      I myself have upgraded twice, first from Win2000 Server to Red Hat 8 and then to Gentoo.

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    7. Re:Hmm... by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All of that, to upgrade a machine from Windows to Linux?

      Still, perhaps you actually meant it that way round - while I've never had a virus or worm on my Linux boxes, I've never had one on my Windows boxes, either.

    8. Re:Hmm... by molnarcs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm a freebsd user (5.1 - cvsupping to 5.2rc2 at the moment) and I love it. Contrary to some myths, it is great on the desktop. There are some things that just work. Put one line in your kernel config file (devce pcm) and you can just plug any supported sound card in, and it will just work, without the need for any configuration. The same goes with digital cameras: plug it in, and mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera and there you go. Configuration is no more difficult than slackware (in fact, its easier, with automatic dependency checking/resolution ala apt-get, or by simply using the ports system). On the other hand...

      I agree with parent post ... sadly, this announcment will be considered as flamebait. I don't understand this, really. I signed up to bsdforums when switched to BSD, and I must say its one of the friendliest forums I ever been to (including mandrakeusers.org or pclo which are also great). I don't find the hostility against linux in bsd users there the way I find hostility towards bsd users from linux users here on slashdot or recently, even osnews.In fact, there is a linux section (other os) on bsdforums, and I saw people helping out with fedora install or whatnot there without any 'use bsd instead' notes. I wish this continual flamewar would end, but frankly, I believe (mod me down if you wish) that most hostility comes from linux users. If you find some bsd folks here a little touchy, considering the amount of trolling every bsd announcment gets, it is a small miracle that people still come here for bsd news, that they are not as bitter as one would expect (but than, they - warning, flamebait! - seems to be more mature.

      This is not because BSD is better or something. I like linux as much as I do BSD, I just like to use the latter better, because it is more interesting/fun to _ME_. I believe the linux crowd can be (and maybe it is) as 'mature' as bsd folks, but it is a more diverse group as well as considerably larger, so I think there is more room for a small but vocal minority to ruin the relationship and raise ill will towards each other. I wish that more considerate linux users would help out modding down trolls, afterall, we both have profited from each other's work.

      Unfortunately, due to licencing, code exchange is mostly a one way road (BSD > Linux), but still BSD has to thank for GCC (well, not specifically linux) or the ULE scheduler (which is partly based on a linux developer's work - more linux specific) without which our beloved OS would be poorer.

      Anyhow, the point I was trying to make is that this article can sadly be considered a flamebait, although we see similar announcment without anyone fearing that it is on the 'other' side. It would be nice to live without fears that such announcments would attract a large amount of trolling, to think that the article (read it!) has its on technical merits that can be interesting to anyone who visits slashdot (nerds?) no matter what OS they use.

    9. Re:Hmm... by secolactico · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He. I tought it was more funny than flamebaiting.

      How long before it gets added to debian or gentoo as a package?

      "apt-get install freebsd" or "emerge freebsd".

      There goes my productive day... Now I *have* to try this. I'll set up a linux box and see if I can depenguinate it.

      He... even the name's funny.

      --
      No sig
    10. Re:Hmm... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Nah, that would be more like dist-upgrade, we talk about replacing the core of OS, not just adding something.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    11. Re:Hmm... by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Care to show a recent main page /. article that praised Linux while bashing BSD at the same time?

      Sorry, while the tool is interesting, the article is flamebait. You can be proud of your work without being childish.

    12. Re:Hmm... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Just think, if it was about "upgrading" windows boxes to Linux it would not be considered flamebait. It would be applauded by the slashdot sheep.

      So you can't see how saying one thing is flamebait, but saying the opposite is not?
      Example:
      You're a moron.
      You're no moron.
      It also depends on your audience. Saying "Abortion is murder" at a pro-choice meeting might well be flamebait, but saying it at a pro-life meeting certainly is not.

    13. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, lighten up.

      If your OS was dying, you'd be trying to drum up any new users you could get too.

    14. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He Said:
      There are some things that just work. Put one line in your kernel config file (devce pcm) and you can just plug any supported sound card in, and it will just work, without the need for any configuration. The same goes with digital cameras: plug it in, and mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera and there you go.


      Thats not 'just working'. Plugging it in and not having to worry about it is 'just working'. The average user doesn't know how to edit a kernel config file, or mount_blah blah. Try to explain that to your mother. Ok mom, open a terminal window, now you can use vi or emacs here..emacs mom... oh hell with it, I'll just buy you an eMac...

    15. Re:Hmm... by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      I wish that more considerate linux users would help out modding down trolls

      If you browse at +4, you will see a lot of good content with very few overt trolls. (The ones you do will be appreciable for art form and humor if not for content.)

    16. Re:Hmm... by cperciva · · Score: 1

      How long before it gets added to debian or gentoo as a package?

      Actually, I was planning on making an RPM out of this, but I hadn't gotten around to it yet. (And, to be honest, I have work I really should be doing...)

    17. Re:Hmm... by Lonath · · Score: 1

      Upgrade?

      Double-minus downgrade, actually.

    18. Re:Hmm... by hendridm · · Score: 1

      To hell with trying to explain it to your mom, she won't be using FreeBSD. Try even explaining that to a moderately technical person. I know enough about Linux to get a desktop mostly working to my liking, but I don't want to read newsgroup after newsgroup to find the correct line to add to my conf or command to execute (mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera) to get stuff working (sure, that's an easy command, once you find it). I don't mind hunting for some things, but using your desktop shouldn't be like a trip to the dentist.

      Ok, I'm done whining now.

    19. Re:Hmm... by alcmaeon · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      "It also depends on your audience. Saying "Abortion is murder" at a pro-choice meeting might well be flamebait, but saying it at a pro-life meeting certainly is not."

      God, if slashdot is no different from the choice vs. life crowd, I'm outta here. Nothing to be gained from hanging around with a bunch of tunnel vision zealots.

    20. Re:Hmm... by Atzanteol · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Just to get a bit more off topic here. People who believe that abortion *is* murder may be tunnel-visioned (as you put it). But keep in mind that anyone who tries to convince them otherwise is effectively trying to justify murder to them.

      Many people get upset when you tell them 'murder is okay'.

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    21. Re:Hmm... by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Insightful


      I wish this continual flamewar would end, but frankly, I believe (mod me down if you wish) that most hostility comes from linux users. If you find some bsd folks here a little touchy, considering the amount of trolling every bsd announcment gets, it is a small miracle that people still come here for bsd news, that they are not as bitter as one would expect (but than, they - warning, flamebait! - seems to be more mature.


      I don't think its so easy to point to the source of hostility.

      Around '97 I was becoming interested in Unix/like systems. So I got myself an old 486 and was trying to decide to load it up with - FreeBSD or Linux. I was coming from a very Windows-centric viewpoint, so I asked around for advice. One friend suggested Linux (Slackware to be exact). Then I went to chat up the folks at the ISP I had a part-time helldesk job.

      The ISP in question was almost an entirely BSD shop. They were great believers in FreeBSD and, of course, suggested it. When I asked them about Linux I almost got my ear chewed off - and not with helpful reasons why to pick one over the other. I was shocked at how much animosity they had for the system.

      I can understand animosity towards Windows and Microsoft. I have shared some of the experiences that build up that contempt. But I can't understand why there is this friction between BSD and Linux users. Maybe its the old "Ford vs. Chevy" thing. Or maybe I just haven't experienced things as a BSD fan.
    22. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You mean like: E00Z smopuiM o+ xnui7 apeJ6dn ?

    23. Re:Hmm... by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      I mainly addressed the average linux user. If you check the config file for the fsbd kernel, u will see how easy it is to edit it. You don't even have to open it btw:
      echo "device pcm" >> MYKERNEL
      Then:
      config MYKERNEL
      cd ../compile/MYKERNEL
      make depend && make && install
      REBOOT

      Do this once, and you can buy a new card, plug it in, and it will work. Of course, you don't have to recompile the kernel to have sound working. Just as in linux, if you know what module you need for your soundcard, you can just do
      kldload snd_via8233
      or
      kldload pcm (I think) to get any supported sound card working.

    24. Re:Hmm... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      But that's pretty-much exactly what it *is* like here, for certain topics.

      Stuff like general tech and science is okay, but as soon as a discussion starts up on the relative merits of Windows and Linux, or closed source and open, you might as well save your bandwidth. Neither side is going to convince the other, and all you get are the same tired old arguments being used by both parties.

      That's just life, though. Once a person has convinced themself of something, it generally takes a hell of a lot to change their mind.

    25. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    26. Re:Hmm... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Hint to moderators: it's not insightful the 10,000th time.

      You can say that about almost any comment attached to a story about Linux, Windows, the RIAA or MPAA, the DMCA, closed source or open source, though - all those discussions tend to go round and round in circles, producing very, very little in the way of new insights.

      Besides, calm down - it's now sat at +3, with a couple of "Overrated" moderations. Looks like the "equal airtime" is being reduced...

    27. Re:Hmm... by __past__ · · Score: 1

      Why not, it already works the other way around. RedHat, Debian and Gentoo can be installed on FreeBSD as ports (emulators/linux_base*) thanks to its Linux ABI support. Even using FreeBSD and various Linux distros (except the actual Linux kernel, of course) simultaneously on different virtual consoles is pretty easy, just a little 'chroot' here and there...

    28. Re:Hmm... by Reteo+Varala · · Score: 1

      vi vs. EMACS
      KDE vs. GNOME
      GUI vs. CLI
      C++ vs. Java vs. C

      Linux vs. *BSD

      Since when have we NOT been polarized?!

    29. Re:Hmm... by aonaran · · Score: 1

      The same goes with digital cameras: plug it in, and mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera and there you go.

      Yes, that looks so much easier than
      mount -t vfat /dev/sda1 /mnt/camera

      of course using an automounter would be even better (or at least having the camera in /etc/fstab so you just mount /mnt/camera)

      Don't get me wrong, BSD is a lovely system, I switched to Gentoo recently so that my Linux system would have the advantage of a ports-like system with portage. (I was always jealous of "make world" before gentoo came along) but I wouldn't say it's better than Linux. I think they each have small advantages in different areas. (FreeBSD's Handbook being one big plus in it's favour)

    30. Re:Hmm... 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.
    31. Re:Hmm... by AME · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      While I agree that your post is offtopic (as is this one -- come on, moderators... Bring it on!), I must say that it's a very insightful offtopic post.

      Congratulations. Not much on Slashdot impresses me anymore.

      --
      "I have a good idea why it's hard to verify programs. They're usually wrong." --Manuel Blum, FOCS 94
    32. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is now official -- Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

      Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

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

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

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

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dead

    33. Re:Hmm... by shaitand · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well for one thing this site is news for nerds. Nerds are educated and therefore run englightened technically superior operating systems such as linux and BSD and all form of *nix.

      Windows is out of place here and therefore upgrading windows to pretty much anything would be quite on topic with the theme of the site. Since although you may disagree on other points, surely you wouldn't claim that windows is on par with any of those systems in a technical aspect (security, stability, performance, hackability (as opposed to crackability)).

      People who disagree with the theme and don't find it interesting should fly fly away and leave us geeks and nerds in peace.

    34. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when have we NOT been polarized?!

      Never. Everybody knows that emacs, gnome, guis, c++, and Java suck ass, while vi, kde, the cli, and c rule.

    35. Re:Hmm... by jrumney · · Score: 1
      The same goes with digital cameras: plug it in, and mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera and there you go.

      Yes, that looks so much easier than mount -t vfat /dev/sda1 /mnt/camera

      Both examples seem to assume that the camera appears to the kernel as a SCSI hard drive, which is not true for any camera I've seen. Maybe if the camera supports the USB mass storage protocol, BSD might turn that into SCSI (Linux uses different device names rather than shoehorning them into the SCSI namespace IIRC), but a large proportion of cameras still use proprietary protocols, in which case GPhoto or similar is needed (though Nautilus and the KDE file manager are still able to make it appear as part of the filesystem).

    36. Re:Hmm... by sloanster · · Score: 1

      Nah, you're confused - the slashdot sheep would dutifully flame the linux fans as expected. You do realize that the majority of slashdot readers are windoze users, right?

    37. Re:Hmm... by dasunt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How long before it gets added to debian or gentoo as a package?

      "apt-get install freebsd" or "emerge freebsd".

      Debian is already flirting with demonic possession in different ways

      Ne'ermind the hopefully optimistic other project

    38. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like KDE and hate C++? Interesting... The former is written (mostly) in the later..

    39. Re:Hmm... by aonaran · · Score: 1

      Actually almost every digital camera I've looked at in the last 2-3 years except kodak used usb mass storage. which to Linux and aparently also BSD generally shows up as a SCSI device.

      My camera (Fuji) on Linux 2.6.0 is /dev/sdc1, my usb card reader is /dev/sda* and my card reader built into my USB printer is /dev/sdb

      I refuse to buy a camera or other USB storage device that isn't compliant with usb mass storage, thankfully there aren't many anymore as manufacturers are cluing in that they don't need to write drivers for any OS if they use the standard.

    40. Re:Hmm... by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      I'm with you.
      Linux will be for my mom and dad when I can give them a CD and let them figure out the rest on their own.

      Ideally it would be something like knoppix that doesn't even need to be installed to hdd.
      If the bootable-distro guys can get their hardware detection straight (at least for the hardware that DOES have drivers available) and make the desktop do sensible things (e.g. display menu "scan, copy or fax?" when usb scanner is plugged in/turned on) it could be even easier for mom&pop to get along with it than with windoze.

      Wanna work? Just boot the CD.

      If you want to save settings and documents, use a usb memory stick.

      Mom&Pop could have a stick where their documents, and ALL config settings (incl. detected hardware, preferred window manager, icon layout, desktop-background-color, address book etc.) are stored.

      Mom&Pop would be able to carry their whole personal computing environment (incl. files) around by taking only the BootCD + stick with them.

      At that point it would become interesting to the .biz-people who do a lot of travelling.
      Need to get work done at a hotel?
      No problem, just find a PC (any PC!), insert stick, insert disc, feel at home.

      I think knoppix and others are working towards that direction and I hope they will soon bring it to a point where you can really just give the CD to someone and it will work. It will not allow them to download and install stuff from the internet (or a CD) but for the average mom&pop&.biz that's not necessary. They want OpenOffice, Mozilla, E-Mail, Fax, Printer/Scanner/Camera support, Onlinebanking, simple Image/Photo Manipulation, sync'ing with their mobile devices, CD/DVD writing, Sound playback.

      And they don't want to use their brain for it. They don't want to have a zillion blinking icons in their tray that they have no idea what it's all about. They don't want to be worried about Viruses/Worms. They don't want their PC to slow down and become unstable after 3 months.
      They don't want to search for their windows CD when they plug in their new webcam.

      Give them something that "just works" and they'll never ask for windows again.

    41. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The same goes with digital cameras: plug it in, and mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera and there you go.

      Yes, that looks so much easier than mount -t vfat /dev/sda1 /mnt/camera

      of course using an automounter would be even better (or at least having the camera in /etc/fstab so you just mount /mnt/camera)

      And in Windows XP, you plug in a digital camera and it automounts a drive letter for you. Or enables you to use TWAIN support with any imaging program....

    42. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think, if it was about "upgrading" windows boxes to Linux it would not be considered flamebait. It would be applauded by the slashdot sheep.

      So you can't see how saying one thing is flamebait, but saying the opposite is not?


      Well, if anything, it's reverse flamebait. Putting a word in double quotes makes me think the author is being sarcastic.

      For example, when I say:

    43. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think, if it was about "upgrading" windows boxes to Linux it would not be considered flamebait. It would be applauded by the slashdot sheep.

      So you can't see how saying one thing is flamebait, but saying the opposite is not?


      Well, if anything, it's reverse flamebait. Putting a word in double quotes makes me think the author is being sarcastic.

      For example, when I say (and this time I'm actually saying something):

      Paradise Pete is "special."

      It's possible a third party will think that I'm implying that you rode the short bus to school.

      If instead I say:

      Paradise Pete is special.

      It means something else.

    44. Re:Hmm... by overbom · · Score: 1

      I wish I could, buddy. BSD articles don't usually make it to the main page anymore. The best a BSD user can usually hope for is a repost of whatever is at daemonnews with 5 intelligent comments and 40 automated "BSD is dying" trolls.

      It's pretty much a lost cause to mention BSD anywhere here without someone getting childish sooner or later, which is too bad.

      http://daily.daemonnews.org

    45. Re:Hmm... by alcmaeon · · Score: 1
      "Once a person has convinced themself of something, it generally takes a hell of a lot to change their mind."

      Exactly why I am so damned agnostic about everything. Most of the time, I realize I don't have enough information to form an unwavering opinion, and every time I have thought I had enough information and I formed one, I was confronted with more information that made me waiver.

      Having said that, I am still more than 99%, though less than 100%, certain that Windows sucks.

    46. Re:Hmm... by alcmaeon · · Score: 1
      "Just to get a bit more off topic here. People who believe that abortion *is* murder may be tunnel-visioned (as you put it). But keep in mind that anyone who tries to convince them otherwise is effectively trying to justify murder to them."

      Which is just another way of saying it is a waste of bandwidth. Agreed.

      As an aside, have you ever wondered why many of the people who are against abortion or the death penalty or whatever, have no problem with ritual cannibalism?

    47. Re:Hmm... by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      Well, if anything, it's reverse flamebait. Putting a word in double quotes makes me think the author is being sarcastic.

      Well, that's a good point. But it's the audience that determines the "flammability" of the comment. Different comments set off different audiences.

    48. Re:Hmm... by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      As an aside, have you ever wondered why many of the people who are against abortion or the death penalty or whatever, have no problem with ritual cannibalism?

      Umn... No. No I have not.

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    49. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh, funny, my kodak cam is a usb mass storage device. Doesn't even need drivers. Spose thats a new thing even though the cam is a year old.

    50. Re:Hmm... by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      Hehe, my friend (has his computer near mine right here) uses gentoo as well. What makes FreeBSD easier for ME is its rc system (don't like sysv init) - but that's just my personal preference + good documentation. If I'd use a linux distro, I would go with gentoo (got too used to ports) - if it were the only OS I'd use... But since I don't want to duplicate the time spent with compilation, I think I'll go for slackware on my second hd.

    51. Re:Hmm... by jrumney · · Score: 1
      Canon still didn't use USB mass storage as of 18 months ago, I don't know if their latest models do. I was disappointed to find this out, as my previous camera (Sony) had used USB mass storage, and was plug and play on Linux, whereas Windows needed drivers installed, which impressed me.

      Last Christmas, a friend if mine had bought a new PC and tried to connect their Olympus (also non-USB mass storage) camera to it, only to find that they'd lost the CD. While downloading the 30Mb "driver package" over their 56k modem, I took their camera and pluged it in to my laptop. GPhoto recognized it straight away, another case where Linux (and BSD) won over Windows for hardware compatibility.

    52. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We all know that *BSD is dying. It is common knowledge that *BSD is dying, that *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 OS hobbyist dillatant dabblers. If truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking. Fact: *BSD is dying

    53. Re:Hmm... by aonaran · · Score: 1

      Last Christmas, a friend if mine had bought a new PC and tried to connect their Olympus (also non-USB mass storage) camera to it...

      That surprises me, I was under the impression that Fuji and Olympus were basically the same cameras since they switched to XD a while back... My fuji behaves much like your Sony did, in some versions of windows you need to download drivers, but in Linux, MacOS etc. it is cool with the stock USB Mass Storage drivers.

    54. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The number one problem with FreeBSD is that it is a failure. Almost every problem with FreeBSD relates back to that. It becomes a vicious cycle--FreeBSD continues to self-destruct because it is a failure, and it is a failure because it continues to self-destruct.

      The old saying that "nothing succeeds like success" has a flip side--failure breeds more failure.

    55. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just say "bsd.slashdot.org is dying"? ;)

    56. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Getting seriously off-topic now.

      As an aside, have you ever wondered why many of the people who are against abortion or the death penalty or whatever, have no problem with ritual cannibalism?

      If you're referring to the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, I would point out that few of them would dream of applying their "ritual cannibalism" to any human flesh that didn't taste remarkably like bread.

      To put it another way, if you're trying to make them sound like religious hypocrites, I would say you'd do better looking elsewhere - how about those parts of the Christian Right who manage, somehow, to believe that the death penalty is right and that God literally gave Moses a stone tablet inscribed with the words THOU SHALT NOT KILL?

    57. Re:Hmm... by tigga · · Score: 1
      When I asked them about Linux I almost got my ear chewed off

      1997 ? Yeah, It's like you asked F-150 Ford owner if his truck could haul same amount of cargo as Toyota Corolla...

      At that time Linux was very immature, especially in server area - almost everything was rewritten since then.

    58. Re:Hmm... by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      Ironically, Slackware is probably the most BSD-like Linux distro there is.

      (I should know, I have three Slackware boxes at the moment. I also have Mac OS X 10.2.8, which is essentially BSD.)

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    59. Re:Hmm... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      My Olympus C740 is UMass. My brother's Canon A70 is UMass. They both are "plug-n-play" under FreeBSD or Linux. But that's not necessarily the case under pre-XP Windows.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    60. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BSD is as dead as an AIDS homo . . .

    61. Re:Hmm... by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're approaching FreeBSD from the wrong direction. At the risk of over-generalizing, the problem is that Windows, Linux and FreeBSD people approach problems in three different ways.

      Windows people want to know "what". What do I do to use a digital camera? What are the exact steps I need to take to make a picture I just took with my camera be my desktop wallpaper? And don't leave out any trivial steps, or I'll get confused. A good example is my mom. She doesn't know how to use Internet Explorer if it isn't running in a maximized Window. And even though she knows how to save a document she wrote, she doesn't know how to save a document someone sent to her in the mail. Although my mom is an extreme example of Windows users, I've seen similar attitudes amount highly experience Windows developers and administrators.

      Then there's the Linux approach. It's focused on the "how". Witness all the HOWTO's polluting the documentation space. While a much better approach, it's still limiting. The Windows user is stuck with eating out at restaurants and ordering take out food, but the Linux user has a recipe book, so they can cook their own food. But if there's a recipe they want that's not in the recipe book, they're still stuck. That's your problem. You're searching the Linux recipe book (newsgroup after newsgroup) for a recipe on how to use digital cameras.

      The FreeBSD (and traditional UNIX) approach is "why". Why do we do what we do when we mount a filesystem? When we know that, then we know how to use a digital camera. Because it's the same damned thing. We don't need a recipe book with ten thousand recipes for ten thousand different kinds of bread. All we need is a primer on baking bread. The rest we can figure out.

      Notice your use of the phrase "sure, that's an easy command, once you find it". You're looking for a specific recipe. A specific HOWTO. A FreeBSD user would say "that's an easy command, once you know why." The "why" is that a digital camera is a filesystem. So you mount it just like any other filesystem. If you don't want to type in the resulting command each time you use the camera, then do the same thing you do with all your other automounted filesystems, use an automounter! It's no different.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    62. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      God did give Moses the 10 Commandments.

      1. God said it.
      2. I believe it.
      3. That settles it.
    63. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it's fair to say FreeBSD is dead, but that's a sort of odd thing to say. It stems from the obvious popularity of Linux as _the_ Unix free OS, but the FreeBSD project has only gotten more fractious and more hateful in recent memory. FreeBSD is pathologically sick in this respect. Granted the lack of development in the BSD standard is gonna hurt, and right now things are looking poorly for FreeBSD. Yes it is dying. Don't mean to step on your toes, but that's the truth.

    64. Re:Hmm... by lurwas · · Score: 0

      I do apt-get upgrade almost everyday...

    65. Re:Hmm... by jusdisgi · · Score: 1

      If only I had a modpoint.....goddamn that's funny.

      --
      Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
    66. Re:Hmm... by soft_guy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Or, to paraphrase what you said:

      1. I read it in some old book made up by a con man.
      2. I'm stupid.
      3. Leave me alone.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    67. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are full of more horse shit than a Hanukkah turkey. Surely you don't believe it yourself.

    68. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think that I can help put this into perspective:
      • Linux is growing.
      • FreeBSD is dying.
      Hope this helps.
    69. Re:Hmm... by McAddress · · Score: 1

      big deal. I never got a worm on any of my windoze boxes. wait. thats b/c i dont have any windoze boxes.

    70. Re:Hmm... by God!+Awful+2 · · Score: 1

      So you can't see how saying one thing is flamebait, but saying the opposite is not?
      Example:
      You're a moron.
      You're no moron.
      It also depends on your audience. Saying "Abortion is murder" at a pro-choice meeting might well be flamebait, but saying it at a pro-life meeting certainly is not.

      The amusing thing to me is when you point out that two popular /. opinions are mutually incompatible and someone is always quick to point out how that proves that /. is not a monoculture and different people have different opinions. Of course, posts that disagree with either one of those contradictory opinions will still most likely be modded either troll or flamebait.

      -a

    71. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      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.

    72. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You may recall that Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, demonstrated that 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.

    73. Re:Hmm... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Huzzah to you sir, you do my sig proud. :)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    74. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is but one small fact which need be remembered:
      FreeBSD is dying
      That is everything you need to know about FreeBSD. That little fact trumps all else.
    75. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I also have Mac OS X 10.2.8, which is essentially BSD.
      Blasphemy!

      Try comparing Mac OS X to say, OpenBSD. One is carefully and elegantly prepared and maintained. The other is carelessly slopped together from pieces of 4 different operating systems. (Mach, OpenStep, Mac OS, FreeBSD)
    76. Re:Hmm... by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      Two operating systems.

      Mach and BSD were already integrated into OpenStep, although Apple did recently update the FreeBSD elements of OS X. Furthermore, Mac OS Classic compatibility is attained in two ways:
      1. The "Carbon" API, which is available for Mac OS 8/9 (starting at 8.5, IIRC) and OS X.
      2. The "Classic" environment, which essentially runs OS 9 inside of OS X.

      Mac OS X traces back to OpenStep, and although it's largely compatible with OS 8/9 apps, OS X is not code-related to the classic Mac OS. (I'm sure SOME code was re-used, but all the core OS is either new or from OpenStep/BSD.) OS X could not be as stable as it is if it used Mac OS Classic code as a base, period. Mac OS Classic sucks, Mac OS X rocks.

      Therefore, you are a dumbass.

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    77. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Mac OS Classic sucks, Mac OS X rocks.

      Therefore, you are a dumbass.
      Whoa, there! AOL user over here has some top notch logic. :-)

      The fact is, Mac OS X is far from elegant. You see a bunch of Machisms, a bunch of sort-of Macisms, and a lot of the NeXT stuff, plus all that FreeBSD tacked on, even some GNU tools thrown in there, and some original things as well.

      It's rather like a bastard child. Definitely not very well thought out. Some of those BSDs really put it to shame in terms of organization.
    78. Re:Hmm... by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      The line "Therefore, you are a dumbass" is in the context of the entire comment, not the line "Mac OS Classic sucks, Mac OS X rocks."

      Therefore, you are still a dumbass.

      As to your comments, many people prefer useful over elegant. Mac OS X may not be that elegant under the hood (I personally think it's fine), but the user experience (in terms of the GUI) is incredibly elegant, and better than anything I've ever used.

      Can I run Photoshop on OpenBSD/FreeBSD/whateverBSD? I suppose I could run it with WINE, but there are no guarantees that it will work, nor will I get support from Adobe. I can, however, run it on OS X, vendor-supported and all. Whether or not you like OS X, it runs more software than anything else out there. Which is useful.

      P.S. Your "AOL user" digs don't even bother me. You assume that I'm stupid, simply because I have a homepage on AOL, while you hide behind the aptly-named "Anonymous Coward" facade.

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    79. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever used FreeBSD? Extensively? Be honest.

      Because I don't think anyone who has would talk like that.

    80. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Therefore, you are still a dumbass.
      Have you ever heard of the book "How To Make Friends And Influence People"?

      Well, this ain't the way.

      Lemme tell ya. Nobody called anybody stupid, except you. So relax.
    81. Re:Hmm... by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1

      How does one make friends with an anonymous coward?

      --
      Ron Paul 2012
    82. Re:Hmm... by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      You managed to describe in a single post the feeling (and my reason for) using freebsd better than I could in several. Its been only for 3 months now, but that's exactly how I figured mount_msdosfs should work on a digital camera, once someone told me it uses fat.

      This is where the care, money and resources spent writing that handbook pays of - it easy to read even for absolute beginners, yet it gives you in-depth information about the system. And it leads you with a gentle hand - you don't even notice that you have learned more from it than any documentation I had on linux (saw mandrake's and rh's documentation - they are answers to questions between how and what :)) - maybe except for one perhaps: The Intro Linux Guide. A good guide for those wanting to learn more about linux (and yes, gentoo documentation is still more like a how-to, as far as I can see).

    83. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Browsing at +4 also has the side benefit of filtering out most of your dumb posts.

    84. Re:Hmm... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the comment. It's an unpopular opinion on this pro-Linux site. HOWTO's are like recipes. If you have all of the ingredients in the right quantities, they work. But if you don't you're stuck.

      Example: I just bought a new laptop for my post-Christmas present to myself. Installing FreeBSD was a snap. But I can't get USB working at all under Linux (Slack 9.1). Off to the documentation I go, and discover a hodgepodge of conflicting information. They're all in the form of "do x, y and then z". But the steps don't work, with no clues in the docs as to why not. I don't know enough about "why" USB works in Linux to figure out what's wrong. Am I missing a kernel module? Do I need to edit something related to hotplug? What do I look for in dmesg to get some clues?

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  3. I'm gonna sit back at a safe distance by CompWerks · · Score: 5, Funny

    and watch this flame war. Marshmallows anyone?

    --
    If you can read this sig - the bitch fell off.
    1. Re:I'm gonna sit back at a safe distance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elegy for *BSD


      I am a *BSD user
      and I try hard to be brave
      That is a tall order
      *BSD's foot is in the grave.

      I tap at my toy keyboard
      and whistle a happy tune
      but keeping happy's so hard,
      *BSD died so soon.

      Each day I wake and softly sob
      Nightfall finds me crying
      Not only am I a zit faced slob
      but *BSD is dying.


  4. When I do this, by Krapangor · · Score: 1

    will this make me a necromant ?

    --
    Owner of a Mensa membership card.
  5. Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. a worm to upgrade all windows boxes to linux remotely :D

    1. Re:Now all we need is.. by Mark+J+Tilford · · Score: 2, Funny

      What, don't you remember Tuxissa?

      --
      -----------
      100% pure freak
    2. Re:Now all we need is.. by skinfitz · · Score: 3, Funny

      March 29, 1999 What started out as a prank posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy yesterday has turned into one of the most significant viruses in computing history. The creator of the virus, who goes by the moniker "Anonymous Longhair", modified the well-known Melissa[1] virus to download and install Linux on infected machines. "It's a work of art," one Linux advocate told Humorix after he looked through the Tuxissa virus source code. "This virus goes well beyond the feeble troublemaking of Melissa." The advocate enumerated some of the tasks the virus performs in the background while the user is blissfully playing Solitaire: Once the virus is activated, it first works on propogating itself. It has a built-in email harvesting module that downloads all the pages referenced in the user's Internet Explorer bookmarks and scans them for email addresses. Using Outlook, the virus sends a copy of itself to every email address it comes across. After it has successfully reproduced, the virus begins the tricky process of upgrading the system to Linux. First, the virus modifies AUTOEXEC.BAT so that the virus will be re-activated if the system crashes or is shut down while the upgrade is in process. Second, the virus downloads a stripped-down Slackware distribution, using a lengthy list of mirror sites to prevent the virus from overloading any one server. Then the virus configures a UMSDOS filesystem to install Linux on. Since this filesystem resides on a FAT partition, there is no need to re-partition the hard drive, one of the few actions that the Word macro language doesn't allow. Next, the virus uncompresses the downloaded files into the new Linux filesystem. The virus then permanently deletes all copies of the Windows Registry, virtually preventing the user from booting into Windows without a re-install. After modifying the boot sector, the virus terminates its own life by rebooting the system. The computer boots into the Slackware setup program, which automatically finishes the installation of Linux. Finally, the dazed user is presented with the Linux login prompt and the text, "Welcome to Linux. You'll never want to use Windows again. Type 'root' to begin..." The whole process take about two hours, assuming the user has a decent Internet connection. Since the virus runs invisibly in the background, the user has no chance to stop it until it's too late. The email message that the virus is attached to has the subject "Important Message About Windows Security". The text of the body says, "I want to let you know about some security problems I've uncovered in Windows 95/98/NT, Office 95/97, and Outlook. It's critically important that you protect your system against these attacks. Visit these sites for more information..." The rest of the message contains 42 links to sites about Linux and free software. Slashdot is one of those links. "That could spell trouble," one Slashdot expert told Humorix. "Slashdot could fall victim to the new 'Macro Virus Effect' if this virus continues to propogate at its present exponential growth rate. Red Hat's portal site, another site present on the virus' links list, seems to be quite sluggish right now..." Details on how the virus started are a bit sketchy. The "Anonymous Longhair" who created it only posted it to Usenet as an early April Fool's gag, a demonstration of how easy it would be to mount a "Linux revolution". Some other Usenet reader is responsible for actually spreading the virus into the wild. One observer speculated, "I imagine the virus was first sent to the addresses of several well-known spammers. The virus probably latched on to the spammer's email lists and began propagating at a fantastic rate. With no boundary to its growth, this thing could wind up infecting every single Net-connected Wintel box in the world. Wouldn't that be a shame!" Linus Torvalds, who just left for a two week vacation, was unavailable for comment at press time. We have a strong feeling that his vacation will be cut short very soon...

    3. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Guys? Let's not keep lauding every new 20 lines of shell script and sophomoric disk duping tools as a new invention. And "making sure the first 40 Mbytes is not in use" is non-trivial. In most cases, it involves relocating the "/boot" partition. "/boot" is almost never necessary these days, you can put its contents on "/", but it's still awkward to do.

      Switching from one OS to another is not completely obvious to do at its best. I've written tools that do extremely similar things in Linux, although I stuffed the OS image into a swap space at the *END* of the disk, and completely automated the OS installation procedure to do a complete "burn to bare metal" and completely partition it as desired. Unfortunately, this guy's approach does not allow a graceful recovery if the middle step fails. If you use the Linux LILO tool, you can, by using "lilo -D" to set a default OS, but using "lilo -R" to set the next reboot to use the other OS for one time only.

      It's easy to do in the Linux world, because you can chroot to the new partition and run "grub-install" or "lilo" from there. It's tougher in the cross-platform world: getting it to correctly write an MBR is considerably more difficult. I normally solve it for Linux/Windows/Solaris/what-ever by using the Linux-based MBR generation tools, then if I really feel the need to flush the Linux partitions and blow away the MBR, use the other OS's native MBR tools while running that other OS.

      But the basic technique is at least 3 years old, hardly worthy of slashdotting.

    4. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      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.

    5. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tuxissa Virus Hoax

      Symantec Security Response encourages you to ignore any messages regarding this hoax. It is harmless and is intended only to cause unwarranted concern.

      Type: Hoax

      This is a hoax. The hoax message is similar to:

      Attack of the Tuxissa Virus
      March 29, 1999
      What started out as a prank posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy yesterday has turned into one of the most significant viruses in computing history. The creator of the virus, who goes by the moniker "Anonymous Longhair", modified the well-known Melissa[1] virus to download and install Linux on infected machines.
      "It's a work of art," one Linux advocate told Humorix after he looked through the Tuxissa virus source code. "This virus goes well beyond the feeble troublemaking of Melissa." The advocate enumerated some of the tasks the virus performs in the background while the user is blissfully playing Solitaire:
      Once the virus is activated, it first works on propogating itself. It has a built-in email harvesting module that downloads all the pages referenced in the user's Internet Explorer bookmarks and scans them for email addresses. Using Outlook, the virus sends a copy of itself to every email address it comes across.
      After it has successfully reproduced, the virus begins the tricky process of upgrading the system to Linux. First, the virus modifies AUTOEXEC.BAT so that the virus will be re-activated if the system crashes or is shut down while the upgrade is in process. Second, the virus downloads a stripped-down Slackware distribution, using a lengthy list of mirror sites to prevent the virus from overloading any one server.
      Then the virus configures a UMSDOS filesystem to install Linux on. Since this filesystem resides on a FAT partition, there is no need to re-partition the hard drive, one of the few actions that the Word macro language doesn't allow.
      Next, the virus uncompresses the downloaded files into the new Linux filesystem. The virus then permanently deletes all copies of the Windows Registry, virtually preventing the user from booting into Windows without a re-install. After modifying the boot sector, the virus terminates its own life by rebooting the system. The computer boots into the Slackware setup program, which automatically finishes the installation of Linux. Finally, the dazed user is presented with the Linux login prompt and the text, "Welcome to Linux. You'll never want to use Windows again. Type 'root' to begin..."
      The whole process take about two hours, assuming the user has a decent Internet connection. Since the virus runs invisibly in the background, the user has no chance to stop it until it's too late.
      The email message that the virus is attached to has the subject "Important Message About Windows Security". The text of the body says, "I want to let you know about some security problems I've uncovered in Windows 95/98/NT, Office 95/97, and Outlook. It's critically important that you protect your system against these attacks. Visit these sites for more information..." The rest of the message contains 42 links to sites about Linux and free software.
      Slashdot is one of those links. "That could spell trouble," one Slashdot expert told Humorix. "Slashdot could fall victim to the new 'Macro Virus Effect' if this virus continues to propogate at its present exponential growth rate. Red Hat's portal site, another site present on the virus' links list, seems to be quite sluggish right now..."
      Details on how the virus started are a bit sketchy. The "Anonymous Longhair" who created it only posted it to Usenet as an early April Fool's gag, a demonstration of how easy it would be to mount a "Linux revolution". Some other Usenet reader is responsible for actually spreading the virus into the wild. One observer speculated, "I imagine the virus was first sent to the addresses of several well-known spammers. The virus probably latched on to the spammer's email lists and began propagating at a fantastic rate. With no boundary to its growth, this thing could wind up infecting every single Net-connected Wintel box in the world. Wouldn't that be a shame!"
      Linus Torvalds, who just left for a two week vacation, was unavailable for comment at press time. We have a strong feeling that his vacation will be cut short very soon...

    6. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guys? Let's not go on lauding every new trick. We've invented "wheel" and it's a damn fine invention. It's much more comfortable to sit on than "log" and I don't really need to say anything about that damned "fire".

    7. Re:Now all we need is.. by fred666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, i think it is better (and easier) to have some kind of viral knoppix for that, since the system is already configured and immediately usable.

      There is very little steps needed to be performed when the worm is run, have a look:
      * First, the worm must download the knoppix ISO image (this is the most time and bandwidth consuming task)
      * Then, check the MD5 signatures and extract the files from the ISO and the boot floppy images to the harddisk into an hidden directory
      * Using the Windows "locales", configure little things like keyboard layout, default language,...
      * When everything is set up, install and configure the linux bootloader. (lilo is preferred here since it is blocklist based: booting Knoppix from NTFS partition is possible)
      * Mass-mailing using outlook, like any other worm :-)
      * You may have a choice here: should it delete the windoze system files ??
      * Finally, the worm reboot the system to finish the "infection" :-)
      * Enjoy your Gnu/Linux-infected machine :-D

      "Infecting" windoze machines with a Gnu/linux distribution without user interaction look like a feasible task to me: all we need is a crazy and skilled enough windoze worm developper.

    8. Re:Now all we need is.. by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      The only problem is the makers would probably quit development after a long battle over which distro to use.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    9. Re:Now all we need is.. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Dear Sir,
      Please remember the nature of Open Source licenses. BSD may be relatively stagnant, but it is hardly dying. That which it can do, it continues to be able to do. Any one person or group has the ability to continue it's existence. (Well, that last assertion is a bit dubious due to the rapid changes that come over hardware, but certainly for as long as the current hardware continues to exist.)

      To say that you don't want to use it would be a true statement, and reasonable for many people. To say that you don't want others to use it is probably true, given the nature of your comments. To act on that preference is immoral. You don't have the right to coerce others to act to futher you will, in opposition to their own.

      Now I will admit that there are many people who are immoral by my definition. I consider this an unpleasant truth, but a truth. The ones that bother me most live in governmental bodies and in corporations. This doesn't make them any less immoral. And your relative impotence doesn't many you any less immoral.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty much a given that *BSD is dying.

    11. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      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's a fact, FreeBSD is dying.

    12. Re:Now all we need is.. by Knights+who+say+'INT · · Score: 1

      Smart! Not being able to market Linux as a viable desktop environment, market it as a virus!

      I'm sure it will do wonders for the public image of the open source community as a whole.

    13. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Let me help you put all of this into perspective:
      • Linux is growing. FreeBSD is dying.
      Hope this helps.
    14. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dark clouds covered the European skies, threatening the Children of Israel in the fall of 1939. The Nazis had tightened their grip over Eastern Europe and, as it often happens, nature acted with unfriendliness toward the oppressed. A cold winter came upon us -- the refugees -- after the traumatic and dreadful fall, when the German occupation began.

    15. Re:Now all we need is.. by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to joke here... Maybe I should have opted for the [Laughter] sign ;/

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    16. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is only one fact which need be remembered:
      FreeBSD is dying
      That is all you need to know about FreeBSD. That one little fact trumps everything else.
    17. Re:Now all we need is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FreeBSD is dying

      NOoOoOOOoOOoOoOOOOoOOoOOoOoO!!!!!!!!!

  6. Similar tool for Debian by tuxzone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looks like a great tool. Unfortunality for the daemons, I want to replace my dead rat (7.2) with a Debian branded penguin. I would love to do that upgrade online. Any tips or tools?
    Thanks!

    1. Re:Similar tool for Debian by CaptainBaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      you need debootstrap. now is not the best time to be looking for the rpm, as people.debian.org is still down after the brk() attack, but the relevant section of the install docs is here.

    2. Re:Similar tool for Debian by vadim_t · · Score: 5, Informative

      Use debootstrap. It will create a minimal install in any folder. Then chroot, and there you go, a small Debian system. Using that, you can either install Debian on another partition while running another distribution, or I suppose you also could replace your current install with Debian by booting into single user mode, and replacing your old system with Debian.

      While you should be able to simply chroot into your new system and start adding stuff, I'd be a very good idea to boot it first. Debian will need to run some scripts on boot to finish configuring itself.

      I'd go with the first option. The second one is too easy to screw up if you don't know what you're doing.

    3. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Killeri · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would guess the easiest way to do this is to get a Knoppix CD image, unpack it to disk and then boot from it, just like the source article describes.

    4. Re:Similar tool for Debian by heikkile · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have once installed Debian over ssh, after I got the owner of the box to boot Knoppix. I guess DeadRat might work as well - except that you need to be careful not to mess with the partition(s) where the system is living. The Knoppix CD contained Debian's install software, and Debians website had a guide (somewhere - lost the link ) on how to a very manual install. I had to do all the disk partitioning etc from the command line, but that should not scare a slashdot reader...

      --

      In Murphy We Turst

    5. Re:Similar tool for Debian by vasah20 · · Score: 1

      I did this when switching from MDK 8 to Debian.

      I've heard nightmares about configuring X in Debian, so I went the Knoppix route and have never been happier.

    6. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Marsala · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, I don't know of a tool, but how about HOWTO?

      Have a good one. :)

    7. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      people.debian.org is still down after the brk() attack

      Quick, I want to run the system built by this people.. Where do I sign up?

    8. Re:Similar tool for Debian by haskellcompiler · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I want to replace my dead rat (7.2) with a Debian branded penguin.

      Did you mean Debian brain-dead penguin? ;-)

    9. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter how tempting it could look, do NOT install "everything you like" from dpkg list :)

    10. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

      I use User-Mode-Linux for my web/email/DNS servers. The co-lo that rents servers only rents RedHat servers. The 'host' still runs RedHat, but really very little of it - I have my own custom kernel (with skas patch, very useful if you are running UML virtual machines) on the RedHat host, plus iptables to act as a firewall. The RedHat host conceptually just runs as a network router.

      The real servers are all UML instances, all running Debian. The UML page on Sourceforge has a minimal Debian root disk image. I based my root images from these (created a new filesystem on the RedHat system of the appropriate size, mounted both, and cp -a from the minimal Debian install to the root filesystem file I was going to use, edited /mnt/etc/network/interface etc. to set the right IP addresses etc.) then booted. After that, it's just a case of using apt-get to get the packages you want to run.

      The nice thing about separating all your services on different VMs within one host is you can apply decent firewall rules for each VM. If, say, your DNS UML got rooted because of an unpatched BIND (unlikely with Debian, since you can just apt-get update && apt-get upgrade to keep up to date) the skript kiddie - instead of having the run of your whole server and being able to deface your website (or worse) is locked into your DNS UML. Add proper egress firewall rules with iptables on the host, and you can prevent most skript kiddie attacks from being able to work.

      Although I like the BSDs (I like all UNIX style OS, well, except a certain company whose name need not be mentioned), they can't yet (natively) do the equivalent of user mode Linux which is something I find incredibly useful. Hopefully they will in the future.

    11. Re:Similar tool for Debian by jcoy42 · · Score: 1
      I want to replace my dead rat (7.2) with a Debian branded penguin. I would love to do that upgrade online. Any tips or tools?

      Well, my long held belief is that before upgrading you should back up /var, /etc, /home, /usr/src, and /usr/local.
      Just tar them up and dump them on a CD- put the date on it. I've been upgrading linux systems since '94, and this method has worked for me.

      (/usr/src may be a bit much, but if you have installed much custom software there might be something there you can't find- my fav is specialized network drivers. This is definately something to at least glance at and pick & choose).

      With those directories backed up, you can pretty much restore any linux system. /etc for all kinds of system information, /home for your custom settings & saved mail, /usr/local for your custom tools/apps, and /var for all kinds of surprises you won't think about until after the upgrade.

      The only real "gotcha" is if you end up installing a system with a different version of libc, but if you are going debian there should be a package out there which will provide it. You'll just have to grep /var/lib/dpkg/available to see what it's called.

      Oh, you may also want to back up that pr0n partition as well, but it's usually too big for CD and it's easier to just not re-format it during the installation.

      --
      Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
    12. Re:Similar tool for Debian by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      Although I might have missed your point here, I believe what you are describing is similar to FreeBSD jails :)

    13. Re:Similar tool for Debian by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Talk to Progeny. A few weeks ago, they mentioned upgrade/replacement for deprecated RH systems to Debian.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    14. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Alioth · · Score: 1

      It's a little more than a FreeBSD jail, which looks like an almost-VM-but-not-quite. The UML is a complete VM that runs its own kernel (which can be different to the host, so it's good for experimenting), has its own memory allocation, own swap space etc. My physical server is split up into several UML instances - a little tiny one as a DNS server, a big one as a web server, a small one as a barebones webserver for static sites, another big one as a shell machine etc.

      It does require more resources than just shoving everything on one physical box, but the advantages outweigh that. At kernel upgrade time, it's a lot less stressful rebooting a UML rather than the entire box since you can fix it if it goes wrong a lot easier (since I don't have physical access to the machine). It also allows me to allocate different amounts of resources to different web servers. Also, when the main web server UML gets Slashdotted, the shell system and other UMLs don't get completely starved of resources, since the host's run queue is only half a dozen processes long. In a traditional do-everything server, if you get Slashdotted, you can't even log in at all to check why your system has become unresponsive, because there's 200 cgi-scripts in the run queue, plus god knows how many Apache and MySQL instances all trying to run meaning your shell gets a miniscule timeslice. (It also means I can just block port 80 on the host to the UML being Slashdotted if I want to stop the Slashdotting - something you can't do if there's so little CPU left that SSH times out before you can log in).

    15. Re:Similar tool for Debian by HiThere · · Score: 1

      There are many fancy approaches, but the best approach is a normal install (I recommend LibraNet).

      Things to do to prepare:
      1) Make sure that /home is a separate partition.
      2) Examine your disk (df and /etc/ftab certainly, possibly also /etc/mtab) to determine where you have free space.
      3) Decide whether or not you want to keep the old install. If you don't, all you really need to save is in home.
      4) If /var is going to be a separate partition, make it fairly large. I use:
      /dev/hda2 4032124 152528 3674768 4% /
      /dev/hda5 5036284 1711812 3068640 36% /var
      /dev/hda6 4032092 35608 3791660 1% /tmp
      /dev/hda7 6048320 4202208 1538872 74% /usr
      /dev/hda8 4032092 920620 2906648 25% /usr/local

      on my Debian system, where the Red Hat (on a smaller disk) uses a simpler partition scheme. The size of the /var partition is because apt-get caches a lot of files there, and it's sized to allow a complete dist-upgrade from a CD that's a year old. (I was a bit excessively generous, but that's no problem at current disk space prices.)
      When I want to refer to a Red Hat partition from the debian system, I use an altered partition name, e.g.:
      /dev/hdb1 202220 14723 177057 8% /b1
      /dev/hdb3 10080520 3434696 6133756 36% /b3
      /dev/hdb6 29000444 5331712 22195576 20% /bhome

      where /b1 is known to Red Hat as /boot and /b3 is known to Red Hat as / . Similarly, Red Hat knows the debian partitions by names like /ahome and /a. Swap partitions are shared between the distributions.

      This has caused me no problems. I prefer to use a separate disk for each install, as that keeps the process cleaner. Also, I use grub as the boot manager, for the same reason. (I could probably manage that in a neater way, but it's never given me any problem, so I haven't bothered.) Remember that only one boot manager can live in the mbr. If you want more than one, you need to install the alternates in the /boot partition (/hda1, /hdb1, etc.) This restriction may actually be lifted if you are using grub, but I've never experimented, and in any case only one can live in the mbr.

      I have done this with MSWind in the /hda drive, and that was actually LESS tricky (because that was expected by the installers).

      Caution: Be sure to do custom partitioning, and don't include "too many" partitions. I'm not sure what too many is, but when I tried to include all the partitions from 3 Linux installs, I encountered install problems. So say no more than 15 mounted partitions, and probably significantly less. (Again, I haven't yet experimented here to find the limits.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    16. Re:Similar tool for Debian by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      HOWTO - Install Debian Onto a Remote Linux System

      I imagine it would be relatively easy to modify the source of debootstrap (the tool used in the process) so as to run on a BSD box - if it even requires any modification. It's basically just a frontend to wget, I hear.

      I scripted the entire process for myself, so I could do remote upgrades, but I can't seem to find the scripts. Hope they didn't get wiped.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    17. Re:Similar tool for Debian by molnarcs · · Score: 1
      Hmmm... I'm not an expert (I read about jails, but never implemented it - and been using FreeBSD for 3 months, 1 year linux before that) but I thought you can configure a jail the way you like, ranging from having an entire base system (including kernel of course) to having just an executable. From man jail:
      Setting up a Jail Directory Tree
      This example shows how to setup a jail directory tree containing an
      entire FreeBSD distribution:

      D=/here/is/the/jail
      cd /usr/src
      mkdir -p $D
      make world DESTDIR=$D
      cd etc
      make distribution DESTDIR=$D
      mount_devfs devfs $D/dev
      cd $D
      ln -sf dev/null kernel

      In many cases this example would put far more stuff in the jail than is
      needed. In the other extreme case a jail might contain only one single
      file: the executable to be run in the jail.

      We recommend experimentation and caution that it is a lot easier to start
      with a ``fat'' jail and remove things until it stops working, than it is
      to start with a ``thin'' jail and add things until it works.
      Anyhow, thanks to the info :) It made me think: what if I simply cvsup (download sources to /usr/src/) to FreeBSD 5.2rc2 on my 5.1 box - will 'make world' create the base system for the 5.2 release in the jail? Provided its possible at all. I'm still learning basic stuff (just configured postfix) so I'll have to wait till I can dig into these stuff.
    18. Re:Similar tool for Debian by tigga · · Score: 1
      It's a little more than a FreeBSD jail, which looks like an almost-VM-but-not-quite. The UML is a complete VM that runs its own kernel (which can be different to the host, so it's good for experimenting), has its own memory allocation, own swap space etc. My physical server is split up into several UML instances - a little tiny one as a DNS server, a big one as a web server, a small one as a barebones webserver for static sites, another big one as a shell machine etc.

      UML usefull for debugging, for some odd multipurpose servers, but not for production use. The main problem is memory. Each kernel allocates a lot of memory which could be unused on one kernel and overused on another. A lot of functionality dublicates in kernels..

      In case of FreeBSD jails approach is more lightweight and security-wise is a-must on servers.

      There is network stack virtualization project - something in between UML and jail - http://www.tel.fer.hr/zec/vimage/

    19. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have recently installed some new software on my FreeBSD computer but I have some questions. One thing it is apparently doing is detecting bad "scripts" on web pages and asks me if I want to debug them.

      The question I have is "what exactly is scripting" and "debugging" and how I am supposed to debug? Can someone with some techno experience explain what is scripting, coding, etc...Also, what is a "RunTime Error". The exact line that pops up says: "A runtime error has occurred. Do you wish to debug? Line:52 Error 'null' is null or not an object" What does this mean?

    20. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As you might remember, Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, clearly demonstrated that 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.

    21. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      > I have once installed Debian over ssh, after I got the owner of the box to boot Knoppix.

      +1 Cool Hack

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    22. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Is there a HOWTO for this? If not, could you write how you did it? (Please??)

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    23. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is but one fact which need be remembered:
      FreeBSD is dying
      That is all you need to know about FreeBSD. That one little fact trumps everything else.
    24. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is only one small fact which need be remembered:
      FreeBSD is dying
      That is all you need to know about FreeBSD. That little fact trumps everything else.
    25. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Well, I'd disagree that it's not useful for production use - I use it in production and find it much more useful than the old 'shove all the services on one box' approach. Ideally, I'd like one physical server for each of the things I use a UML for, but that's highly wasteful of physical resources (not to mention expensive to keep at the co-lo) - I can put up with a bit of memory wastage with UML (since the box has plenty of memory).

      The main thing is that each UML (with the host built with skas) is just two processes on the host. It makes a Slashdotting much more bearable than the standard 'bung all the services on one box'. Since every single process in the FreeBSD jail shows up in the "host's" process table, the FreeBSD jail doesn't give you that. It's a case of making choices - some need to be economical with memory so a FreeBSD jail is best, others (like me) get a monthly Slashdotting [0] and would like the rest of the daemons on the server to keep serving when a single website is receiving the Slashdotting.

      [0] Not from Slashdot, but the term is getting to be generic like 'googling'.

    26. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Alioth · · Score: 1

      You can look at http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net for more info.

    27. Re:Similar tool for Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means you need to either get back to basics and learn some 101 on unix like systems, or go to Windows. I am sure you mean well, but asking what "debugging" and "scripting" your BSD system is kinda like a NASCAR driver asking why the tires are "all slick". I would suggest starting at the very beginning, and learn your basics so all this will make sense.

      Scripting and debugging are at the very heart of running any unix like system, and there is no way you will be able to do much of anything (except install) without having a better understanding. Most people want simple "now" answers, but until you learn the basics, you will never be able to do anything except ask questions about a system you won't understand.

  7. I always knew those daemons were trouble... by Nate+B. · · Score: 2

    They're lurking in a nice Linux system just waiting for the moment to come alive and do their dirty work.

    Perhaps we penguinistas need to perfect a means of exorcising our systems of these evil daemons! Pure Linux, I say, pure Linux!

    --

    "Insanity is doing the same thing over again expecting a different result."
    1. Re:I always knew those daemons were trouble... by jhigh · · Score: 1

      It's time to go to the mattresses. Let's make those daemons an offer they can't refuse.

      --
      Social Engineering Expert: Because there is no patch for stupidity.
    2. Re:I always knew those daemons were trouble... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there is a solution! We shalt convert those init.d-daemons into penguinized kernel modules!

      Huh?

    3. Re:I always knew those daemons were trouble... by Simon+Kongshoj · · Score: 1

      What do you propose we replace them with? Paenguins?

      --
      Six sick .sigs, the Number of the Beast!
    4. Re:I always knew those daemons were trouble... by mrmez · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt that you want your Linux free of all bsd-derived code - that's a little too pure.

  8. next remote ssh exploit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh Great... Does this mean we'll see Linux boxes being turned into FreeBSD boxes when next remote ssh exploit is discovered?

  9. Having Used the latest FreeBSD (5.2(r2)) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Troll

    Having used the latest FreeBSD which I say is probably more together as a group than the NetBSD (Which I've also used) I'm not impressed.

    the *BSD's just don't have the polish of a Linux especially not the speed with the advent of the 2.6 kernel.

    Sorry, for certain, specialized server stuff I've no problem recommending *BSD, for a workstation, I take Linux and don't look back

    1. Re:Having Used the latest FreeBSD (5.2(r2)) by sremick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who has been using FreeBSD on his desktop for over a year (first 4.8, now 5.1, soon 5.2) I'm interested in why you don't like FreeBSD on the workstation.

      The way I look at it, you get all the stability of FreeBSD's server skills, but on your desk. And the "polish" hasn't been an issue as Gnome looks the same on FreeBSD and Linux.

      Heck, I got a TV-in card for xmas and installed it in just a few moments. Popped it in, used kldload to load the driver without touching the kernel, built fxtv from ports, and a min later I was watching CNN in a window on my desktop.

    2. Re:Having Used the latest FreeBSD (5.2(r2)) by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      How can this be modded 'interesting'. Since fefe's test, everyone is trolling with those results, and in more detail btw. What does he mean by the 'polish' of linux? It doesn't make any sense. (the kernel? it might be polished even though its a .0 release, but I doubt its more polished than -STABLE - whcih have been polished since 2000). Mod parent down please, we don't need this here.

      (Besides, although this is a personal experience, KDE 3.1.4 on FreeBSD 5.1 uses less memory (doesn't touch swap with 256 SDRAM) than any linux I have tried (well, those were Mandrake 9.1 and RedHat), although I have to admit I didn't try it on more slicker distroes like slackware. (I like linux as well :))

    3. Re:Having Used the latest FreeBSD (5.2(r2)) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And I popped my TV card into a RH9 box which auto-detected it and then all I had to do was to start the TV application. Done.

      Your writeup really reminds me of this switch to linux ad.

    4. Re:Having Used the latest FreeBSD (5.2(r2)) by sremick · · Score: 1
      > And I popped my TV card into a RH9 box which auto-detected it

      Which mine would've done too, if I had chosen to run with a bloated kernel which contained every conceivable driver already compiled in. Instead I chose to run a streamlined kernel which only contains the drivers for hardware I actually use, and leave certain things to dynamically-loadable modules.

      >and then all I had to do was to start the TV application.

      This would be because you already had the software on your computer. So if you had never had any intention of running a TV-in card, you would've had that software sitting on your computer, taking up space, never to be used. Which is the case for all these other RH9 users. And is the case for you too, as I would imagine then there are quite a few other programs already on your computer for stuff you'll never use. Personally, I see that as bloatware. I much prefer the FreeBSD method of letting you install only what you really want, and then making that install as absolutely painless as possible. Yes, I had to install software before I could run it, unlike you who could simply run the already-installed software, but this amounted to all of the following additional commands:

      cd /usr/ports/multimedia/fxtv
      make clean install

      Which automatically handled downloading, patching, compiling, and installing, as well as all dependencies and their dependencies and so on. The beauty of FreeBSD ports.

  10. The Exorcist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I give it a couple days, at most, before someone does the same thing to install Linux. ...and since THAT one would remove the little red "demons".....

    1. Re:The Exorcist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      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 endeavor 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 legitimize 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.

      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.

  11. Flame war! by GeckoFood · · Score: 2, Funny

    Oooooh! Fire! Pretty!

    --
    Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
  12. HOWTO - Install Debian Onto a Remote Linux System by vinsci · · Score: 4, Informative

    Personally, I find this howto more useful. ;-) HOWTO - Install Debian Onto a Remote Linux System

    --

    Trusted Computing FAQ | Free Dawit Isaak!
  13. Depenguinator? by Channard · · Score: 1, Funny

    Found next to the Bat Anti-Shark pills in Batman's utility belt, maybe? Still no reaction to the news from Mr Flibble, though

    1. Re:Depenguinator? by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

      It was anti-shark *spray*, darn it! Haven't you seen the movie (with Adam West, not someone else - though Angelina Jolie's dad, I forget his name, sure looks like Adam West)?

  14. Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by tommck · · Score: 4, Funny
    This is going to go over like a pregnant nun!

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    1. Re:Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by Doomrat · · Score: 0, Funny

      But in true petty zealous geek style, the word upgrade is between double quotes. You can just picture a fat, snotty nerd making the quote signs with his fingers as he says the word.

    2. Re:Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by tommck · · Score: 1
      Yeah... I remember one time a guy told me that "uber geeks use BSD". I bet he felt so cool that he didn't use what the other geeks used :-)

      I think I might have just crossed the flamebait line, but so be it.

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    3. Re:Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by Zathrus · · Score: 3, Funny

      a pregnant nun

      Which is another way to "depenguinate".

      Yes, I did just watch Blues Brothers a couple nights ago.

    4. Re:Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by tommck · · Score: 1
      Wow... How did I not see that connection. Very funny. Thanks for the laugh...

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    5. Re:Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes... I'd better watch out for low-flying pigs.

    6. Re:Wow... a Linux bashing article on SlashDot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doomrat, I'll have to agree with you. BSD is dying.

  15. pff, old stuff by sweede · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isnt new, I changed 3 of my dedicated servers (2 debian 1 redhat) to Gentoo using a doc thats almost 2 years old that was based of a "how to remote install BSD"

    you can do this with any system that lets you bootstrap the OS from the harddrive (i.e. gentoos stage tarballs).

    --
    I follow the SDK and GDN principles.. Spelling Dont Kount, Grammer Dont Neither
    1. Re:pff, old stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Was the doc two years old before after you started installing Gentoo ;)

      Just kidding, love the stuff.

    2. Re:pff, old stuff by lysander · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, the suggested way to netboot-install gentoo on sparc is to use the netboot installer of debian, chroot, and then do the gentoo stage installs. Sadly, the netboot kernel (2.2) was too old to chroot into the 2.4 environment, so I had the joy of rebuilding the kernel just to chroot just to build all of gentoo (with another kernel).

      --
      GET YOUR WEAPONS READY! --DR.LIGHT
  16. Instant system trash by Fizzl · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So, it writes a bootloader, ramdisk loader scripts and a bare bones BSD image to the beginning of your disk, trashing the partitioning (not sure about the last bit. That's the impression I got).

    Effective, yet mischievously evil.

    Well. Uhoh.. I don't know what to think about this. I mean, it's kinda neat. It's called depenguinator to make clear it's going to get rid of your linux, butbut...
    I still think the way of operation is very crude and evil.

    It says:
    This code is beta-quality at best. Do not use this unless you know what you're doing.


    I'd personally go as far as saying:
    Do not use this unless you are reallyreallyabsolutely sure you want to permanently destroy your current system.
    1. Re:Instant system trash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. I'd personally go as far as saying:

        Do not use this unless you are reallyreallyabsolutely sure you want to permanently destroy your current system.

      Erm...backups anyone?

    2. Re:Instant system trash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, seems like a bad idea to me too. I once did this to a box that was running Debian and upgraded to linux from scratch. This is a VERY blind technique. So, if FreeBSD won't boot on that box without further configuring, you've got a dead box until someone local can reboot it again to linux. You've gone from having a working OS to not having a working OS. Also, this is nothing new. All it basically does is have ssh at install time so you can install via ssh.

    3. Re:Instant system trash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably really good for laptops with a hidden config partition at the start of the disk, too.

    4. Re:Instant system trash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You don't need to be a 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 yet 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's a fact: FreeBSD is dying.

    5. Re:Instant system trash by jusdisgi · · Score: 1

      Not at all the point. This is neat for a certain purpose. That purpose has nothing to do with a laptop.

      It would be nice for a machine you have no physical access to, like, say, a virtual co-lo gig that preinstalls redhat for cheaper than bsd. If you have a laptop, you will have physical access to the machine, so doing an elaborate procedure like this from another computer is just downright silly.

      --
      Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
  17. Windows - Freenix by aking137 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've often wondered if this could be done with Windows - if one could make a (perhaps large) Windows executable that, when you double click on it, assimilates your system and turns it into a Linux box. (Which could in turn provide the depenguinators with lots more machines to work on.)

    Win9x should be more straight forward - you can boot a linux kernel directly from a real DOS prompt using loadlin (although this may not be necessary), and it's possible to have the whole root filesystem stored in one file on a FAT32 filesystem, so the .exe could create the root filesystem (maybe something like a base debian or gentoo install), put everything in place, change how the machine boots, and restart.

    1. Re:Windows - Freenix by houghi · · Score: 1

      I've often wondered if this could be done with Windows

      Most, if not all, distributions have something like that. Suse, for example, can be easily installed next to or over Windows with just a floppy or bootable CD. In my opinion this is even easier then first downloading to Windows and do the instalation from there.

      That way you do not need the loadlin, a dosprompt or FAT32 (PSome machines do not HAVE FAT32 anymore).

      One could write something to atomate the writing of the CD or the floppy and that is about it.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Windows - Freenix by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      It's called the debian boot CD :)

    3. Re:Windows - Freenix by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 1

      Win9x should be more straight forward

      Indeed it should. Send the average win9x user a 650 MB file named ostrash.exe (but secretly it is the RH 9 install disk). Most win 9x users will spend 6 hours downloading it, then run it finally they will call their sysadmin asking what is a root password?

    4. Re:Windows - Freenix by LM741N · · Score: 2, Funny

      There is already software similar to this. Its called Cygwin.

    5. Re:Windows - Freenix by sbergman2 · · Score: 1

      Save it in an attachment. Add a little viral magic and send it off into the ether. World domination may be closer than you think... ;-)

    6. Re:Windows - Freenix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is only one fact which need be remembered:
      FreeBSD is dying
      That is all you need to know about FreeBSD. That pregnant little fact trumps everything else.
  18. Night Of The living Dead by fafaforza · · Score: 2, Funny


    The dead are going after the living!

    1. Re:Night Of The living Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious!

  19. Do not use this unless you know what you're doing by e_AltF4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >5. Make sure that the first 40MB of space on your hard drive is not being actively used. ...
    I'm afraid that is NOT a trivial thing in 99.9% of all machines

  20. a return salvo? by Mazzie · · Score: 1

    How long do you think it will take the penguins to fire back with a dedaemonizer?

    Wait, would that be considered a downgrade to Linux if they already depenguinized? Or would it then be a repenguinizer?

    --
    Having a bookmark to Google does not make you an expert on everything.
    1. Re:a return salvo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's already a tool designed to upgrade BSD systems. It's called Format.

    2. Re:a return salvo? by sharkey · · Score: 0
      Or would it then be a repenguinizer?

      Frink: "That would require some sort of repenguinator, ahem, umwhey. Glavin!"

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    3. Re:a return salvo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is official; Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

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

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

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

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying.

    4. Re:a return salvo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you want is an exorcist.

    5. Re:a return salvo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL why did you do that, now I hafta go wipe myself..

    6. Re:a return salvo? by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      That would *have* to be called an Exorcism.

      "I have Exorcised the daemons!"

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
  21. Nice troll, by o'reor · · Score: 1

    and I'm gonna feed it. I think upgrading from Linux to BSD must be like upgrading from CSS2/XHTML to the HTML formatting used by this guy. Has the guy heard about HTML 3.2 ? :P

    --
    In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
    1. Re:Nice troll, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talking about BSD losers, 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."

  22. Niiice! by SharpFang · · Score: 0

    A troll that made it to frontpage of Slashdot!
    Any more examples of trolls that the editors accepted as actual stories?

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  23. iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --syn --dport 22 -j DROP by JCCyC · · Score: 2, Funny

    PHTHBBBBBTTTTT!!!!!

  24. Let me get this straight... by eviltypeguy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Let me get this straight, we're supposed to remove "inferior" RedHat distributions (such as 7.3 which Progeny is going to support) or Debian, because an unstable release of FreeBSD 5.x would be better for our systems, peacefully obliterating all of our data while this script is running as well? WTF?

    1. Re:Let me get this straight... by evilviper · · Score: 2, Flamebait
      we're supposed to remove "inferior" RedHat distributions
      [...]
      because an unstable release of FreeBSD 5.x would be better for our systems

      You've obviously never used FreeBSD... The most unstable and buggy version of FreeBSD is a dramatic step-up from any Linux distro.

      This is no troll, it's a fact, and extremely hard to dispute ("Linux never crashed for me" does not count).

      peacefully obliterating all of our data while this script is running as well? WTF?

      That just might be a small stumbling block... But I think this is just a proof-of-concept right now... I'm sure you'd be the first to jump up and start waving the Linux banner if something like this was created to convert Windows to Linux in the same manner.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You've obviously never used FreeBSD... The most unstable and buggy version of FreeBSD is a dramatic step-up from any Linux distro."

      Actually, I had FreeBSD 4.8 installed up until last week, and it was stable. FreeBSD 5.x which I had installed a few times over the past year was incredibly UNSTABLE on my system. Complete with kernel panics, which I haven't had on a normal release of a Linux distro on my personal system in a few years. Besides the fact that the FreeBSD people themselves say it's not stable until they say so.

      "This is no troll, it's a fact, and extremely hard to dispute ("Linux never crashed for me" does not count)."

      Wow. Nice troll. I like FreeBSD to a certain extent, but let's play your game:

      "This is no troll, it's a fact, and extremely hard to dispute" does not count, to put it in your words.

    3. Re:Let me get this straight... by shani · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've obviously never used FreeBSD... The most unstable and buggy version of FreeBSD is a dramatic step-up from any Linux distro.

      This is no troll, it's a fact, and extremely hard to dispute ("Linux never crashed for me" does not count).


      My experiences with FreeBSD have been universally bad.

      From the fact that it didn't support the built-in network card on my laptop (worked fine in Linux and Windows) to the fact that no less than 3 versions of the FreeBSD boot CD *and* floppy hard-locked on my desktop on install (worked fine in Linux and Windows). Then there's the fact that the POSIX threading support was bad enough to make our core application unusable on all versions of FreeBSD (up to 4.9, and it works fine on Linux and Solaris).

      I also find the whole CURRENT/STABLE/RELEASE naming a little confusing, but I could live with that if FreeBSD actually provided any real-world benefit. The only areas where I've seen a real, measurable benefit to FreeBSD is in high-volume UDP servers (which is to say: DNS, or possibly NFS) or the IPv6 stack (thanks to the KAME project).

      The fact is the FreeBSD technology is playing catch-up to Linux, and even if the technology were great, the childish "my OS is better than your OS" attitude of most FreeBSD users that I've met is what really makes FreeBSD stand out.

    4. Re:Let me get this straight... by swb · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the FreeBSD Ports collection, there are many Ports marked as broken, and many more unmaintained and suffering from bit-rot.

      Name any five that depend on each other and are important for real-world use? Ports suffers from both the desire to be large and from the fact that they're generally supported by one person. I've been running FreeBSD now for nearly 5 years and have only run into a broken port once, snmpd, which broke after a significant change in system variables, which in turn broke snmpd. It was fixed quickly, and since then every time I've built a port it's built.

      How exactly is FreeBSD 5 a "dramatic step-up from ANY Linux distro"? FreeBSD releases are only supported for 12 months. Then you have to upgrade. In comparison, Debian supports its releases for at least two years, and RHEL offers a whopping FIVE years. That's right, five. This matters in real-world use.

      You don't understand FreeBSD releases. There are point releases (eg, 5.2), -STABLE branches and -CURRENT branches. Most people track a -STABLE branch. Tracking a stable branch provides you with bug fixes and occasionally some new features backported from -CURRENT. Tracking -STABLE requires you to periodically rebuild the system from source, but this is FreeBSD's *advantage* -- it's a single, coherent system that can be easily and totally recompiled from up-to-date source code.

      I've been running 4-STABLE now for almost 4 years and its still a supported (ie, active development and maintenance) branch of FreeBSD. The 2.2 and 3 STABLE branches are still there and I think 3 was still supported until the 5-STABLE branch was created.

      Maintaining FreeBSD is easy if you track -STABLE and supported for years, and its often possible (albeit not necessarily recommnede) to upgrade from one major release to another -- I did it from 3.x to 4.x. In this manner (and not just point RELEASEs), FreeBSD revisions are suppported for years -- far longer than even most sane people would run a given revision of software.

      I never did more chasing than I did trying to keep Dead Rat systems updated; either I used RPMs and prayed that the package author didn't decide to switch a bunch of compilation options, or a built packages from source, which meant I had to do my own porting. And then there was libc upgrades and all other manner of horror of trying to maintain an OS that was a kernel with a bunch of other stuff glued on without any coherency.

      I'll grant some Linux distros have better turnkey desktop setups, and certainly greater corporate involvement (although ask yourself when "greater corporate involvement" and "better software" were part of the same sentence), and higher visibility.

      But longer suppport, easier maintenance and reliability over the long haul? No way.

    5. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and even if the technology were great, the childish "my OS is better than your OS" attitude of most FreeBSD users that I've met is what really makes FreeBSD stand out.

      You're kidding, right? Damn hypocrite! What the heck do you think you're doing in your own post?

    6. Re:Let me get this straight... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      My experiences with FreeBSD have been universally bad.

      I'm sorry to hear that.

      From the fact that it didn't support the built-in network card on my laptop (worked fine in Linux and Windows)

      I don't know if this is representative or not. I've only put FreeBSD on one laptop, and the network card worked fine (as it did in Windows, but not Linux).

      no less than 3 versions of the FreeBSD boot CD *and* floppy hard-locked on my desktop on install (worked fine in Linux and Windows).

      Which versions were these? Which install method did you use? When did it lock? I've never seen anything like this on any machine I've used. What platform were you using?

      also find the whole CURRENT/STABLE/RELEASE naming a little confusing

      It's not that complicated. -CURRENT is the unstable branch, -STABLE is the stable branch, and -RELEASE is a fixed point in terms of features, with only security fixed added.

      I could live with that if FreeBSD actually provided any real-world benefit.

      Maybe it has no benefits for you. For me, it has the following benefits:

      1. The ports tree makes installing software trivial from source or binary.
      2. The fact that 3rd party software is all in the ports collection and filed away in /usr/local/ makes it a lot easier to maintain, and lets you upgrade the base system easily independent of the other things. When I upgraded from 4.8 to 4.9 I had a total of under a minute of downtime while it rebooted and nothing broke. My experiences of upgrading Linux distros is quite different...
      3. The consistent layout of files. man hier explains the file layout clearly, and programs stick to it. Again, the separation of base system executables in /bin/ and config files in /etc, while third party things live in /usr/local/bin /usr/local/etc makes it a lot easier to keep clean.
      4. Kernel sound mixing. This is not important on a server, but on a workstation the presence of multiple /dev/dsp devices is useful (one for the kde sound daemon, one for the gnome one, and one for legacy apps that write directly to /dev/dsp). I hate the way xmms stops playing on Linux when another program makes a sound (or prevents the other program making a sound, if it was loaded first).
      5. Linux ABI. Most of the software I run is open source, and has been ported to FreeBSD, but some commercial things are Linux only and they run fine (I was running the Linux version of Opera 7 before they released a FreeBSD version, for example)
      6. Finally, and most importantly in my opinion, the documentation is first rate. I have almost never looked in the FreeBSD Handbook and failed to find what I needed. Beyond that, Dru Lavigne's columns are first rate, and bsdforums.org is full of helpful and knowledgeable people.

      There are probably a few other things, but these are the ones that spring to mind. I've been using FreeBSD for about 18 months now, and Linux for about 5 years. So far, I have never sat at a FreeBSD box and thought `This would be easy on Linux!', but I have frequently sat at a Linux box and thought `This would be easy on FreeBSD!' Again, your milage may vary.

      the childish "my OS is better than your OS" attitude of most FreeBSD users that I've met is what really makes FreeBSD stand out.

      I have to take issue with this. Take a look at bsdforums.org, and count how many 'linux sux0rz' post there are. I have yet to find one, and have found a lot of useful advice there. Now look at bsd.slashdot.org, and count the number of '*BSD is dying' trolls.

      Offline, my experience with BSD users when I was a Linux user was that they had a kind of `My OS is better than yours because it can do x/y/z which you seem to need at the moment. Do you want any help installing / configuring it?' My experience with Linux users is that they have the kind of attitude whic

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    7. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You don't understand FreeBSD releases."

      No, I understand _exactly_ the FreeBSD release process (I've been running FreeBSD systems for years). We're not talking about how easy it is to move from one release in 4.x to the next; it could even bake you a pie in the meantime but it wouldn't solve the problem.

      Consider this example: a company develops an app around the newly-released FreeBSD 4.8. This app depends on components from the base system and Ports tree. After 12 months, FreeBSD 4.8 is no longer supported and users should move to 4.9. Because there have been changes to the base system and Ports tree, the company then needs to completely re-test its app to pick up on any glitches the changes have brought on.

      Multiply this by 100 machines, and imagine doing it every 12 months. It doesn't matter how easy it is to upgrade the OS; it's the fact that you have to deal with changes every 12 months. I mean, look at how much hassle Microsoft got for EOLing NT4. This is a critical issue in the real world -- backported security and bugfixes over many years makes life so much simpler.

      Hence Red Hat offering 5 years on their RHEL. Debian does pretty well with approx. 2 years for each release. Yep, FreeBSD's community is relatively small and it doesn't have the resources to support each release for more than 12 months, that's understandable, but all the same it often makes it a weaker choice.

    8. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      really?

      you tell me, in all seriousness, what freebsd can offer for me. ok?

      my slackware box runs very fast, doesn't crash at all, works with all my hardware, gives me easy access to a huge number of programs, and gives me security fixes for 18 mnths.

      what can freebsd offer over that? it may also be fast and stable, but it doesn't support all my hardware and has issues running some apps I use (vmware), and I have to keep upgrading every 12 months

      maybe you're a troll, a zealot, or just some guy who doesn't get out much, but your post is a disgrace. most linux users I know respect freebsd and think it can be a good alternative, even if they prefer linux. most freebsd users HATE linux and want to make false claims about it at every opportunity. it's unhealthy

    9. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some valid points there, but:

      1) Ports is cool, but you can have exactly the same thing with Gentoo or Apt-FU in Debian. Plus, the packages in the latter tend to be far more thoroughly tested.

      3) True, but that's really because there's only one FreeBSD right now. If it becomes very popular one day you'll have lots of variants, as with Linux distros, so the same problem would apply.

      4) Linux definitely offers this. Right here I have /dev/dsp and /dev/dsp1, perfect for using XMMS whilst playing a game. It's more likely down to features of the sound card rather than the OS.

      6) Linux documentation tends to be more scattered, and while FreeBSD's Handbook is a superb work, it's closely rivalled by SUSE and Red Hat's massively in-depth hard-copy docs.

      Regarding the community, there are cretins on both sides. However, the recent trend for long-time BSDers to bash Linux with FUD and vague allegations ("Linux is slow", "Linux crashes a lot") etc. are sad and worrying.

    10. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please explain, why do you think FreeBSD 5 is a "dramatic step-up from ANY Linux distro"? FreeBSD releases are only supported for 12 months. Then you have to upgrade. In comparison, Debian supports its releases for at least two years, and RHEL offers a whopping FIVE years. That's right, five. This matters in real-world use. Companies don't want to re-test their apps every 12 months. Backported security and bugfixes matter. Look at the hassle Microsoft got for EOLing NT4.

      Dispute? Stability is a subjective thing and there aren't really benchmarks to "prove" it, but you say that millions of Linux users around the world who've NEVER experienced a crash in years of use -- you're saying that doesn't count? Linux has far more eyes going over the code than FreeBSD. Large companies such as IBM, Novell, Intel, Red Hat and others are testing, testing, testing.

      And, in all honesty, a good Linux distro is rock-solid, faster than FreeBSD on multi-proc hardware, has longer release lifetimes, works with a broader range of commodity hardware, has a great range of commercial support, an ever growing software range, all backed by a friendly community of people willing to help.

    11. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Q : How do you spell dying ?

      A : F - R - E - E - B - S - D

      ( Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.)

    12. Re:Let me get this straight... by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      "Consider this example: a company develops an app around the newly-released FreeBSD 4.8. This app depends on components from the base system and Ports tree. After 12 months, FreeBSD 4.8 is no longer supported and users should move to 4.9."

      Very realistic example. Companies have a tendency to write software, dump it on a platform, than leave it as it is. Rrriiight. Currently, the last officially supported BSD is 4.7, released in October 2002. 4.8 will be supported for almost a year from now. Architectural changes between .8 and .9 are so negligible, that it would require a mimimum effort (if it requires anything at all) for that software to work under 4.9. Basically this is true for most softwares written for the 4.x branch. If a software company cannot do the mimimal work to maintain its software package (and it IS MIMIMAL work to have the software working without any problems in any of the releases of the 4.x branch) than I guess that company should be out of business soon.

      What you have written is also true of any linux distributions (glibc changes in RH anyone?) Also, you clearly don't understand how the ports system work: "app depends on components from the base system and Ports tree." I have news for you: both the 4.x branch and 5.x uses the SAME ports tree, even the changes to the base system are significant.

    13. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Portage is written very badly, so while Gentoo does provide a ports collection it needs to be refactored and cleaned up.

      4. You misunderstand what he's talking about. With OSS and ALSA (normally, more later...) on Linux you can only open a sound device multiple times if it specifically has hardware support. FreeBSD's pcm driver, like Windows, abstracts away the necessity by providing an abstraction layer so that it can be accomplished in software transparently. There's a module for ALSA that allows you to multiplex a sound device, but it's a bit more complicated.

    14. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's somewhat amusing to see a Linux user talking about platform stability. Multiple incompatible package formats, constant libc and GCC ABI breakage, "stable" kernel releases that provide less hardware support because their kernel interfaces are constantly changing, major vendors shipping releases with broken compilers, and so on.

      Then you get Linus telling people that binary kernel modules are supposed to be under the GPL. It's somewhat amazing and sad that Linux obtained so much publicity and commercial attention when it's such a bad platform in terms of stability, and its users are such rabid fanatics.

    15. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't answer any of my original point. In fact, you confirmed that a company would have to test its software every 12 months, even if it was "minimal work".

      As for "What you have written is also true of any linux distributions"... NO IT ISN'T! This was my whole point! Sheesh. You talk about glibc changes, but if you install RHEL (or Tao Linux etc.), you will have _backported_ fixes for five years. No changes, no new versions, just backports.

      Leaving you to do your work and let a system run, instead of having to upgrade 100s of boxes every 12 months. Whatever spin you put on it, it's as simple as this:

      RHEL: Upgrade every 5 years
      Debian: Upgrade every 2 years
      Mandrake: Upgrade every 18 months
      Slack: Upgrade every 18 months

      FreeBSD: Upgrade every 12 months

      See which one needs more work? That, my friend, is one of the reasons why Linux is being more widely adopted in the enterprise. It may be no hassle for you or I to upgrade a single system and get our software working, but consider companies with hundreds of machines and very complex software. They need long lifetimes and backported fixes.

    16. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4) Gotcha. Sorry for misunderstanding. That is a damn sweet feature, and congrats to the FreeBSD crowd. That's the kinda stuff to advocate, instead of claiming Linux crashes all the time etc.!

    17. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Death in the BSD Ghetto

      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.

    18. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Death In The BSD Ghetto

      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.

    19. Re:Let me get this straight... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      From the fact that it didn't support the built-in network card on my laptop

      What kind of network card is it?

      no less than 3 versions of the FreeBSD boot CD *and* floppy hard-locked on my desktop on install

      Which versions, on which hardware?

      The only areas where I've seen a real, measurable benefit to FreeBSD is in high-volume UDP servers

      I see, so having a filesystem that is twice as fast provides no "real, measurable benefit". Having a system that is by far more secure, far more stable, and performs far better has no benefit?

      The fact is the FreeBSD technology is playing catch-up to Linux,

      And on what do you base that fact? From what I've heard, the only thing you've got is that it didn't support your network card.

      the childish "my OS is better than your OS" attitude of most FreeBSD users that I've met is what really makes FreeBSD stand out.

      This is complete crap. The only reason people pretend to believe that, is because they are such zealots over their OS. I wouldn't even have posted this if the parent hadn't tried to claim that Linux is universally better than FreeBSD. Now, you try to claim that Linux is "ahead", with a complete lack of evidence backing up your rant.

      And BTW, I don't have a single system running FreeBSD. In fact, my top-of-the-line system is running Gentoo (but only because FreeBSD doesn't support many TV-Capture cards).
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    20. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooh, good lot of hand-waving there 'evilviper', instead of using real facts. Let's see...

      "far more secure, far more stable, and performs far better has no benefit?"

      The "far more stable" comment is nonsense. You can find millions of users for whom Linux has never, ever crashed. I've been running it for 5 years on a variety of boxes, with all sorts of distros and setups, and never had a kernel panic. I know _lots_ of people who can say the same. Why can't you just accept that? Both OSes are extremely stable when configured correctly.

      As for "performs far better", you're really in zealot mode there. Linux has a much more mature threading model, is quicker on the desktop and, most crucially, runs orders of magnitude better on increasingly-common multi-processor machines. Heck, even core FreeBSD developers have admitted that! So where on earth are you coming from?

      "hadn't tried to claim that Linux is universally better"

      Erm, nobody said that! Some of us pointed out that hardware support, long-term backported fixes and variety of software is very important, and currently Linux is stronger in all of those areas (not always by much, but still stronger all the same).

      It's not universally better. It's just better in the areas that matter to most people.

    21. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't understand the release trees, you probably grabbed a 5.x iso for install. Big mistake, if you don't know what you're doing.

      As for the "lock up" during install, you need
      to read the docs. There's a very, very simple
      fix, if you read the release notes. :)

      If you just add this:

      hw.pcic.intr_path="1"
      hw.pcic.irq="0"

      to your loader, or enter the equivalents at
      the firmware (forth) interface (that's the
      thing just before the little spinny prompt
      character), it will work just fine. RTFM. :)

    22. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now to throw my 2.48 cents (inflation...) in...

      Over in the corner is a FreeBSD 2.2.7 system that I still use (kernel built in 1998...) While it has some faults, it still does what it needs to do. Someday, I will get around to replacing it with new hardware & a fresh 4.9 or 5.x install of BSD.

      The key point that I want to make, is that I routinely install and update ports on it. While the ports maintainers do not claim to support it, almost every time, the install/update goes smoothly.

      John Farmer

    23. Re:Let me get this straight... by swb · · Score: 1

      Leaving you to do your work and let a system run, instead of having to upgrade 100s of boxes every 12 months. Whatever spin you put on it, it's as simple as this:

      RHEL: Upgrade every 5 years
      Debian: Upgrade every 2 years
      Mandrake: Upgrade every 18 months
      Slack: Upgrade every 18 months


      It's not ever that simple; major applications of all those OSes have had significant root exploits and significant changes in libraries and components over 18 months let alone over five years. You cannot help but maintain them and *hope* that the components released for them are reliable and stable. The only way you can NOT upgrade them is if they are not connected to the rest of the world and do some isolated processing on an application that itself is never updated. Even the hardware they run on must be replaced more often than that if load and other demands increase over time.

      Security fixes, feature-driven application upgrades, bug fixes, etc are a reality and FreeBSD's build system via STABLE is the easiest and most reliable way to accomplish this.

    24. Re:Let me get this straight... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You can get stable systems. The thing is, they don't have the latest software. So if you want to keep running Debian Stable, and never do a dist-upgrade, then you've got your stability. At the price that new software doesn't work.

      You can't have it both ways, but you *can* have it either way.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    25. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There must be something very special about our first love, as clumsy as they were, they have inspired enough love stories written about it, to fill libraries. Well, there must be something real about it, because there are growing numbers including scientist, that believe that your first blushing love, is your only true love, and everything that has followed are sadly, only weak and empty sequels.

    26. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of one percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

      FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

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

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

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

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

    27. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

    28. Re:Let me get this straight... by ViVeLaMe · · Score: 1

      funny thing is...
      go watch the OS compatibility list for Veritas Netbackup (client.).
      And a whole slew of other software, too.
      The last and only supported debian release is 2.2.
      FreeBSD support spans from 3.5 to 4.9. So, i guess it isn't *that* hard to maintain their software across multiple FeeBSD versions.

      --
      i had a sig, once..
    29. Re:Let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There is only one fact which need be remembered:
      FreeBSD is dying
      That is all you need to know about FreeBSD. That little fact trumps everything else.
  25. "upgrade" using only ssh? hmm.... by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if there's a security risk here... so I can "upgrade" someone's linux installation to freebsd using only ssh, assuming permission is not blocked? That sounds like a potentially dangerous piece of software!

    --
    stuff |
  26. Depenguinate ?? by KoolDude · · Score: 2, Funny


    How do you moderate an entire article as flamebait?

    May be you can write a program to flamebaitrate the article. Nobody said only people who freebsduse can verbgenerate, rite ?

    --
    getSexySig(); /* returns sexy signature */
    1. Re:Depenguinate ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop with the doublespeak, you're messing with the Slashbot groupthink!

  27. In The spirit of the Holiday's by mrmdls · · Score: 1

    Time for the Slashdot Chorus to start singing, "Chestnut's roasting by the open Fire"

    1. Re:In The spirit of the Holiday's by iapetus · · Score: 1, Funny

      Wow. The IT industry really is in a slump. I can remember the days when Slashdot readers could afford more than one chestnut between them...

      --
      ++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
      Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
    2. Re:In The spirit of the Holiday's by NevDull · · Score: 1

      The "knowledge-based economy" requires people who can use apostrophes properly, doesn't it?

      IT *is* fucked.

    3. Re:In The spirit of the Holiday's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      FreeBSD's final Christmas

      Outside this frigid tumble-down shack, dry leaves before the wild winter hurricane fly. Here within, at the corner by the cold hearth rests an empty stool. A crutch without a master stands perched against the wall. These forlorn and lonely objects serve as mute reminders of their departed owner, FreeBSD.

      This crutch and vacant stool have become orphans, not unlike the now dead FreeBSD. No longer will FreeBSD hobble about on its cripple's crutch. Like the empty hearth, and the vacant stool, FreeBSD lies cold and still. FreeBSD's corpse, lifeless beneath frozen earth and December snows, will see no more Christmas cheer. No, there will be no Christmas ever again for FreeBSD, for FreeBSD is dead.

      Goodbye, FreeBSD. The pain of life forever stilled, sleep for all eternity in that long winter's nap. Fade gently into Earth's frozen bosom where in dreams even cripples walk and blind men see.

  28. Dead Rat by lunenburg · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dead Rat? OMG! I get it! It's like you took "Red Hat" and changed some letters around, and now it's like insulting!

    That's what makes it funny!!!!111

    1. Re:Dead Rat by TCM · · Score: 0

      I like "hatred" more.

      --
      Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
    2. Re:Dead Rat by pacman+on+prozac · · Score: 1

      It works on so many levels...

    3. Re:Dead Rat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they are saying the fedora is made out of dead rat pelts

    4. Re:Dead Rat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You make a good point: *BSD is dying. We all can agree on that much. As we all know, due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sold another troubled OS. Now BSDI too is out of business, and its corpse turned over to the Wind River charnel house. I suppose it's not diplomatic, but an ``I told you so'' is certainly in order. Apology accepted.

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyists. *BSD continues to decay, and nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time; for all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    5. Re:Dead Rat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also rhymes.

    6. Re:Dead Rat by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

      No, it's funny because it's true.

      (thanks, Homer)

      --
      No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
    7. Re:Dead Rat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's almost as funny as all the jokes made at BSD's expense.

    8. Re:Dead Rat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't that be "Hed Rat"?

    9. Re:Dead Rat by Cyno · · Score: 1

      Does this mean there's a wild pack of BSD zealots running around somewhere out there in the ether?

  29. does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum ? by Jackson-The-Cat · · Score: 1

    Does FreeBSD have something like apt-get , or yum for fetching binary updates? I know you can patch the sources easily, but having to do a make world on 300 boxen is not my idea of time well spent.

  30. Useful! by SynKKnyS · · Score: 1

    Where was this when I needed it about 3 months ago?! This is PERFECT for one of those Dedicated Server hosting providers that don't let you touch your box at all.

    Oh, and "creep" not "creap."

    1. Re:Useful! by cperciva · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is PERFECT for one of those Dedicated Server hosting providers that don't let you touch your box at all.

      That was the initial motivation; although it turns out that this is also very useful for installing FreeBSD on easily accessible servers, since loading the entire OS into a memory disk makes it possible to do things which sysinstall doesn't support -- for example, creating a vinum root system.

    2. Re:Useful! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, fuck off fucking asshole.

      Troll Glass

  31. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by Scott+Lockwood · · Score: 0

    Yes. It's called ports. If you know how to use ports, it's possible to write a one-liner that will upgrade all the installed packages on a system (lord knows why you would do such a thing, but you can).

    --
    But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
  32. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by sparkes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "upgrading" from one OS to another is never trivial.

    I would think that on most i386 systems running linux the first 40mb or so is /boot or swap.

    Swap is a simple case of swapoff then setting it up again in the freebsd setup (perhaps using the old /boot?)

    and /boot is going bye bye anyway.

    As a confirmed debian user (running it across multiple platforms) I wouldn't use this anyway and would suggest any user looking for a clean upgrade to a BSD from GNU/Linux would be better off backing up /home and other stuff that you want to survive the upgrade (/var/www perhaps) and nuking the whole thing using OpenBSD. If you are 'upgrading' from GNU/Linux to a BSD at least make it the safest variant ;-)

  33. Superb! by Pseudonym · · Score: 0

    Not only do we now have the Linux vs BSD flamefest, you've managed to work Windows into it as well! You, sir or madam, have my admiration. Well done!

    Pass out the marshmallows. It's going to be a fiery one.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  34. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually it isn't difficult in most cases. Your /boot partition should be at the beginning of the disk, and will typically be more than 40 MB. It is also typically never used or accessed once the system is booted. This is usually at the beginning of the disk because some BIOSes and boot loaders still have problems with booting the kernel from a place on the disk that is beyond the first 1024 cylinders. This makes it dangerous to merge / and /boot partitions and just use root.

    That is usually followed by a sizeable swap partition, which is also bigger than 40 MB. This is because the beginning of the disk is usually faster than the end (more sectors on the outer tracks).

    So, actually, it is nowhere nearly as difficult to ensure as you are suggesting. It would certainly work on just about every RH install (including default ones) I have seen in the last few years.

  35. The question we all want to see answered... by hak+hak · · Score: 1

    Those `upgraded' boxes... we know that of course they run NetBSD, but do they run Linux?

  36. Not really an upgrade.... by bobthemuse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So all this does is write to the boot partition and load a barebones copy of bsd on a ramdisk? Not terribly impressive. Now if there was a script which could make a list of my RH packages, backup all my config files, generate an BSD install script, then most importantly, intelligently copy my config files from their old RH default location to the new BSD location, then I would be impressed.

    Not really difficult, just time consuming. Of course, this assumes the RH system was installed through packages only, would break on most anything compiled, but the script described above would be a start.

    1. Re:Not really an upgrade.... by cperciva · · Score: 2, Informative

      So all this does is write to the boot partition and load a barebones copy of bsd on a ramdisk?

      It also inserts a system configuration file into the filesystem image; and the filesystem in question -- UFS2 -- is one for which Linux support is rather lacking, so the filesystem image has to be built entirely within userland (thanks NetBSD!).

    2. Re:Not really an upgrade.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off, fucking asshole.

      Troll Glass

  37. Darl McBride by dark_day · · Score: 0

    there's also the Darl McBride version that makes your Linux server require a SCO licence to run.

  38. Dummy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Linux is viral (due the the GPL) you're the worm! ;)

  39. Re:You have been rooted, welcome to SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darl ("Where's my $699?") McBride should use that $50M from the Canopy Group and pay someone so he can do this with OpenServer.

    The Fed will then have to open an office dealing not with 419 scams, but 699 ones.

  40. BillG has a nice wide grin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With an impending Linux vs BSD war, guess Bill G must be having a nice time. Merry Christmas and a happy new year for BILL

  41. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by cperciva · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Would you be looking for FreeBSD Update, perhaps?

  42. Re:"upgrade" using only ssh? hmm.... by TCM · · Score: 1

    DUH, of course - if permission is not blocked - you can as well do rm -fr. It's not like some random kid on the net can upgrade your Linux if you have port 22 open to the world. Get a clue.

    --
    Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
  43. Depenguinator... by Unominous+Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Not as useful as a defenestrator.

    --
    "Smoking helps you lose weight - one lung at a time" -- A. E. Neumann
    1. Re:Depenguinator... by jbridge21 · · Score: 1

      I defenestrated my three-lamp pole lamp thingie last week, it might a nice crash in the back yard after falling 1.5 stories...

    2. Re:Depenguinator... by Blob+Pet · · Score: 1

      Those who moderated the parent down were obviously not aware of the Defenestration of Prague.

      From this site: On May 23, 1618, in Prague, a few royal officials were thrown out a window of Hradcany Castle by some noblemen, but survived the fall by landing in a cart full of manure.

      It's the most amusing thing you'll learn about in an AP European History course.

      --
      "...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
  44. finally... by thoolihan · · Score: 1

    I can safely live in a world running
    ps -waux
    instead of
    ps -ef

    -t

    --
    http://unmoldable.com W:"No one of consequence" I:"I must know" W:"Get used to disappointment"
    1. Re:finally... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1, Funny
      I can safely live in a world running
      ps -waux
      instead of
      ps -ef

      I don't get it. ps -waux works fine on my Debian GNU/Linux box. So does ps -ef. On the other hand, my braindead OpenBSD box doesn't support ps -ef and I assume FreeBSD probably doesn't either since you're all a bunch of flaming BSD zealots and won't accept the superiority of System V. For god's sake you probably haven't even adopted System V runlevels and /etc/init.d script directory structures. Savages.

    2. Re:finally... by brassman · · Score: 1

      Funny about BSD's ps -- I've seen a couple of rooted RH boxes, and both of them were running a ps that looks nothing like the one that comes with RH.

      So instead of hiding the rootkit processes, it actually tipped me off. In fact it was like waving a big red flag. "Yo! Rootkit here!"

      --
      "Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
    3. Re:finally... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Actually, "ps -ef" works just fine under FreeBSD. Although why I would want to use some tainted SysV nomenclature is beyond my comprehension.

      p.s. We don't use /etc/init.d because /etc/rc.d is so clearly superior.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  45. Thanks, thanks! by EduardoFonseca · · Score: 0

    This is the best story ever. We are going to be able to watch the flamefest AND his server dive into oblivion: http://mrtg.daemonology.net/

    Great! Thanks CmdrTaco!

    1. Re:Thanks, thanks! by cperciva · · Score: 1

      Actually, my server seems to be doing surprisingly well, considering that it's running a PPro 200.

      That said, the people pounding on mrtg.daemonology.net are creating a bit of a load... I might need to take those scripts offline if things get too bad.

    2. Re:Thanks, thanks! by cperciva · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, too many curious people. I've disabled mrtg.daemonology.net for now, but I'll put snapshots of the MRTG graphs online later for anyone who wants to see what a slashdotting looks like.

    3. Re:Thanks, thanks! by EduardoFonseca · · Score: 1

      Please, do. And BTW, great tool.

    4. Re:Thanks, thanks! by cperciva · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've put a static snapshot of mrtg.daemonology.net up here: http://www.daemonology.net/depenguinator/slashdott ing/

      I'll update it from time to time over the next day.

    5. Re:Thanks, thanks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey dude, why don't you FUCK OFF?

      Troll Glass

  46. Uh-oh by essdodson · · Score: 1, Funny
    This code is beta-quality at best. Do not use this unless you know what you're doing.

    Apparently the software was not designed to be used by the majority of the Linux community.
    --
    scott
    1. Re:Uh-oh by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 0

      On the contrary, being beta code, wouldn't it be designed with the Linux community in mind?

    2. Re:Uh-oh by essdodson · · Score: 1

      It's the part about knowing what you're doing that rules out most of the Linux community. :)

      --
      scott
  47. Here is DeadRat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  48. The Word 'Upgrade' is Dying by cattail.nu · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The concept of an upgrade is dying. We all know we can switch out operating systems just like we can change what pair of shoes we are wearing. Each OS has good and bad points and I'm in favor of anything that makes it easy to shuffle between them. We should be bright enough not to destroy our production machines anyway. Isn't the ability to play with different things key to the evolution of open source software?

    Ancient Anguish

  49. FreeBSD problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you BSD fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a BSD box (a PIII 800 w/512 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this BSD box, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

    In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even MicroEmacs is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various BSD machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a BSD box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the BSD machine's faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 800 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that BSD is a "superior" machine.

    BSD addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a BSD over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

  50. Debian take over by golan · · Score: 1

    Have a look at this: DebianTakeOver, a script that a debian developer is creating to migrate a Colo server from redhat to debian.

  51. Re:Articel of TROLL by soccerisgod · · Score: 0

    Ive been reading slashdot for ages but only "recently" signed up to comment...Getting upset with this is just a phase and it will go away, but every once in a while I get enough and have to blurt it out... ;)

    --
    If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
  52. Boot Sector Virus or BSD ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article seemed like it was describing the workings of a boot sector virus.

    Replace the 40k virus payload with 40Mb of BSD and the story is the same.

  53. Burnt toast anyone? by mrmdls · · Score: 0

    I don't think He'll be able to to order his toast, lightly toasted this morning.

  54. Re:Articel of TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Besides, what's the point of this conflict between Linux and BSD users... most programs run on both plattforms anyway, also a lot of users don't have a real choice because of driver issues. And what's up with this whole holier than thou attitude? It's been fun for a while, but eventually it gets very very annoying. It's annoying enough to have to fight off religious windows users and ignore the tux fetishists in our own ranks, but THIS is the pinnacle of unnecessity!!"

    On the one hand, if it was a troll, then you just fed it.

    The overall point is that you don't have to bloody like news for it to be news, and this might be helpful for someone other than your voice in the wilderness whinging about the fact that some people get all heated about a subject close to your heart. Take a step back and read what you wrote.

    So people proclaim BSD is dying. So what?

  55. Forget depenguinator, I want reverse defenestrator by phr1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Reverse defenestration, throwing windows out of your computer. Where do I download? (Props to Eric for definition).

  56. Can we have the DeSCOinator now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are the possibilities of using this method to let companies switch from SCO Unix to Linux/FreeBSD?

    or better yet.....

    Hmm.. How about trying the concept out on the microsoft services for unix package? Laides and gentlemen, I give you the "DeWindowsInator"!.

    1. Re:Can we have the DeSCOinator now? by Valdrax · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, it's not quite what you're looking for, but I have written a shell script to remove all offending SCO IP from Linux based on the evidence presented so far:

      #!/bin/sh

      I hope everyone finds this helpful.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  57. a linux-polarized user speaks out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [wakes up to find system has been converted to FreeBSD]

    "Somebody set up us ON TEH SPOKE!"

  58. My Linux Box has Linux Intrusion Detection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not so quick BSD, first you have to through me (Linux Intrusion Detection).

  59. Can't we all just get along? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What's up with BSD "demonizing" linux like that?

    Actually, it's a fairly neat hack, even if the rivalry is somewhat silly.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:Can't we all just get along? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to understand..

      Linux is the "man" to *BSD users, and is keeping *BSD down. They'll never get along.

    2. Re:Can't we all just get along? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is now official - Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

      Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

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

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

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

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dead

    3. Re:Can't we all just get along? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It's probably more of a licensing thing than an OS thing. A GPLd version of *BSD would probably be ostracised from both camps, however. (But would anyone care to attempt it?)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  60. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I would think that on most i386 systems running linux the first 40mb or so is /boot or swap.

    I haven't made separate /boot partitions in years since the whole booting from >1023 cylinders fiasco was done away with on modern systems. My first partition is always the root so I can easily remember to boot off of /dev/sda1 or /dev/hda1 if I need to make a rescue disk.

  61. Upgrade? Sheesh. by nathanh · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I hope this software also inserts that unique "BSD eliteness" gene into your DNA. It seems too many BSD users have an unjustified superiority complex. The worst example I ever saw was on IRC; a jackass said "yeah, if you're stupid you should use Linux, but once you really understand UNIX you should use BSD". If only IRC had a /strangle command.

    1. Re:Upgrade? Sheesh. by fafaforza · · Score: 0

      "yeah, if you're stupid you should use Windows, but if you really want to understand computers you should use Linux"

    2. Re:Upgrade? Sheesh. by acidbass · · Score: 3, Funny

      The worst example I ever saw was on IRC; a jackass said "yeah, if you're stupid you should use Linux, but once you really understand UNIX you should use BSD".

      Hey! I said that!

  62. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All these people who waste space in their /boot partitions. 20MB is more than enough for a fistful of vmlinuz's and System.maps, plus the associated junk from lilo or grub. And as for putting the swap next, no way. OK, so the outside of the disk might be a little faster, but most of the time the delays are actually from head movement, so on my boxes swap sits between other filesystems (e.g. / and /home, or between alternative / partitions on test boxes).

    The other thing about my partitions is that almost all of them are extended (ok, I have an attachment to /dev/hda1 for /boot, so that is primary). Writing across the start of the extended partition record _will_ make the remaining filesystems unusable.

    FreeBSD flamebait - who needs it ?

  63. excellent! by kevin+lyda · · Score: 3, Insightful

    this is a good thing for linux and bsd. it would be nice to see a dedemonizer to go with it. this shows to people what "open systems" REALLY can be.

    --
    US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
    1. Re:excellent! by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1
      it would be nice to see a dedemonizer to go with it.
      Wouldn't that just be a monizer? What-ever-the-heck that is ...
      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  64. A program?!? by Groo+Wanderer · · Score: 1

    You don't need a depenguinator to do this. If you want to keep the pesky little critters from crapping on your lawn, just use a shotgun. If you are good, you can do it from your second floor window, that way you don't have to put on pants for the day.

    -Charlie

    1. Re:A program?!? by redog · · Score: 1

      If you were "good" you would use a rifle not a shotgun from the second floor window. A .22 is very accurate, deadly and easy to silence, a shotgun would certianly give away your position faster as well, then you have to worry about the pengunin king waddleing up to the elevator to root you.

  65. well by wobblie · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I have to say, if BSD folks weren't already considered the most annoying, obnoxious and dweeby unix users around, this pushes them over the top.

    1. Re:well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry. You must have "Linux users" and "BSD users" mixed around in your head.

      I can see from this very thread that it must be so. ^_^

      No. Seriously.

  66. I'll bite. (Sorry, can't resist) by Qbertino · · Score: 1, Troll

    Gee, that's a cool thing.
    Only one question: Just who would want to install a dead OS?

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:I'll bite. (Sorry, can't resist) by tepples · · Score: 2, Funny

      The same people who just reinstalled Windows 98.

    2. Re:I'll bite. (Sorry, can't resist) by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

      Only one question: Just who would want to install a dead OS?

      Hey! It's dying, not dead. Dying! It's been dying for years, and as far as anyone can tell, it'll continue dying forever.

      Geez, get with the program already.

      --
      No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
  67. Re:Morphix+VNC by TheLoneCabbage · · Score: 1

    I believe VNC comes with the distro

  68. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by molnarcs · · Score: 5, Informative

    "having to do a make world on 300 boxen"

    Not any more, and 'make world' is being deprecated in favor of 'make buildworld'. The difference is, that 'make buildworld' is totally self contained. You do 'make buldworld' on one machine, export /usr/obj (and /usr/src as well?) as nfs, mount it on your 300 boxen, and you only need to install the shiny new bsd with 'make installworld'. That's it. So it is actually quite easy to deploy on a large server farm. You would go the same way with the ports btw: build on one machine and have it make pakcages, than install the packages with pkg_add -r whatever on the rest of the machines. Neat. :)

  69. Why oh why by maroberts · · Score: 1

    If I understand correctly, it seems to depenguinate in a fairly destructive manner. I'm fairly certain that a better depenguinator could operate off the existing filesystem, even if it is Ext2/3 and certainly ensure it didn't stuff vital directories such as /home.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  70. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by greekguy · · Score: 1

    Why make world on 300 boxes? Why not do it on one box, and share the src dir. Same with ports or pkgsrc.

  71. No, is a stupid idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, if i wants to install OpenBSD, i'll install it from scratch, not with some 'great' tool to 'erradicate the penguins from you box'. I'm tired of the 'openbsd is kooler than linux' or 'linux is kooler that netbsd' shit. Grow the fuck up.

    They should better spend his time doing useful open source software...

  72. 5.2RC on my lappie - good so far by puzzled · · Score: 2, Interesting



    I run two IBM T20s - on is my main machine, the other is backup and it runs the OS of the month. I keep FBSD 4.9 on most everything including my primary laptop, but last week I loaded 5.2RC to check its progress.

    I was mostly interested in improved USB support and I'm pretty pleased with the behavior so far. I've found some things to not love about ACPI but that may be my lack of clue rather than a problem with the OS.

    I pronounced 5.2RC almost cooked enough for daily use. I'm going to wrench on the backup lappie for a few more weeks and if it does nothing worse than ACPI neutering the power switch I'll probably swap drives and make it my main machine.

    --
    I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
    1. Re:5.2RC on my lappie - good so far by puzzled · · Score: 0, Offtopic



      That was stupid, inflamatory, and irrelevant to anyone who knows anything about what is really going on with the various BSD derivatives the first time you said it. Are you a genuine troll, a troll larva, or a very clever shell script created by some Linux fanboy? I'm guessing shell script ...

      --
      I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
  73. Re:immaculate by sinserve · · Score: 1

    By hiring surrogate mothers.

  74. If only they could do something more... Usefull by X!0mbarg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Like a program that would "Capture the Flag" of a certain monopolistic regime...

    Now *that* would be a Wonderful use of a "program" ;) Taking all the current settings of a Windoze machine, keeping the "wallpaper" and similar, familiar trappings, and allowing you to switch to BSD (or your fax 'NIX), and minimize the trauma of some poor drone's switch to something "else"...

    But what are the Odds of seeing That happen anytime soon?

  75. Not the way I'd do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My weapon of choice for stuffing an OS on a remote box is a LILO boot floppy with just enough of a kernel to see the disks, NIC, and then run the barebones in-kernel DHCP client. This sits alongside an initrd that contains a small program that fixes up /etc/resolv.conf (using the stuff the kernel client found - dig around in /proc) and gets "stage 2".

    Stage 2 is just a URL (courtesy of append= in the lilo.conf) to a root disk image. It pulls that into the ram disk, mounts it, then does a pivot_root over to the new filesystem. This binary was linked against dietlibc, since a static glibc binary would take up several floppies by itself.

    The image is just a bastardized Slackware root disk with sshd installed and configured to start up and listen for a connection.

    Once that's up, you just ssh in as root and now you can do anything you want from there. It's great for installing stuff on distant systems, and it's even better for repairing something that won't boot from the hard drive for some reason.

    Anyone with half a clue about modern systems should be able to whip up something like this in a couple of days tops. None of it is particularly complicated. I bet the hardest part is writing the initrd program that pulls in the root image.

    Change the names of the technologies around for a BSD equivalent, of course.

    Note: once you have this technique down, you're about two or three steps away from a full-blown auto installer. Instead of starting sshd, run a script that partitions and then formats and mounts the disk, then start blowing packages onto the new filesystem. If you do it right, you can have a bootable floppy or CD that can be stuffed in a machine on any network with a DHCP server and a route to the Internet. Just pop it in, hit reset, wait for it to load, pop it out, and walk away. It will soon be yours.

  76. But Wait - There's More! by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 0, Redundant

    That is funny, but it gets even better. If you click on the Dead Rat link it brings you to...

    wait for it...

    the Red Hat website!!

    For those people who just didn't get it the first time.

  77. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by R.Caley · · Score: 2, Informative
    [having to do a make world on 300 boxen is not my idea of time well spent.]

    mount /usr/src
    mount /usr/obj
    cd /usr/src
    make installkernel installworld
    scp -r build:/etc/\* /etc

    This is assuming all your machines are identical. If not you'd have to be more careful about the config stuff, and use mergemaster, but that would be the case for any OS.

    Of course, NFS is not something you'd want to use to a remote machine, the idea of opening RPC ports in my firewall makes my skin crawl. But for upgrading multiple machines on your own network, the BSD system is really quick and clean.

    If something could be done to improve mergemaster, the ease of upgrading FBSD would be the killer argument for the death of the penguin. I've never seen a description of how to upgrade linux which didn't make me decide it would be easier just to do a clean install ofa new version. If there is such a description/method, please post and earn some well deserved karma.

    --
    _O_
    .|<
    The named which can be named is not the true named
  78. Dude, this is Slashdot..... by DesScorp · · Score: 1

    ...pregnant nuns will turn some people on here.

    Add some tentacle rape hentai, and watch Slashdot get slashdotted...

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:Dude, this is Slashdot..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Everything reminds me of you so much. When we pass by Chilis I remember you sitting across from me eating your favorite salad. You always told the waiter to take off the little white crunchy things ... because you hated them. And when we drive by billboards that say An Army of One, it makes me remember you in your military uniform. How you always made a crunching sound when you walked, and how you shined your big boots every night before you went to bed. I miss seeing that all the time. Little things that I took for granted when you were here seem priceless now.

      One thing that I regret is when you wanted to open my car door for me, but I always got it myself. I wish I would have let you do it. And when you wanted to hold my hand, I sometimes would pull away because I didn't want people to see me holding my daddy's hand ... I feel so ashamed that I cared what people thought of me walking down the parking lot holding your hand. But now I would give anything just to feel the warmth of your hand holding mine.

  79. At least the server didn't go down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not sure how much of the Slashdot crowd woudl have decided to actually visit the page (your famous /. effect)... but I'm sure the server woudl remain up, as compared to other OS'es I've seen get /.-ed.

    I ran a LOTR promotion on my site a few months ago that brought a signifigant number of eyes to the page, in effect, a /. of my own making. Damned OS (FreeBSD 4.9) stayed up and chugging along...

    I've seen both Windblows and Linux creak under the same type of stress. You may label this as a troll post, but there is a bit of cheer for this "depenguinator"... I'm surprised the Linux community hasn't developed a "downgrade" tool for *BSD (etc.) to pop Linux back on a system posessed by the Daemon! ;-)

    Cheers folks...

    1. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ran a LOTR promotion on my site a few months ago that brought a signifigant number of eyes to the page, in effect, a /. of my own making. Damned OS (FreeBSD 4.9) stayed up and chugging along...

      I've seen both Windblows and Linux creak under the same type of stress.


      Yeah, Solaris is good at that, too. Linux did have a good solution for that once upon a time, but it got lost amidst a my-memory-manager's-better-than-your's pissing contest (between Arcangeli and van Riel, IIRC).

    2. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by jrexilius · · Score: 2, Informative

      it is a bit of a troll post as the item that would crash under a /. effect is Apache (assuming thats what you are running) not the OS. There is not enough of a performance difference in OS level operations between linux and bsd that would have an impact on your network and webserving daemon's ability to handle a /. Assuming apache 1.3.x, even recompiled to handle more than 256 children you are hard limited by memory and bandwidth. So when you get too many concurrent TCP connections, they just get dropped, regardless of OS.

    3. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      That's true. The Dallas Morning News is running a Redhat load balanced cluster, and when 9/11 hit they effectively got slashdotted. They have a measley t1 pipe to the outside world and the pipe got full, none of their boxes went down but to the public it looked as though their site was hosed. Part of this was due to the way they have Apache setup...each process has a 10 second wait for the jsp stuff to build. If you know you're headed for a /.'ing the least you can do is throw up a static page that's cached in ram.

    4. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by jrexilius · · Score: 1

      I have taken to running a spidering type script against my servers when they restart apache/tomcat to get the initial "compile" and caching going which improves initial users' experience. But 10 seconds sounds ridiculous no matter how you look at it.

      Perhaps they are in need of some performance tuning in their code?..

    5. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      Well performance tuning or not, my point was that their cluster with ridiculous timing, still withstood a slashdotting. I can almost guarantee you that a pentium 200 with 64mb of ram can withstand a slashdotting on a t1. The bandwidth is the limiting factor.

    6. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      > I'm surprised the Linux community hasn't developed a "downgrade" tool for *BSD (etc.) to pop Linux back on a system posessed by the Daemon! ;-)

      --Just wait about a week... Somebody will doubtless code this to one-up the BSD folks!

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    7. Re:At least the server didn't go down... by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Well performance tuning or not, my point was that their cluster with ridiculous timing, still withstood a slashdotting. I can almost guarantee you that a pentium 200 with 64mb of ram can withstand a slashdotting on a t1. The bandwidth is the limiting factor.

      Just a note to add: I did some make shift tests with a dual ppro 200 (ibm 325, uw40scsi) and 256 mb ram on a well tested 1.2mb SDSL line dishing up static pages. This was RH 6.2, a custom kernel (2.2.x), hand rolled apache 1.3.x and max clients around 1000. Now, a 1.2SDSL line is not a T1, but still I couldn't get the load over a .50 average before the line was saturated.

      Yes static, yes lots more ram, but it does go to prove your point that the main bottleneck is the backwidth. I have to imagine that with a newer and tighter kernel, and staying with apache 1.3 for static pages, the load could be reduced further.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  80. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by essdodson · · Score: 1

    need to share your obj dir too

    --
    scott
  81. in other news by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

    holy men have created a DeDaemonator to rid those boxen of little satan men.

    in seriousness, the same thing could be done to bsd so linux would be installed..

    I feel the OS wars rekindling on a new level.

  82. xbill by dollargonzo · · Score: 1

    i think xbill now needs a sequel (after all the machines are turned into toasters): xlinus. except that now the daemons trash the dead rats.

    --
    BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
  83. Re:"upgrade" using only ssh? hmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More like "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda". This *really* wipes the start of your disk, including the MBR.

  84. BFD by ksheff · · Score: 1

    I've done a similar thing to thousands of SCO boxes in order to turn them into penguins.

    --
    the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  85. Bah. by Enahs · · Score: 1, Troll

    As far as I'm concerned, this is further proof that BSD zealots are far worse (and less trustworthy) than Linux zealots.

    --
    Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
    1. Re:Bah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah.. because one bsd user posted a mild flamebait.
      Good observation.

    2. Re:Bah. by Enahs · · Score: 1

      Hell, I got rated funny, and that's what I was going for. Think I meant it? Think again...

      It's a neat trick, as far as I'm concerned. :-D

      --
      Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
  86. the historical record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    One undeniable truth, upon which we all can agree, is the fact that *BSD is dying. But why? What are the reasons for its catastrophic failure? 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.

  87. non-FreeBSD? by hubertf · · Score: 1

    After all the tools were taken from NetBSD (looking at the bottom of that web page), I wonder how hard it would be to adopt this to end up with NetBSD on the disk? :)

    - Hubert

    1. Re:non-FreeBSD? by little_fluffy_clouds · · Score: 1

      Do that and earn my eternal gratitude :)

      --
      What were the skies like when you were young?
  88. Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy! by Zone-MR · · Score: 1, Insightful

    * Put one line in your kernel config file (devce pcm) and you can just plug any supported sound card in.
    * The same goes with digital cameras: plug it in, and mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera and there you go.

    You mention this as if it demonstrated how easy freebsd was to operate!

    Whilst the above steps might seem trivial to the experienced users, you have to admit it's not the kind of intuitive setup proccess you would reccommend to your grandma.

    Whilst win32 is a joke to advanced users, you generally plug in supported hardware, and it just works. This is probably the main, and only, reason why windows continues to have it's widespread popularity amongst newcommers.

  89. Stupid flaming by juhaz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Maybe it's a neat hack (well, it's dead simple actually, nothing just about anyone couldn't do), but the way it's presented is a gigantic flamebait.

    RedHat bashing is especially transparent and nothing short of insulting, really.

    Editors continue to happily let trough "articles" that have obviously been written by someone who is at mental level of five years old. Way to go.

  90. Why won't I do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see. Why won't I do it?

    It's very simple - I just ditched FreeBSD (stupid OS corrupted my hard disk!!) and switched to Linux.

  91. How pathetic by killmister · · Score: 1

    Yee. These BSD guys sound exactly like Linux guys sounded during mid 90ties - it's cool, even the soundblaster (usb for bsd guys) is working properly. It's really cool :)

    --
    MySQL Error 1040: Can't return sig, Too many connections!
    1. Re:How pathetic by bunco · · Score: 1

      BSD's focus on the desktop has been of a far lower priority than that of Linux'. Sorry, but I don't need USB, sound, an office package, or the ability to play games on my servers.

  92. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fact: FreeBSD is dying

  93. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by SquadBoy · · Score: 1

    apt-get update
    apt-get -u dist-upgrade

    This is for Debian.

    --

    Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
  94. Obligatory Gentoo plug by metamatic · · Score: 1

    I replaced a dead rat with Larry The Cow using an SSH connection. There are instructions in the documentation section at gentoo.org.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  95. divide and squabbling by den_erpel · · Score: 1

    I am an active Linux user and developer, so what. I just think it is a pitty that some ppl, especially from the free/unix side still have to proclaim in such a way that their flavour is better and given an informative discription.

    Just when I have the impression that a lot of the distro wars are over (or am I just passively ignoring them), some BSD zealot has to attack Linux. I have the impression that the author of the site/tool used these words sarcastically, but the submitter of the story should have had better judgement than to just take over the heading of the page.

    I want to try BSD from the moment I have some more time (possibly in some emulator or on an old box initially) and I don't care that much what *n*x system I am working on, especially when I consider the alternative. This kind of stuff does not really help when the *n*x playground if fighting like small children while big brother is sitting by and enjoying the spectacle.

    Hm, I'm taking myself too seriously again :-/ Let's kiss and make up :) [hm, come to think of it, since I guess the author is a 'guy', I'll drop the kissing]

    Nice tool, though I don't see the real innovative in this simular things are available (dunno for which *n*x but I would guess they are pretty platform independent).

    --
    Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis. You can't simply say, "Today I will be brilliant."
  96. waiting for upgrade-worm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm still waiting for the upgrade-worm to appear.
    The worm that installs linux has been joked about for years. It'd be a fr*gg*n' time someone actually implemented it and let the windows users out of their miseries. We need a really VIRAL Linux/*BSD!

  97. Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just spent 3 months on FreeBSD 5.1, and from my experience I have to disagree. I switched to Mandrake to test an app I was developing against 9.2, but it has been a nightmare. FreeBSD was much more responsive under load than Linux has been, and the sound is for some reason fucked up on this Mandrake install (intel integrated sound that worked great in 9.1 and on FreeBSD). urpmi keeps spitting a weird and as far as I can tell useless error message at me and moving on, and I had to add shit to /etc/rc.local to make my hostname work right.

    A note on the last thing. I don't mind editing /etc/rc.local being a BSD user/admin, but with people touting the "ease-of-use", "ease-of-install", and "polish" of Linux distros, I have to say I'm not impressed. One more thing, supermount sucks and should be destroyed. Rebooting to get you fscking cd back is not cool.

    bja
    -who can't remember his /. passwd

  98. Emerge! by shadow_slicer · · Score: 1
    I've never seen a description of how to upgrade linux which didn't make me decide it would be easier just to do a clean install ofa new version. If there is such a description/method, please post and earn some well deserved karma.

    emerge sync; emerge -u system; emerge -u world
  99. MS-DOS v6 ReadMe by JLester · · Score: 1

    My old business partner and I got a kick out of the ReadMe file included with MS-DOS v6. It told how to "upgrade" from OS/2 to MS-DOS.

    Jason

    --
    "FORMAT C:" - Kills bugs dead!
  100. Linux as a server by shani · · Score: 4, Informative

    Interestingly, the k root name server has been running Debian Linux for a year or two now and has not had any "creak". It gets about 1500 queries/second per machine (the root server is distributed geographically via anycasting, and at each site by load balancing), and receives all manner of ill-formed packets.

    Other root servers seem to run Linux (use nmap if you're curious), but I don't know the people running them so I can't be sure.

    Now admittedly this is a very specific type of service: it's a single application that all fits into memory.

    We're going to be moving www.ripe.net and whois.ripe.net from Solaris to Linux in 2004. The WWW server gets about 20 hits/second as you can see here, and the whois server gets around 28 hits/second as you can see here. These have more complex usage, with disk I/O, new process creation, and so on. I wouldn't let these services migrate if I thought they would be unstable.

  101. Slashdot needs this ... by Chromodromic · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The Slashdot crowd needs this. It justifiably makes many of them look like rats picking fights with their tails. So many of these Slashrodents are so myopic by virtue of their unceasing "promotion" of Linux that it's as if they don't know what to do now when you show them something that isn't Windows, but isn't Linux, but it isn't Windows! but it isn't Linux! So they default to ATTACK! AAUUUGGGHH! It might be friendly but we can't afford to take the risk! ATTACK!

    Even now, throughout these posts, there are a ton of "off-topic" posts that didn't get moderated as such. "Personally I prefer this ". They're not commenting on BSD, they're just moving their mouths and out comes LinuxLinuxLinuxLinux in a neverending, mindless blather. Most of them are like the Scientologists on Hollywood Blvd. "Would you like a free personality test? Oooohhh, we see here you need Linux. Linux will make you whole ..."

    It shows that many of these nits can't distinguish between understanding computers and software as tools or understanding computers and software as religion. Here's a hint guys: This isn't religion. Or it shouldn't be. And Linus isn't God. He's just an egotistical programmer that made some nice software. And, because I've never read it anyplace else, I'll just say this: He looks as dorky as hell.

    Get a freakin' clue, guys. BSD is amazing. Stop being sheep and start using the brains you were born with. Learn what BSD is about and then, perhaps, you'll stop stuttering "DebianDebianDebianDebianDebian ..."

    --
    Chr0m0Dr0m!C
    1. Re:Slashdot needs this ... by josepha48 · · Score: 1
      I'm bi-opic .. I use both FreeBSD and Linux.. and NetBSD and Sun and HP and.. yes even Windows.

      I'm not sure why someone who is running Linux would want a FreeBSD upgrade path, but it does offer them an option. The questions they may have are 1) Will all their hardware run? 2) Will all their software run?
      The answers are maybe and maybe. I have had better luck with getting my wifi card in my laptop to run with NetBSD than I had with FreeBSD OR Linux so it runs NetBSD. I have had better luck getting my sound card to work in my desktop with Linux then I did with NetBSD or FreeBSD, so it runs Linux. My router runs FreeBSD because it has good SMP support which NetBSD did not have till recently and while Linux has good SMP support, I wanted to try FreeBSD.

      In the end weather it be Sun, BSD, Linux, Windows or even a Mac, the end user can make it be whatever they want it to be.

      All platforms now have support for gtk+ and qt, so you can use gimp on all these platforms, with cygwin, you can have bash ( or other popular shells ) on your windows or mac or pick your UNIX / unix like flavor. You can run X on all of these platforms and at that point, it becomes what you prefer.

      --

      Only 'flamers' flame!
      Does slashdot hate my posts?

    2. Re:Slashdot needs this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my thoughts exactly.
      FreeBSD is smooth from install to roll out.
      I see Linux as windows without a receipt, and I see FreeBSD as Linux without training wheels.
      Myopic sheep ffs.

    3. Re:Slashdot needs this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      anything to back this up, or are you just a troll?

    4. Re:Slashdot needs this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If the issue here had anything to do with FreeBSD's IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness.

      FreeBSD's packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

  102. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 1

    exactly right. The idea that some complicated command line is "good" in any sense of the word is rediculous.
    By definition, a good OS will recognize peripherals automatically

  103. Having an open relationship with your OS... by bunco · · Score: 1

    To prevent sounding biased... I run FreeBSD on all servers. I ran Linux on my laptop until FreeBSD 5.1 was released. I switched because I use FreeBSD more often, not because Linux was lacking. I run XP on my workstation. I'm quite familiar with the strenths and weaknesses of each platform.

    Back on topic...

    5.2RC2 was released what?.. less than one week ago? I don't think you invested enough time to make an educated decision.

    If you were a long time Windows/MacOS user, and gave Linux/BSD/Solaris/WTFE a few hours of your time, do you honestly think you would switch? I very much doubt it.

    "Why did I spend an hour of my time installing THIS!?"

    In short, changing OSes requires a fair amount of tenacity. A true geek cannot be a zealot. You've got blinders on my friend. Open your eyes and you will see how great *BSD really is.

    1. Re:Having an open relationship with your OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

      The statistics sample for over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part.

      If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

      Well that's about the size of it. And then the people who know better pretend not to know why FreeBSD is dying. Yeah, right.

    2. Re:Having an open relationship with your OS... by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Are there any FreeBSD live-cd's available?

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  104. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the slowest with the weakest hardware support for the most realistic platform. Yup. Good plan. Keep on using GNU/Retardian.

  105. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) I'll bet you $100 that you posted that from a Windows box.

    2) If you are too stupid to figure out how to update a driver in Windows then perhaps this whole "com-pu-ter" thing is too much for you.

    3) Please give us step-by-step instructions for updating *anything* on a *nix based box (one per variant and packager please... one where you compile the source yourself on each variant.. oh and one where you do not run any XWindow system whatsoever.)

    Have a nice day, tool.

  106. Maybe so, but we all know...... by gavri · · Score: 1

    BSD is Dying

    1. Re:Maybe so, but we all know...... by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      In another thread I read something along these lines:

      BSD is one of the oldest and most influencing branches of UNIX. Almost every other relevant OS (including windows) contains BSD code. MacOS X is based on BSD.

      So even if BSD was "dying" (as in nobody using it anymore?) a lot of its goodness will live on under the hood in other OS'.

      They call it evolution. It's a Good Thing.

  107. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not really true. The only reason that windows continues to have popularity amongst "newcomers" is because it is pre-loaded on all computers sold in retail! Newcomers never know of anything different. To them, windows is a fact of the computing world and is part of all computers(Most "newcomers" don't know what a OS is!). Oh and, some Linux distributions can automatically detect many devices when they are plugged in and they will "just work". This is not true of all devices however, and it is not true of all devices for ANY OS! Mac claims to be the OS where everything "just works," but I find that many devices won't work unless you install the drivers. Windows is far worse when it comes to device detection. Many installs of windows I've had the displeasure of working with fail to find drivers or use a device properly even after you install the drivers(Through the control panel which many users couldn't do). Windows rarely "just works".

  108. If it's that easy... by biendamon · · Score: 1

    ...why doesn't BSD do this by default? I don't mean to fan the flames here, but that sounds like more work than I have to do with either a Windows or a Linux installation. In either case, I can just plug in a sound card and it'll work (In Linux, it's usually detected by harddrake, anaconda, or whatever hardware configurator the distribution you're using happens to be). So what are the benefits of configuring a sound card as you describe? And why doesn't it do that by default, so you don't have to go through the recompilation?

    1. Re:If it's that easy... by molnarcs · · Score: 1

      "why doesn't BSD do this by default?"

      Well, I screwed it up a bit :( Putting 'device pcm' in the kernel just saves you the trouble of having to reconfigure your system when you put in a new card. Well, some linuces do what you claim they do, others don't. I used Mandrake 9.0, and 9.1 later, and hw detectin worked fine. On the other hand, with the motherboard I'm currently using, onboard sound wasn't detected properly in either of them. I had to write to asrock (well, I know its a cheap mb) and they pointed me to a via site from where I had to downlaod the driver and install it manually.

      But this is not the point. My point really was that any moderately experienced linux user (those who use slackware or debian on the desktop for instance) wouldn't have any trouble with FreeBSD, in fact, they might find configuring the system easier (or in case of Slackware, very similar, for it uses the BSD init system) Of course, I can't convince anyone of this, unless someone tries both. And as another poster has written, one good thing about FSBD is that they care a great deal about their documentation. Check out their handbook to see what I'm talking about, so no hunting for howtos scattered over the net. And its always up to date - wherever things differ in the 'new technology release' branch, those changes are noted in the handbook - and it is free (as opposed to SuSE documentation, that some people mentioned as coming close in quality to freebsd documentation).

      Also, you don't have to recompile to get sound to work. You can use 'kldload pcm' and there you have it - as I said, 'device pcm' is good if you change sound cards or something. Essentially FreeBSD works similar to linux, but there are little differences. For instance, during boot time, my hardware (soundcard) is properly detected, and device nodes created automatically in /dev/. Want sound to start at boottime? Its a one liner in /boot/loader.conf:
      snd_via8233_load="YES"
      (every modul you might need that it is not in the kernel works like that). You want linux compatibility. ls /boot/kernel, and you'll see a file: linux.ko So what you need is:
      linux_load="YES" These are just examples of 'easy' configurability, as opposed to /etc/modules.conf (or was it conf.modules) or was it something different (modules.autoload on gentoo perhaps?) - see what I meant?

      To sum it up: my post wasn't intended for anyone's grandparents.

    2. Re:If it's that easy... by loucura! · · Score: 1

      FreeBSD is mostly a server OS, why would sound card support be compiled in by DEFAULT in a server OS?

      --
      Black and grey are both shades of white.
    3. Re:If it's that easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way that most geeks see it, FreeBSD is pretty much D E A D

    4. Re:If it's that easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Debian and OpenBSD.

      I can think of few areas where Linux has OBSD beat. I guess they all really lie in the kernel. I can't attest to the structural elegance, or lack thereof, of the Linux kernel. I know many BSD proponents say that the Linux kernel is, technically speaking, not as nice. But I am not intimately aware of the innards of either kernel.

      Anyway. The Linux kernel supports much more hardware and is much easier to build. I very much admire OBSD's "config" and the way it is laid out. However, Linux's "make menuconfig" is much easier to deal with. It has a lot more options and drivers, and it really does a good job of making me feel like I know what's going on.

      The OBSD kernel build stuff has its own merit, don't get me wrong. I admire the way the config files are laid out. It just doesn't have as many drivers, and configuration is not nearly as easy. There are times when I might really know what I'm doing, and I might want to do things the OpenBSD way. Most of the time, though, I don't want to bother.

      The other thing that bugs me about OpenBSD is that /dev is very confusing for someone that is used to the simple Linux device names. Linux stuff is just more intuitive there. But it's never that hard to figure out. No major gripe.

      My gripes with Linux, however, are much more numerous in comparison to BSD.

      The BSD way of doing things just makes more sense. Look at all the probems Linux has created for istelf. Its development is too disorganized.

      Look at what a mess /proc has become on Linux. To make up for this, there are a slew of other virtual filesystems that do what would previously be done in /proc. This is especially true of Linux 2.6.

      Or how about the way devfs, which was once hailed as one of the greatest achievements of Linux 2.4, is now deprecated in 2.6, and considered harmful?

      The problem? They can't find the maintainer.

      Look at how many times ipfwadm/ipchains/iptables had to be rewritten. Each utility was written to patch over the inadequacies of the previous. Each kernel feature comes with a separate, rather clunky userland utility to administer it.

      The BSD way of PF and NAT rules is this: have a couple files in /dev. That's where userland tells the kernel what the rules are. Then you have a couple files in /etc. That's where the admin actually types the rules. Then you have a few simple utilities that parse the files in /etc and write them to /dev.

      But the Linux way: write some clunky utility with a lot of weird flags (/sbin/iptables) that gets called many times, with rules one-by-one on its command line, instead of being stored in a file and being called once. Then the Linux distributors have some shell script where you type your rules, instead of the simple files in /etc. Where's the sense in that?

      Not to mention that iptables rules are needlessly confusing, while BSD's are very simple and easy to write.

      The other thing Linux is that userland is completely disconnected from the kernel, and even userland packages are disconnected from OTHER userland packages. BSD is developed as a single system and built from a single tree. Your typical Linux distribution comes from many people, each with their own style and taste, and there is no real effort to integrate the packages after the fact. Even though BSDs have packages coming from other sources (like GCC or XFree86), they still make an effort to make them feel like a part of the tree. Linux does not do this.

      BSD is developed as a single system, and Linux is developed in pieces. Look at some of the header files on your typical Linux system. Many GNUisms and countless #ifdefs that don't apply to you. Then look at the headers to some BSD system. Very straightforward in comparison, am I right?

      BSD just seems much more thought out. I like it. It's right up my alley. Linux, on the other hand, seems like a huge compromise.

    5. Re:If it's that easy... by loucura! · · Score: 1

      I was wondering why the server room smelled of putrecine.

      --
      Black and grey are both shades of white.
  109. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by fubar1971 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Correct! If by "just works" you mean:
    1. load the driver from the supplied cd (where is that damn thing)
    2. reboot
    3. recover from blue screen of death
    4. reboot in 'safe mode' (thanks MS, for protecting me from evil!)
    5. Remove outdated, incompatable driver
    6. Spend six hours reading forums and newsgroups about other users experience with how the device failed for them, and what they did.
    7. Hunt down an obscure driver that is not intended for use with your device, but will give you some functionality without conflicting with your other drivers.
    8. Download and install driver from a less than reputable source
    9. Watch a worm run rampant through your system
    10. Finally learn your lesson and install Linux or buy a Mac


    I am definetily no fan of WinBlows. I use linux everyday. Unfortunately, installing *new* hardware on Linux can be just as inconveinent as any othe OS.

    The same thing can be said about most Linux distros as well....

    1. find the driver on some obscure website or news group.
    2. Recompile the kerenel to include the driver(Damn it has errors)
    3. Fix code problems
    4. Recompile
    5. Repeat steps 3 and 4
    6. Write patch for incompaitable gcc version
    7. Repeat steps 3 and 4
    8. Restart with new kernel
    9. kernel panic
    10. reboot old kernel
    11. Remove incorrectly compiled kernel.
    12. Spend six hours reading forums and newsgroups about other users experience with how the device failed for them, and what they did.
    14. Download and install beta or (shudder alpha level)driver.
    15. Repeat steps 2 - 12
    16. Compile driver as loadable module.
    17. Repeat steps 3 - 7
    18. Start Daemon or reboot
    19. Kernel Panic
    20. Reboot in 'interactive mode', 'different run level' or 'using emergency boot media'
    21. Remove loadable module
    22. spend 6months writing your own driver
    23. Overlook security flaw in your own code.
    24. Watch your box get r00t'ed.
    22. Finally learn your lesson and install Windows or buy a Mac.

    Those that live in glass houses should not throw stones.

  110. But no similar utility for Windows. by OrangeTide · · Score: 1, Troll

    Unfortunetly I did not see something like Depenguinator for windows. Again the FreeBSD crowd attacks Linux and ignores windows. Maybe old Linux users is their only market share.

    And my FreeBSD friends wonder why I'd rather run NetBSD on my systems. Maybe it's because politically Linux and NetBSD users can coexist. Or maybe it's because NetBSD is in "full production" on more architectures than FreeBSD. (many times more, including architectures I don't use).

    *waits for some OpenBSD person to post how great they think OpenBSD is*

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  111. It just works. by runlvl0 · · Score: 1

    3) Please give us step-by-step instructions for updating *anything* on a *nix based box (one per variant and packager please... one where you compile the source yourself on each variant.. oh and one where you do not run any XWindow system whatsoever.)

    apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade

    Updates all of my packages on the distro of my choice, Debian. (If you need help, it's kind of like Windows Update, except that it works, and I excercise control over whose updates I trust.)

    (Although, in the interest of full disclosure, I am 1) ... post[ing] that from a Windows box; I got it copy of Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic for Xmas, and it freaking rocks. Thus, I'm using my X(P)box right now.)

    If you really want to compile from sources yourself, I'm sure that someone around here can help you with Gentoo and the emerge command.

    emerge sync && emerge packagename , I think. So simple, even an MCSE (me) can do it.

    --

    Carthago delenda est!
    1. Re:It just works. by DShard · · Score: 1

      Also works for fedora core and redhat btw.

    2. Re:It just works. by Matty_ · · Score: 1

      In FreeBSD, if you've installed sysutils/portupgrade and have your make.conf configured correctly, all you do to upgrade all of your software is as follows.

      # cd /usr/ports
      # make update && portsdb -uU && portupgrade -a

      That'll upgrade everything. Of course, I'm not one for upgrading all packages at once. That can cause a lot of problems, especially on a production server. Best to only do this on your workstation, if at all.

    3. Re:It just works. by schnurble · · Score: 1

      emerge sync && emerge -uD world

      [go get coffee, depending on how long it's been, it could be a while]

      etc-update

      [done!]

      --
      "To err is human, to forgive is simply not my policy." --root
  112. Funny by cdn-programmer · · Score: 1

    I think some people take things too seriously. I think this is rather funny.

    BTW - As to BSD dying. I don't think so. We've migrated to OpenBSD on the servers and we really like it. It is solid, secure and stable. It is easy to install what we need and performance is certainly adequate for what we are doing.

    This does not mean that Linux would not do the job... yet with Linux we found that the last two (2) redhat distros we bought were broken miserably. Hense - we do not expect to ever use RedHat again.

    So its a toss up - those folks who install one of the BSD's on their servers generally know why they are doing it and generally are going to be pretty happy with it.

    Those people who elect to go with a Linux distro probably also know why they are chosing what they chose (even if its the support they are looking for) and they also probably are going to be happy.

    As for the people who install Microsoft servers. Well - they probably are happy too - but for different reasons. First off, ignorance is bliss. Next they have a marketing machine that certainly knows how to passify people who don't know too much and are dumb enuf to listen to marketroids. Yup - so they can be happy too.

    I guess that leaves one group that probably isn't all that happy and they would be the professional admins who know better but are told by their collective bosses to use what they are given. To this group I will address the following comment.

    A professional knows when to say NO. Just say NO dammit! Don't install it - don't support it - don't clean it up. Let them sink if necessary. A professional engineer will not use faulty concrete to build a bridge any more than a professional doctor will follow the bad advise of a bean counter. Right?

    As a professional developer I personally have had to stand up to dumb ass bosses. One wanted us to use (of all things) BASIC to build a system that eventually had more than 1/2 million lines of code in it. Now - that was a really dumb suggestion since the BASIC in question only had variables of the type A B C ... Z and was so restrictive that you could not write a callable function.

    The point is that sometimes we have to simply say NO to the dumb ideas that float around and we need to do this even if we feel our job is in jeopardy.

    1. Re:Funny by jusdisgi · · Score: 1

      Dude, don't hold back ;-)

      Your main theme I agree with:

      (BSD != Dying) && (Linux == OK_AS_WELL) && (Windows == BUSTICATED)

      But there are some silly things in here, too. First, I gotta ask about these two "broken" RH distros...like, uh, broken how? Like, "the CD was broken in the box" or like "couldn't get through the installer" or like "wouldn't boot on any computer I tried it on" or what? Or just "couldn't get a productive desktop system easily" or "couldn't get sendmail, apache, mysql, etc. on there and happy easily enough for my taste"?

      I don't think I can remember any distro I've tried that I would have said was "broken" really...they all did something....that's just weird.

      And these comments about professional windows admins who no better, seriously...get real. I mean, I'm a *nix zealot, no fooling (check other posts). But it's not like Windows is completely incapable of doing lots of jobs that professional admins require...quite the opposite. There are viable (if not maybe as secure) servers for everything, and if the boss is buying...whatever. A lot of admins that are tremendously put upon and don't have office clout can't sit there and refuse that as "bad concrete", offering up some "free" alternative. What do they do, just get another job?

      Some of us can take the high road in one form or another if we choose, but not without some cost.

      And lots of us probably sit around in jobs that force us to work with windows, waiting and looking for the job that won't.

      But generally speaking, acting the way you prescribe is not healthy from an employment perspective.

      ---

      --
      Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
  113. Don't tell Darl by GreyWizard · · Score: 1

    Careful. That shell script may contain valuable and confidential SCO intellectual property. ;-)

    --
    Not all those who wander are lost.
  114. Re:HOWTO - Install Debian Onto a Remote Linux Syst by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1
    The best part is, after doing the above, you can still go back to BSD from Debian with the depenguinizer. Merely type:
    dpkg -i "is-dying"
  115. Depengs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are the plastic underpants for loose-sphincter elderly, right?

  116. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whilst win32 is a joke to advanced users, you generally plug in supported hardware, and it just works.

    Huh? While often true, there are way too many times where this is NOT the case.

    The primary advantage for windows is most new computers have it preinstalled. Thus, no pain of installing it yourself...all drivers already there.

  117. Nice relationship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux and BSD have a nice symbiotic relationship. Just like a snuffpr0n co-starring Christopher Reeves and Teri Schiavo.

  118. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by shaitand · · Score: 1

    umm just plug in hardware and it works? Are you on crack, damn near nothing "just works" on windows.

    I mean honestly, I work nonstop of different windows configurations all day. Install two network cards, oops ip stack is corrupted, by the way neither just worked I had to install drivers and that is the best you can expect with new hardware on windows. netsh didn't work as usual DAMN, have to get out a utility I wrote myself that goes through and REALLY resets ip on NT based systems.

    Then install two nics on linux, boot computer up, nics detected, system prompts if I want to configure those nics. I do, it just works. Nics are now ready to be configured and work perfectly.

    You know, I've NEVER had an ip stack corrupt on a linux system? It happens literally daily with all versions of windows.

    There was a time when I didn't work with so many systems that I thought this was a rare event, once in a great while you had a problem with IP that couldn't be resolved by reinstalling the nic and such. But not anymore, now I know that 1 in 5 nic installs on windows corrupt the ip stack! woohoo.

  119. Wow, how hypocritical by boobsea · · Score: 1

    The BSD crowd needs to learn that their constant trolling of the Linux community is what is responsible for the hatred of anything *BSD related.

    Now you are saying that "we need BSD", as if your high and mighty ways are somehow overly superior to our own.

    If you don't like Linux, then present your software and if it is actually superior, the people who actually care will use it. Simple.

    You will not get converts with this arrogant attidude of yours, nor will you win over any hearts and minds, including my own.

    I've been very interested in *BSD, but the arrogance abd condesendence of the *BSD community (and to be fair, it exists, to a much lesser extent, in the Linux community as well) has turned me off and away from looking into BSD solutions for my business and personal use.

    1. Re:Wow, how hypocritical by Chromodromic · · Score: 1

      Just so you understand my point of view: I have no idea as to what the hell you're talking about.

      Where do I say, anywhere, that "we need BSD"? Where? What I said was that the Slashdot community needs to be presented with a tool that "upgrades" Linux users to another form of free *nix. I was specifically referring to the content of the post and, in fact, *not* over-generalizing, which you are doing.

      I think Linux is great. I think the variosu BSDs are great. And I'm typing this reponse on a Windows XP box which, more or less, works flawlessly because, more or less, I know what the hell I'm doing.

      You tell me, "You will not get converts ..." But this is exactly my point, myopiaboy. I'm NOT LOOKING FOR CONVERTS. COMPUTERS ARE NOT RELIGION. THEY'RE TOOLS. You claim that arrogance exists to a much lesser extent in the Linux community, you nearsighted nit, but then you use the word "converts" and then claim you won't even look at BSD because of the attitudes of the community as you perceive them.

      So, in theory, BSD could be the most incredible OS ever, but you won't look at it because you find the attitudes of the community offensive?

      And you call BSD people arrogant?

      Dude, you NEED to be the posterboy for Linux. You were born for it. Please post your address so I can send you a big penguin shirt, so that anyone may immediately identify you as a Linux "convert".

      Jeez.

      --
      Chr0m0Dr0m!C
    2. Re:Wow, how hypocritical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do I say, anywhere, that "we need BSD"? Where?

      "The Slashdot crowd needs this".

      If you were really interested in objectivity, which you are obviously not, you could have presented information on other types of free unixes that could be emulated or installed in conjuction with Linux.

      But this is exactly my point, myopiaboy

      More self-righteous flamebait from *BSD land.

      I'm NOT LOOKING FOR CONVERTS. COMPUTERS ARE NOT RELIGION. THEY'RE TOOLS.

      THEN STOP TELLING PEOPLE WHICH OS THEY SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T BE USING, ASSHOLE

      you nearsighted nit

      Wow, more mindless name calling. Thats great argument there. I'm agreeing with you already! (not).

      but then you use the word "converts" and then claim you won't even look at BSD because of the attitudes of the community as you perceive them.


      I sure as hell would not want to have to talk to people like you to get help with my *BSD installs.

      You just made the case for the poster's point.

      So, in theory, BSD could be the most incredible OS ever, but you won't look at it because you find the attitudes of the community offensive?


      Yeah? So what?

      And you call BSD people arrogant?

      How is that arrogant? Maybe he wants to use an OS where most of the users and developers are not big assholes?

      Dude, you NEED to be the posterboy for Linux. You were born for it. Please post your address so I can send you a big penguin shirt, so that anyone may immediately identify you as a Linux "convert".


      Wether that is sarcasm or not, I don't care. Its this attitude of assholes like you that keep your OS' market share down in the dumpster.

    3. Re:Wow, how hypocritical by Chromodromic · · Score: 1

      The dumpster?

      Hahaha ... You're a moron. Because OSX, which is based on FreeBSD, is DEFINITELY in the dumpster.

      Learn to just concede defeat, moron, when you've been shown to be ignorant.

      --
      Chr0m0Dr0m!C
    4. Re:Wow, how hypocritical by linimon · · Score: 1

      > but the arrogance and condesendence of the *BSD community (and to be
      > fair, it exists, to a much lesser extent, in the Linux community as well)
      > has turned me off [...]
      Well, I'll finesse the issue of trying to decide which community has more of this bad attitude by saying, why can't we just say this attitude isn't constructive, from anyone, period, and then just move beyond it?

      My own personal opinion is that most people doing _real_ work on any of these projects are too busy to play the zealotry game. There's too much stuff to do. (In fact, I think I'll shut up on this thread now and go back to bufixes myself.)

  120. Exorcism by ferralis · · Score: 1

    So, we can now exorcise the penguins and dead rats, but is it really better to have a demonically posessed system?

    --
    Any generalization is a stupid one.
    1. Re:Exorcism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it's fair to say FreeBSD is dead, but that's a sort of odd thing to say. It stems from the obvious popularity of Linux as _the_ Unix free OS, but the FreeBSD project has only gotten more fractious and hateful in recent memory. FreeBSD is pathologically sick in this respect. Granted the lack of development in the BSD standard is gonna hurt, and right now things are looking poorly for FreeBSD. Yes it is dying.

  121. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

    If you're running a distro that requires you to recompile your kernel to gain hardware support, you've got the wrong distro.

    Get a swiss army knife kernel like Mandrake and others use..they create ALL possible modules for you and they're just a modprobe away. That's why hardware support is so much better on the 'easy' distros. Remember, easy doesn't mean 'not good'.

  122. Ok, I give up. You win. by Qbertino · · Score: 3, Funny

    I actually thought I was being funny and expected to be moderated that way.
    But moderating me and especially that post 'Insightful' takes the cake. I give up.
    And thus hereby offically anounce: Credit for the biggest 'Funny' goes to Mr. '+1 Insightfull' modder. :-)

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  123. Okay.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5. Make sure that the first 40MB of space on your hard drive is not being actively used. If the first partition on your hard drive is being used for swap, run swapoff to disable it; otherwise, move your partitions around so that this is the case.

    Oh YEAH! That makes the remote install a snap! What linux user puts / or /boot or something else that cannot be unmounted on the first partition?

  124. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

    Unless your looking to power an SMP system...safest or not OpenBSD is still lagging in many areas and why I continue to goto FreeBSD for everything but firewalls

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  125. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by fubar1971 · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately even with swiss army knife distros some drivers still need to be compiled into the kernel. Not to mention by compiling them into the kernel, you will get better performance. Of course, we are getting past the orginal intent of my reply. My reply was only meant to show that every OS has its quirks about installing drivers. Linux, *BSD, WinBlows, Unix, etc. They all have their own little idiosyncrasies.

    I Love Linux....but hate Linux Zealots!!!

  126. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

    My point is that Linux shouldn't be used to mean 'every distro of linux' because they all have different idiosyncracies that make them better or worse than other distros. You can't really lump all distros into one category when you're drawing parallels to installing drivers and the difficulties to be had with such.

    I'm no zealot, but I defend what I like. Fairness is paramount.

  127. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by phaggood · · Score: 0

    Whilst win32 is a joke to advanced users, you generally plug in supported hardware, and it just works

    Haw, say that while installing a Shuttle 801 motherboard.....

    "Yessiree, that board needs the SIS 630 drivers!" said Win2K
    "No," Knoppix says, "its SIS650"
    "Oh, ah, thanks" grumbles Win2K

  128. That was the *Second* Bohemian Defenestration by billstewart · · Score: 1

    There were two Bohemian Defenestrations. The first one was in July 1419, when the Hussite Protestants threw the town council out the castle windows, killing seven of them.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  129. lol by laejoh · · Score: 0

    Blasfemy!

  130. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by fubar1971 · · Score: 1

    My point is that Linux shouldn't be used to mean 'every distro of linux' because they all have different idiosyncracies that make them better or worse than other distros.

    You are correct, which is why I submitted my orginal reply. If you can't even compare diffrent distrobutions, how can you comapre "Linux" to Windows? Every OS and OS variations have their own little quirks. It just pains me when I see people bashing an OS (wether it is Windows, *BSD, Linux (Insert your favorite distro here), etc.), just because It is not Open Source. If you like WinBlows, then you will live with its problems and quirks. If you like *BSD, then once again you will live with its own set of idiosyncracies. The same holds true with your favorite Linux Distro. The only thing I am trying to say is that I constantly hear more and more non-Linux-OS bashing on this sight. Linux=Good, AllOtherOS'es=BAD. Hell we're talking about Winblows, when the parent post had nothing to do with it. Linux was created using the Open Source model. IMHO one of the basis' of the Open Source model is choice. I seem to hear more and more "Linux enthusiaist" bashing other peoples choices of OS'es. It just p*sses me off when, peopel that are suppose to be preaching choice and openess, are so closed minded.

  131. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting take on this.

    We shall call you the shepherd, leading the other sheep down a road of "FUD" (fear, uncertainty, and doubt), in regards to BSD longevity.

  132. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by Aviancer · · Score: 1

    Yes. There are a number of port catalogue systems for FreeBSD too...

  133. Not free by gr8_phk · · Score: 0

    "Free BSD" is not free software. This is why I've never even looked at it. They'll learn some day.

    1. Re:Not free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      FreeBSD is *not* free guys! It never was! At least not in the true sense of the word. It is rather an attempt by some programmers to whore themselves out so that their code can be as popular as possible and as widely used as possible, with only an afterthought given to the ideals of truly free software.

      I love BSD. It's so easy for any Evil Corporation to take it, modify it, redistribute it under a draconian closed-source license, charge an arm-and-a-leg for it, and REAP THE REWARDS! Even if 99% of the code is untouched. Muahahaha!

      Guys, wake up. BSD is not free software. It never was. Well it is free, but it's not designed to stay free due to its overly permissive license. Any true supporter of free software would shun it and stick with GNU/Linux these days.

      BSD comes with a lot of GNU utils. Heck, BSD wouldn't exist without GNU gcc. They *owe* the GNU project, and would do well to switch their license to the FSF's GPL.

      (Let me make a piece of software. Call it RedWM, the Red Window Manager, and within it offer only shades of burgundy and not any real Red. That's an analogy for how misnamed FreeBSD truly is!)

  134. Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OSX is not FreeBSD. Just because they incoporated its code into their propietary OS does not make it FreeBSD.

    Learn to just concede defeat, moron, when you've been shown to be ignorant.


    I see that you have run out of actual argument. You resort to name-calling and ad-hominem. This shows to me that you are already defeated.

    Or have IBT?

  135. why I think it's flamebait by mnemonic_ · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'd consider the article flamebait because of the baiting way in which it is written. A more mature way to describe the purpose of this software might be "a tool for migrating from Linux to FreeBSD", leaving out the controversial "upgrade" part. The author could have written the description in a neutral (in my opinion at least) tone, but decided on an inflammatory one.

    1. Re:why I think it's flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recenetly bought an Athlon XP 1800+... and it turned out that it wouldnt run XFree. Everything worked well besides X. Since a workstation without X is useless I was forced to switch to WinXP and it's very stable so there is nothing wrong with the hardware which means it's a FreeBSD issue. FreeBSD is too hit-and-miss on the desktop. Maybe it will work, but more likely it won't.

  136. Once again ... by Chromodromic · · Score: 1

    ... you don't know what you're talking about ...

    An ad hominem fallacy would be if I stated you were wrong *because* you were an idiot. I don't say that.

    You're wrong because your statements don't hold up. You stated you were closed to BSD because of your own perceptions, not because BSD wasn't superior. This is a wrong, incorrect stance to take.

    You're silly because the manner in which you state your opinions is representative of many of the shrill Linux devotees of which you are one.

    You're an idiot because you can't see how clearly you are representing these people and because when I accused you of having a closed mind, you responded "So, what?"

    You *are* fun, however.

    You see, if I'd stated you were wrong *because* you're an idiot, then that would be ad hominem. That you are wrong, and that you're an idiot, these things are merely coincidental.

    --
    Chr0m0Dr0m!C
    1. Re:Once again ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have a suggestion. Always remember this simple little phrase:
      *BSD is dying
      M'kay?
    2. Re:Once again ... by Chromodromic · · Score: 1
      I have a suggestion for you. Remember this ...
      You're a twerp.
      M'kay?
      --
      Chr0m0Dr0m!C
  137. parent funny, mod++ by fforw · · Score: 0, Troll

    no i am not lame

    --
    while (!asleep()) sheep++
  138. Re:iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --syn --dport 22 -j DR by invenustus · · Score: 1

    What evil system are you standing up to by linking to nonexistent web pages?

    --
    grep -ri 'should work' /usr/src/linux | wc -l
  139. Re: IS free by JShadow · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Not sure what you're talking about.

    If you are refering to the BSD license, well, you're just wrong, because I'm even free to take FreeBSD and change it and sell it as my own, as long as I mention that it's based on FreeBSD code.

    If you're refering to the fact that the CD ISOs are not free, that doesn't keep you from downloading everything that's on the CD...for free.

    So FreeBSD==Free

  140. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bull crap. I have had several family members and friends lately seek my advice for buying a new computer. In spite of my efforts to convince them to try out an alternative OS, NONE of them wanted anything to do with it. Hell- one of them even bought a cheap-o system from Fry's that came with Linux installed, and he wanted me to help him reformat to install Windows XP. He went through great pains to avoid using Linux!

    The point is, you cannot dismiss the popularity of Windows as a product of consumer ignorance. All of these people I helped knew that there were alternatives to Windows, they just wanted nothing to do with them.

  141. Remembering Anno Domini 2003 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    We must report with a heavy heart that Bob "I'm still dead" Hope has gone on to join the "B" team. As you all may know, *BSD has been part of the "B" team for quite some time.

    The Year of Our Lord 2003 has been a particularly bad year for the "B"s,

    • Bob Hope
    • Buddy Ebsen
    • Buddy Hackett
    • Barry White
    • BSD
    This honored list of dead is but a small token of adieu from the many fans of the deceased.
    These dead were truly some American Icons. They will be missed.
  142. picobsd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why not make a picobsd image and drop it in /, boot it from the linux loader?

  143. Sometimes true by ca1v1n · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is often true, but configurations in which it is not true are not uncommon. A friend of mine once had his BSD server stay up with a load of 86. It might take 2 minutes to completely service a request, but it still worked. When he had linux on the same box, same configuration on the same services, it would fall over around 12. BSD is incredible at handling load. It's less flexible in many ways than Linux, but it makes a really great server.

    1. Re:Sometimes true by jrexilius · · Score: 1

      thats interesting. IBM recently did some load testing for linux, OS level stuff and it proved rather stable under pressure.

      I know BSD is a great OS but I still doubt that there is that much of a gap between them.

      I personally am rather fond of both OSes although I tend to run more linux than BSD. But if there were some significant difference I might consider running BSD for my servers.

    2. Re:Sometimes true by ca1v1n · · Score: 1

      While I haven't seen the IBM tests, being stable at a load of 12 is impressive. Being stable at 86 is a miracle. Generally speaking, you don't plan on operating a server with a steady load of 12, but it's nice to know it can go that high if it needs to. It may also be possible to tune Linux to have similar load tolerance to FreeBSD, but the default policies don't have that effect, which has on occasion been the source of lengthy and heated debate among Linux kernel developers.

    3. Re:Sometimes true by jrexilius · · Score: 1
  144. You still use port 22? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...and anyway, it would be more fun to return the traffic to the originating machine.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  145. Just don't answer on the first ring by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Signed, Oscar.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  146. Just make Freecell a link to PySol. by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    They'll never look back. In case of emergency, click here.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  147. Re:Forget depenguinator, I want reverse defenestra by nuintari · · Score: 1

    reverse defenestration would be throwing something in through a window, I think maybe you want inverse defenestration.

    --

    --Nuintari

    slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.

  148. reverse? by ingenuus · · Score: 1

    Ya know, I thought you made a mistake adding "reverse" to "defenestration", but I think I finally got your intent.

    The word "defenestration" means "the act of throwing someone or something out of a window"... "de-" meaning "out of" and "fenestra" meaning "window".

    At first I thought "reverse defenestration" might be like "not not x", which would result in "fenestration"... perhaps meaning "to make something windowed" or throwing something to the inside of a window, both of which would be contrary to your intended point.

    But I see now that you are actually applying "reverse" to what is being thrown ("something" vs. "the window") rather than the direction it is being thrown (inside or outside the window... e.g. with the inside being representative of the computer).

    Ha! very funny... hmmm... just like me to overanalyze a perfectly pleasant quip. Sorry. :)

  149. Re:iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --syn --dport 22 -j DR by JDWTopGuy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If you're going to disable all access to SSH, why not just stop sshd?

    DUH.

    --
    Ron Paul 2012
  150. The state of the FreeBSD Ports Collection by linimon · · Score: 1

    > In the FreeBSD Ports Collection, there are many Ports marked as broken,
    > and many more unmaintained and suffering from bit-rot.

    Let me inject some facts into this discussion, as this is an area in which I've done a lot of research.

    As of 12/30/2003, there are 10011 ports in the FreeBSD ports collection. Except for a very few cases where only a binary is available from the authors, the entire collection is meant to be buildable from source.

    On 4-STABLE i386, 214 ports fail to build from source; on 5-CURRENT, 366 fail to build. The difference is primarily due to FreeBSD being an early adopter of gcc3.3 in 5-CURRENT. As these bugs are fixed, we try to encourage people to get them adopted upstream. This benefits the Linux as well as BSD communities.

    239 ports are marked broken on 5-CURRENT; these are the 'hard-broken' cases. Right around 50% of those are compile problems and in some cases the code is indeed quite old. Some of the others that fail to build, but are *not* marked broken, are failing to fetch and part of that is due to the savannah compromise which is outside our control. That's temporary, we all hope. (I'm reluctant to see any port marked as broken unless it really won't compile/install -- not just having some transitory error.)

    A slightly larger number, for which I don't have statistics, are marked broken on the 64-bit architectures, generally due to bad assumptions in their C code. Again, as these are fixed, changes make it back to the larger community. And, the number of broken ports on the 3 64-bit architectures has also come down dramatically.

    The number of ports PRs has come down from a peak of 1500 during the 5.1-RELEASE freeze, to around 800 today. This is primarily due to a dozen new ports committers in the past 6 months who have been very active.

    The number of officially unmaintained ports is 2616. Although this number may have decreased as well, clearly we still need more volunteers.

    As for bit-rot, again, much of the code that is rotting lies outside the control of the FreeBSD ports team. Another project that is active is to try to identify, and prune, ports for which there is no hope. However, this requires getting a community consensus on what "no hope" is, and that takes time. The last time a pass was made scheduling ports for demolition, somewhere around 100 were proposed, and around 70 were fixed by someone or otherwise adopted in the 3 months afterwards. There are another 100 or so proposed for removal in the next pass; some of those have already been fixed as well. (I hope to create a framework for making this process more visible to end-users so there are as few "surprises" as humanly possible.)

    One last point about bit-rot. For ports that fail to compile/install, the previous version of the binary ("package" in FreeBSD terminology) remains available for fetching until the new version works. Thus, most of the bit-rot only affects those who are installing from source.

    The code that I've written that generates these statistics does so by mining the Problem Report database, the error logs from the bento build cluster (which iterates over each port on each architecture and each relevant OS release, continuously), the ports collection itself, and (to a limited degree) CVS meta-info. As far as I know no-one else has similar functionality. (Interested parties can contact me directly; since this machine is on the end of a cable modem line, I need to protect it from slashdotting). I hope to get this code up and running on a machine with greater bandwidth to make it more generally useful, soon.

    To conclude, IMHO things that get fixed in the FreeBSD ports collection can have the effect of helping the greater community. I'd like to see the culture of zealotry start to disappear, and a greater degree of peer respect, especially in regards to making as many apps useful to as many people on as many platforms as possible. I think there is a lot we can learn from each other, and a lot of duplicate effort that could be avoided, if we could just wrap our heads around that.

    1. Re:The state of the FreeBSD Ports Collection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it's fair to say FreeBSD is dead, but that's a sort of odd thing to say. It stems from the obvious popularity of Linux as _the_ Unix free OS, but the FreeBSD project has only gotten more fractious and hateful in recent memory. FreeBSD is pathologically sick in this respect. Granted the lack of development in the BSD standard is gonna hurt, and right now things are looking poorly for FreeBSD. Yes it is dying. Don't mean to step on your toes, but that's the truth.

    2. Re:The state of the FreeBSD Ports Collection by linimon · · Score: 1

      Well, Harv, I don't see how your reply has anything to do with the statistics I posted. Nevertheless ...

      > the FreeBSD project has only gotten more fractious and hateful in recent memory

      You must not read the same mailing lists I do (most of the development ones). The last round of major flame wars died out around March/April and things have been much smoother since then.

      Of course I don't expect this to influence you, as you're clearly only interested in repeating yourself without taking in new information.

  151. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    By definition, a good OS will recognize peripherals automatically

    Then I guess there is no "good OS"...

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  152. Re:Facing the facts by linimon · · Score: 1

    Boy, it looks like the parent post got under your skin much more than any other recent *BSD post I've seen. Instead of just posting your standard messages once per thread, you've posted each of them, what, 3 or 4 times in this thread already? I ask again, (as I asked earlier but not under this userid -- I have been too unmotivated to create a slashdot userid before), what is your goal in these repeated postings? Why not just avoid using the damned thing if you hate it? Why the repeated trolling with the exact same postings over and over again, in multiple threads, with differing subject lines?

  153. Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by linimon · · Score: 1

    It would be nice if you would attribute the original author of this email. IIRC it is from about a year ago. Some people left, some people stayed, life went on, as in any other volunteer project.

  154. Ummm. This is a waste by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

    Has anyone noticed the requirement to have a FreeBSD install ISO in order for it to work? I mean cripes if you have the iso why don't you just install FreeBSD. Lower ram requirement, works faster and well. You end up with FreeBSD.

    --

    I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

  155. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Whilst the above steps might seem trivial to the experienced users, you have to admit it's not the kind of intuitive setup proccess you would reccommend to your grandma.

    The comparison was being made with Linux. Granted, Linux has made some strides recently. But look back just one year ago. Under FreeBSD you just mounted your camera like it was an everyday filesystem. Under Linux you had to get special software, wade through reams of imcomplete HOWTO's, cross your fingers, clench your buttocks, and hope it worked.

    Whilst win32 is a joke to advanced users, you generally plug in supported hardware, and it just works.

    Yeah right. And I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn...

    Over Christmas vacation I was visiting my mom. Her computer was Win98SE. USB mass storage devices are supported by the OS. Plug in my thumbdrive and it works. But plug in my camera and it goes off into neverneverland. Even though my camera is a standard UMass device. I had to download the camera's USB drivers for Windows before it would recognize it. But I didn't need any special software under FreeBSD.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  156. Re:Developer laments What Killed FreeBSD by linimon · · Score: 1

    That's right, msmith left because he didn't consider it fun anymore. Others have left too. Others stayed. Others joined. So what? that's the nature of volunteer projects. Why rehash this posting again and again?

  157. It's gods' inconsistency, not mans'. by RLiegh · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    If you keep reading, god gave moses a whole book of do's and don'ts which boil down to "if soome-one does this, stone them. if someone does that, stone them". The adultery and homosexuality laws spring immediately to mind, but that is only the _tip_ of the iceberg.

    Oh, by the way, that's not even taking into consideration the "cleansing" of Palestine^W Canaan.

    1. Re:It's gods' inconsistency, not mans'. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, demonstrated that 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.

  158. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 1

    I guess so my def of an OS is automatic regcognition of new hardware, with seamless web access to drivers. So, i guess there are no good OSs

  159. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    In order for you to understand the big picture,
    you have to realize one fundamental fact:
    FreeBSD is dying
  160. rooting DNS will have consequences.... by jusdisgi · · Score: 2, Informative

    While I certainly get your main point (rooting one box will leave the rest safe) I simply *must* take issue with your example.

    You say if this guy roots your DNS VM, he won't be able to deface your website. I'll point out the obvious: he now has control over the web address, and can point your website at his own box, where the defaced site lies. Or he can point it at the DNS box itself, install apache, and deface it there.

    Point is, if he roots your DNS server, you are all kinds of jacked.

    --
    Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
  161. Gnu/Linux - Gnu/(FreeBSD Kernel) or what? by _greg · · Score: 1

    Abbreviating Gnu/Linux to Linux is usually clear in context, but when talking about changing the kernel it's clear as mud!

    The Linux kernel is a tiny part of the Gnu/Linux system and can be replaced by several alternative kernels, thus "depenquinating" it, with little or no impact on users or application programs. So Gnu/Linux can be switched to Gnu/(*BSD kernel) or GNU/Hurd, etc.

    You can also replace the whole O/S with a different one that is able to run Gnu/Linux application binaries. Thus Gnu/Linux can be replaced by FreeBSD or Solaris or SCO Unix. As this is a much larger change, I would expect some trouble and user-visible changes.

    I prefer to always use the term Gnu/Linux in writing even if I may abbreviate to just Gnu or just Linux when speaking.

  162. Straw man... by jusdisgi · · Score: 1

    Ridiculous.

    You argue against this person (The italisized portion of your post) who shows a *parallel* situation, by demonstrating the way an *opposite* situation behaves!

    Seriously, he says "if it was about 'upgrading' windows boxes to Linux it would not be considered flamebait." THIS IS NOT THE OPPOSITE OF THIS ARTICLE! It is in fact a parallel; the same thing with the names changed.

    Now, as it happens, this act (Linux "upgraded" to FreeBSD) has no real opposite. Even a FreeBSD->Linux upgrade would still be more the same than opposite. But that just makes your argument all the more silly.

    Now, that's not to say I agree with this fool, either. Frankly, you're both wrong; you for your argument, and he for his conclusion. Any of the three parallels would be flamebait...no matter what, an article written up this provocatively and on this subject is going to cause the vast majority of responses to be holy-war. You don't think an artical about "upgrading" Windows to Linux would be flame-laden? Who the hell are you kidding?

    On the other hand, that's why I clicked on the story; I wanted to see it happen, and work my logic muscle a bit. Against both sides. I mean, seriously...you get what you pay for. Who here didn't know they were about to read some flames?

    --
    Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
  163. The Depenguinator by petrus4 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I've said it before and I'll say it again...FreeBSD is the real man's UNIX. Linux is a toy...a well-meaning toy, to be sure...but a toy by comparison, none the less. 'Nuff said.

    1. Re:The Depenguinator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You probably feel really cool as a member of such an extremely exclusive user group.

      Do you and the other eighteen users get together often?

  164. Overly complicated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me that OpenBSD has the foundation for remote install already. There is a bsd.rd kernel that, upon being run by the bootloader, boots into a ramdisk based kernel with the installation routines.

    All that would need to be done is modify the creation of the bsd.rd file to include an ip number to an interface, start up the sshd daemon, and a root password. Maybe they left more out of the ramdisk kernel since you just do the installs from the console. Adding a ssh daemon and the underlying framework may be more complicated that it seems.

    But the concept is there. Just put a file on your linux host that the boot loader will run upon a power cycle and reboot and connect. You could even have a second program that would scan the dmesg to discern what interfaces were on the machine, partition sizes, etc.

    The beauty of OpenBSD is the kernel can fit on one floppy, or you can use the bsd.rd kernel, and then download all of the system via ftp over a network connection. The same connection you would use to control the remote install over.

    I'm no kernel programmer, but that seems to be the best method yet: create a file that you could copy to the right place and then when Windows boot it, it takes over and becomes the install kernel of your favorite OS.

  165. Re:Ummm. This is a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try reading the fucking article. Jesus Christ. It's about a remote install where you DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE HARDWARE, which sorta shoots your brilliant idea down to shit.

  166. Re:iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --syn --dport 22 -j DR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Two years ago, a woman stood in a Grand Rapids, Michigan, courtroom awaiting sentencing for murdering her husband. Her grief-stricken son struggled to find the words to express his feelings: "Delete. Delete. . . . Consider yourself deleted from our lives."

    His use of computer language was not only sad and oddly humorous. It was also an example of how technology shapes the way we think and live.

  167. And it ryhmes too! by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 1

    WHich makes it funny and ironic!

  168. damn those daemons by BiggyP · · Score: 1

    i wouldn't care too much if my system were to get rooted by some script kiddy, but if they're going to install F*BSD on the thing, then i'm scared!

  169. Re:"upgrade" using only ssh? hmm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    There is only one fact which need be remembered:
    FreeBSD is dying
    That is all you need to know about FreeBSD. That fact trumps everything else.
  170. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by rifter · · Score: 1

    If you're running a distro that requires you to recompile your kernel to gain hardware support, you've got the wrong distro.

    Get a swiss army knife kernel like Mandrake and others use..they create ALL possible modules for you and they're just a modprobe away. That's why hardware support is so much better on the 'easy' distros. Remember, easy doesn't mean 'not good'.

    You remind me of the Windows admin in the commercials who said he liked Win2k because it automagically detected all of his hardware. I wanted to slap that fucker, because every fool knows that you can only autodetect hardware you have drivers for. In other words, it has to have been developed before your OS CD was made, and there have to have been drivers in time for that release.

    You are referring to the fact that Mandrake and friends compile all the modules included with the Linux kernel, and yes that is probably super spiffy for you. However, what happens when you go get new hardware that was not supported by the kernel that you have? Better yet (and more on the mopney in this case) what happens when the hardware is not supported at all in the vanilla kernel? That's right, you get to do the dance explained above. This is the same for every Linux distro, and anyone with a very basic understanding of how drivers and operating systems work knows why.

  171. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by rifter · · Score: 1

    The point is, you cannot dismiss the popularity of Windows as a product of consumer ignorance. All of these people I helped knew that there were alternatives to Windows, they just wanted nothing to do with them.

    That is because the daemon you know is never so scary as the daemon you don't. Face it. No one likes windows. Only MCSE types claim it is worth a shit, and that is because they are praying to keep their jobs because they don't really understand computers. But people (including the MCSE types) are also afraid of change. Deathly afraid. It was scary enough for them to try a computer, and they have been having nightmares about it ever since. It is no wonder they aren't so keen to repeat the experience, except this time without the benefit of following the herd and having massive corporate support.

  172. Re:Do not use this unless you know what you're doi by anthonyrcalgary · · Score: 1

    Uhg. OpenBSD as a desktop system? Not a good idea.

    --
    When someone might yell at me, it has to be OpenBSD.
  173. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, since we run Linux and BSD, we have to do a moderate amount of research before we buy bleeding edge or 'different' hardware. Strangely enough, I find that these days even the most obscure pieces of hardware are supported (a Soyo KiKY-X USB playstation controller convertor? yes!). So while once in awhile you may have to hunt down driver sources and compile them, if you do some research beforehand you may never have to compile anything.

  174. Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wrote it myself, dumbass.

    Troll Glass

  175. Re: IS free by gr8_phk · · Score: 1
    " Not sure what you're talking about.

    If you are refering to the BSD license, well, you're just wrong, because I'm even free to take FreeBSD and change it and sell it as my own, as long as I mention that it's based on FreeBSD code."

    You can do that with code released under GPL too, provided you supply source code. The problem with the BSD license is that someone with a big name (i.e. MS) can come along, take the code, add DRM to it, and release MS-*NIX. Because they don't have to release source code, they can assimilate and extend it into a proprietary product. After establishing themselves as the dominant player, DRM becomes mandatory for their distribution so all the free applications won't run. Meanwhile, because they've become the dominant distribution and simply integrate all additional features developed by the BSD community (who now feel like free labor to said company) they've given up, and only the proprietary version remains. Don't think this can work? Can it be done for $50Billion? You bet. Can it be done to Linux? Yes, as long as we continue to use X"free"86 which is not free either.

    The BSD style licenses are for people who say they're open-source/free but have ambitions of later making a proprietary product. The problem is that if the software is successful, the winning product will not come from them. It will come from the one who has the most marketing ability.

    RMS may be a bit extreme, but he was the first to really understand this.

    F--- the BSD license.

  176. Re:Just mount_msdosfs /dev/da0s1 /mnt/camera, easy by Groganz · · Score: 1

    Not at all. If you have ever worked in a PC shop you would know there were just as many grannies asking about how t0 blah blah such and such in windows too.

  177. Re:does FreeBSD have something like apt-get or yum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adam Blundell
    Philip Busch
    Jeffery Candiloro
    Michael Collins
    Adrian Dunston
    Bill Folsom
    Grant Henninger
    Robert Hill
    Brett Howard
    David Johnson
    Mark Kistner
    Edmund Kump
    Scott Lockwood
    Dave Mauldin
    John McKeon
    Franjo Sarcevic
    Robert Sheehy
    Max Stalnaker
    Jan Sulmont
    Todd Varland
    Mark Vyland
    Russell Warner
    John Woodbury

  178. Re:iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --syn --dport 22 -j DR by JCCyC · · Score: 1

    If you're going to disable all access to SSH, why not just stop sshd?

    Limit on title length prevented me from adding -s (somewhere). Crap. Couldn't even use the much more fun TARPIT target.

  179. Dude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the hell? What driver made you go through all that? Yeah, it's fun to make up a bunch of stuff, but where's the beans? Link please!

  180. LIN4WIN and Win4Lin by CustomDesigned · · Score: 1
    This is how my Dad got started with Linux. There was a commercial (I think) product called lin4win that built linux filesystems in large FAT32 files, and installed a boot loader (if you didn't already have a multi-boot loader like system commander) that gave you the choice of booting Linux or Windows (or just made a boot diskette).

    When booting Linux, it mounted the FAT32 fs, then mounted the root, swap, etc as loop filesystems. Slower than a real partition, but very cool and very safe for someone who didn't want to risk destroying his Windows setup.

    Since Windows constantly crashed (ME - one of the worst versions), when he got a new disk, he was confident enough to install RedHat directly, and bought Win4Lin (a virtual machine with custom Windows drivers to avoid emulating the hardware - much faster than VM ware for supported Windows versions). ME still crashes inside Win4Lin, but rebooting is much faster (win4lin keeps a ram image of mostly booted Windows) and all the Linux applications stay up!

    The LIN4WIN approach was very good - but is hampered now by MS use of the ever changing and undocumented NTFS.

  181. URL please? by apachetoolbox · · Score: 1

    URL please?

  182. Silly kids! by chaoskitty · · Score: 1

    BSD is NOT dying. The official dying title goes to Amiga, of course, which has been "dying" since 1993. So enough with the "BSD is dying" statements - you're showing your lack of experience.

  183. Mod article -1 troll by Grievre · · Score: 1

    Subject says it all :P