FreeBSD Ports Collection Breaks 10,000 Ports

The title by aridhol · 2003-12-31 06:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

That title makes it look like changes to the port system broke all the ports. Maybe "exceeds" rather than "breaks"?

--
I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.

Re:The title by sremick · 2003-12-31 06:11 · Score: 1

Yeah I thought about that after. Oh well. I can't fix it myself. Maybe someone else can? Regardless, it's true even if it can be misinterpreted, and the proper meaning becomes apparent immediately in the first sentence... you don't even have to RTFA. ;) (WA?)

But if a mod wants to tweak the title, I won't be offended.
Re:The title by evilviper · 2003-12-31 11:51 · Score: 1

Yes, I've had more than one occasion when it seemed like 10,000 ports broke for me...

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:The title by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 06:39 · Score: 0

Yeah, the title reminded me of the kind of complaint you'd see on freebsd-current or -ports.
Re:The title by hmallett · 2004-01-01 13:27 · Score: 1

As I write, freshports says that there are 10022 ports. However, 62 of those are marked as broken, and 4 are marked as forbidden, so perhaps the celebration is premature. Only 44 ports need to be fixed!
Re:The title by OrangeSpyderMan · 2004-01-02 11:43 · Score: 1

Yes, but Slashdot has these things called editors. Now if they can't edit badly written items into sensible english, they're not editors but news monkeys.

--
Try NetBSD... safe,straightforward,useful.
Re:The title by endx7 · 2004-01-02 12:10 · Score: 1

As I write, freshports says that there are 10022 ports. However, 62 of those are marked as broken, and 4 are marked as forbidden, so perhaps the celebration is premature. Only 44 ports need to be fixed!

Actually, it isn't that bad. Some ports report they are broken based on versions (like version of fbsd, perl, etc). For example, take a look at the Makefile of gnump3d. It requires a certain version of perl before it'll be 'unbroken'. Then again, it may be worse, because some don't compile, but aren't labeled as BROKEN. bento is a great place to find out which ports compile and which don't.
Re:The title by stevey · 2004-01-03 15:52 · Score: 1

Interesting; I assumed that any modern version of Perl would work for my gnump3d app.

I've not touched it since the Savannah.gnu.org compromise, but I'll have a look over the code and try to test it on a BSD box sometime soon.

Will they let it die now? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:09 · Score: -1, Troll

Please?! C'mon.....

Re:Will they let it die now? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:15 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Rate of death = 1/number of ports infinity / | 1/x dx 0 / 10000 --- \ / 1/x 1 --- Therefore: I think we have many more opportunities to proclaim the death of BSD. But it will never actually die.
Re:Will they let it die now? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 19:59 · Score: -1, Offtopic

The 'it' you speak of - your brain - has been dead for years. But the flesh fly larve feeding on your dead troll brain deserves to live.

So, until the maggots are done with you, no.
Re:Will they let it die now? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 17:11 · Score: -1, Troll

Fact: *BSD is dying

Developer laments: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:10 · Score: -1, Troll

The End of FreeBSD

[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

Discussion

I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

Shouts

To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It

Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:13 · Score: -1, Flamebait

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.

Just wait... by zulux · 2003-12-31 06:13 · Score: 3, Funny

I hear a port of apt-get is in the works!!!!!

(kidding)

--

Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

Re:Just wait... by BrookHarty · 2003-12-31 07:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm wondering how the work on merging FreeBSD Ports, Gentoo portage and Fink is coming along. There was an announcement that the groups where working on a Centeralized port systems (Together). 1 ports for every paltform. Then you could apt-get, emerge, pkgadd, rpm, whatever...

The saved man hours in a centeralized ports system would be amazing.
Re:Just wait... by TheRaven64 · 2003-12-31 08:04 · Score: 4, Interesting

The saved man hours in a centeralized ports system would be amazing.
Even more man-hours would be saved if people wrote in ISO C using only POSIX functionality, without littering their code with Linux-isms, or worse still distribution-specific things. Creating a package is relatively easy once you can make the code compile.
For something done right, look at Psi. The same code builds on Linux, *BSD, Solaris, Windows and Mac. When the first Mac version was released, none of the developers even had a Mac (they just compiled it on someone else's machine). This is possible by coding to cross-platform APIs (in the case of Psi, the only dependency is Qt, which runs almost anywhere).

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:Just wait... by noselasd · 2003-12-31 09:29 · Score: 1

So, one should not write GUI apps ? afaik posix doesn't standarize a GUI.
There is Motif in the SUS specification though..
Re:Just wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 10:03 · Score: 1, Insightful

Your suggestion is as useful as suggesting that everyone standardise on a single Unix or a single distribution of Linux. Or a single editor.

> Even more man-hours would be saved if people wrote
> in ISO C using only POSIX functionality, without littering
> their code with Linux-isms, or worse still
> distribution-specific things. Creating a package is
> relatively easy once you can make the code compile.
>
But wait, POSIX is considered by *some* to be *broken* such as the threads model, handling of locking and the non-existence of asprintf(3) which I believe orginated in OpenBSD and is now available from all of the Freeix, but not Solaris.

Okay, easy, so let's choose a standard. Oh, picking at random <flame suit=on>How about everyone choose Red Hat Linux 9.0 with patches as of 20030318</flame>. Oh, 99% of developers don't like *that* too much, gee that's a surprise. Alternatively, let's stay permanently in the 1980s or establish a working group that can wrangle for years before making a decision.

There are some very useful functionality which is genuinely operating system-specific (see Linux capabilities). Other things like PAM would have been delayed/hindered if one was forced to implement it on 5 operating systems at once (Solaris, Linux, *BSD). Finally, purely technical differences of opinion will occur, software development is often a game of trade-offs.

Certainly, one should *try* to develop most of the code using POSIX only. In turn libc and kernel developers should think hard before introducing *another* syscall or library call. But OS-dependences will happen, it's the real-world. Deal with it. Any ports model will also have to take that into account.
Re:Just wait... by /dev/trash · 2004-01-01 09:08 · Score: 1

I can't wait til emerge gets ported.

Oh wait.
Re:Just wait... by jschauma · 2004-01-02 02:13 · Score: 1

While it's not the merger of FreeBSD Ports, portage and fink, NetBSD's Packages Collection aka pkgsrc supports a large number of different operating systems (NetBSD, Darwin, FreeBSD, Irix, Linux, OpenBSD, Solaris), with support for more platforms (BSD/OS, HP-UX, AIX) in the works. Full Documentation here.

--

-- "Tradition is the illusion of permanence."
Re:Just wait... by stripes · 2004-01-03 03:52 · Score: 2, Interesting

Even more man-hours would be saved if people wrote in ISO C using only POSIX functionality, without littering their code with Linux-isms, or worse still distribution-specific things. Creating a package is relatively easy once you can make the code compile.

If people only used the "standard" interfaces then the 'void' extention to K&R would never have gotten enough widespread use to be included in ANSI. Nobody would use the better select-like interfaces (epoll, kqueue) and we would never find out which should be included as a "standard" next time around. Oh, and no threads. And more buffer overuns because strlcpy won't be used just strncpy (which gets misapplied and allows buffer overuns more offen then not due to poor interfaces).
The people that push the envlope are the ones that influance the next standards.
(That's not to say one should go use sendfile/splice when you have no need, but if you need the performance, don't shy away)
Re:Just wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-03 16:11 · Score: -1, Troll

It's true that people who push the envelope have the most influence; at this point in time, however, the only thing that BSD is pushing against is against its' coffin lid.
Re:Just wait... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-04 05:28 · Score: 0

Even more man-hours would be saved if people wrote in ISO C using only POSIX functionality...

Probably not, actually. That would save time porting code, but forcing everyone to use one language, instead of actually choosing the right tool for each job, would lead to many more hours being wasted.

For something done right, look at Psi. The same code builds on Linux, *BSD, Solaris, Windows and Mac . . . (in the case of Psi, the only dependency is Qt, which runs almost anywhere)

Except that Qt doesn't have a mature free Windows version. Whoops, bad example methinks.

a hard rough road for FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:15 · Score: -1, Troll

Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personas?

The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

Beware of serious flaws by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:17 · Score: -1, Troll

FreeBSD suffers from a couple of serious process flaws -- it is an operating system which is truly at home neither in the open-source nor the proprietary markets primarily because, although the source is open, the development team is not. Furthermore the license allows proprietary software to "steal" source code and use it. The combination of these problems leads to a somewhat inferior OS.

Now, Apache uses a BSD style license but they have an open development model which allows them to take advantage of a very large developer pool in order to stay ahead of their competition. In fact although proprietary versions of Apache exist which perform better than the official releases, SGI has put out some open source patches which generate even larger performance boosts. This is the reason why they have such a strong showing in terms of market share.

BSD once had potential but the procedural problems they are experiencing hurt it when it comes to the market. I suspect that this is probably in part because the BSD teams are not interested in such things, and that is a shame... In fact, although I labeled it as an inferior OS, this is not due to lack of progress within BSD -- it has been progressing somewhat, but rather because all the improvements they make tend to be quickly copied by their competitors AND they lack the developer pool to stay ahead of this game (a problem which does not exist in the Linux or Apache communities, though for somewhat different reasons).

I don't think that there is enough widespread support for BSD to save the operating system. What must be done is an opening up of the development process OR a GPL-style restriction on redistribution. In many ways I favor the former.

Even in a worst case scenario, I don't see BSD completely dying. I think the developers are less into competition and more into a sort of idealized cooperation. As a result, even if BSD becomes more marginalized, I don't think that it will die outright. It will most likely outlive Netware, for example.

Holy crap!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:20 · Score: 2, Funny

I thought they meant 10,000 ports won't compile any more!! Find the guy that checked in *that* change and SHOOT HIM!

But, uh, that's not what it means. So congrats guys, I LOVES ME THE FREEBSD PORTS!!!

in the BSD ghetto by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:24 · Score: -1, Troll

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.

FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 06:30 · Score: -1, Troll

It is common knowledge that FreeBSD is dying, that ever hapless FreeBSD is mired in an irrecoverable and mortifying tangle of fatal trouble.

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.

Fact: FreeBSD is dying

Re:FreeBSD is dying by kjd · 2003-12-31 09:36 · Score: 1, Funny

If you strike it down, it will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Re:FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 18:32 · Score: -1, Troll

a powerful corpse?

perhaps we can use the dead body of *BSD as rocket fuel then.
Re:FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 06:27 · Score: -1, Troll

a powerful corpse?

perhaps we can use the dead body of *BSD as rocket fuel then
Re:FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-03 04:29 · Score: -1, Troll

a powerful corpse?

perhaps we can use the dead body of *BSD as rocket fuel then
Re:FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-04 16:35 · Score: -1, Troll

a powerful corpse?

perhaps we can use the dead body of *BSD as rocket fuel then
Re:FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-05 10:22 · Score: -1, Troll

a powerful corpse?

perhaps we can use the dead body of *BSD as rocket fuel then.
Re:FreeBSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-06 01:43 · Score: -1, Troll

a powerful corpse?

perhaps we can use the dead body of *BSD as rocket fuel then

Timeline Summary by MBCook · 2003-12-31 06:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

Timeline summary:

Time to reach 1000 ports: 30 Months Time to reach 2000 ports: 18 Months Time to reach 3000 ports: 12 Months Time to reach 4000 ports: 10 Months Time to reach 5000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 6000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 7000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 8000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 9000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 10000 ports: 6 Months

Seems development has been rather steady for a while now. I predict 11,000 ports in... 6 months.

--
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.

Re:Timeline Summary by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 08:28 · Score: -1, Troll

We won't know for sure until we get the death certificate.
Re:Timeline Summary by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 08:03 · Score: 0

Timeline summary: Time to reach 1000 ports: 30 Months Time to reach 2000 ports: 18 Months Time to reach 3000 ports: 12 Months Time to reach 4000 ports: 10 Months Time to reach 5000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 6000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 7000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 8000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 9000 ports: 6 Months Time to reach 10000 ports: 6 Months I predict *BSD will die in 1 month.

I'm glad BSD is dying... by stienman · 2003-12-31 06:53 · Score: -1, Troll

I'm glad BSD is dying. Just think about all those lost developers, making/porting programs for a terminal OS. Soon they will be free to pursue more enriching activities, such as weaving and pinochle

-Adam

Re:I'm glad BSD is dying... by sparklingfruit · 2003-12-31 15:11 · Score: 0, Troll

Not one to feed the trolls, but they need to be countered once in a while.

BSD is not dying, BSD is not a "terminal OS". BSD is fast, stable, scalable and rivals Linux in areas of security (especially openBSD) and openness. It's a good middle ground for developers worried about the implications of the GPL and has it's advantages as well as disadvantages.

BSD and Linux both have their place in the Open Source world, and neither will be leaving us any time soon.

Ports by Quill_28 · 2003-12-31 06:58 · Score: 1

Is there a good listing of all the ports and what they do?

I know a script could be written to search /usr/ports/ and cat the pkg-descr file, but is there anything out there a little more user-friendly?

Re:Ports by kernelistic · 2003-12-31 07:21 · Score: 5, Informative

Here's a good start...
cd /usr/ports make readmes
You'll want to go grab a sandwhich at this point while it goes through all of the ports and creates their associated readme files. You'll then be able to use your favorite browser to list the ports and their descriptions. The URL you want file:///usr/ports/README.html .
Re:Ports by no_l0gic · 2003-12-31 07:57 · Score: 4, Informative

My favorite FreeBSD ports related reference:
http://www.freshports.org/

News of new/updated ports as well as a searchable index of all ports (and you can navigate the site the same as your ports directory structure).

Also, on a somewhat related note, you know of the `cd /usr/ports && make search name=blah` or key=blah feature, right?

Happy New Year! (give or take a TimeZone...)
Re:Ports by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 07:58 · Score: 0

http://www.freebsd.org/ports
Re:Ports by xA40D · 2003-12-31 08:01 · Score: 2, Informative

Is there a good listing of all the ports and what they do?

/usr/ports/INDEX
I know a script could be written to search /usr/ports/ and cat the pkg-descr file, but is there anything out there a little more user-friendly?
cd /usr/ports/ make search key=foo

Or, in answer to both your questions, try the FreeBSD website

--
Do you mind, your karma has just run over my dogma.
Re:Ports by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 13:14 · Score: 0

I believe there is a graphical (KDE I believe) tool for searching and maintaing copies of ports. It's under sysutils and begins with a b. I don't rememebr what exactly it is called. Bruce perhaps? Anyway, it is easy enough to find and easy to use. It is a KDE app and about as user-friendly as you will find for browsing the ports tree.

Brandon
Re:Ports by linimon · 2004-01-01 09:07 · Score: 1

barry. I don't know if it's really current, or just a nice start.
Re:Ports by linimon · 2004-01-01 09:09 · Score: 2, Informative

You might also want to check out portsman.
Re:Ports by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 11:34 · Score: -1, Flamebait

why did you reply to yourself, nigger
Re:Ports by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 21:27 · Score: 0

Try http://www.freebsd.org/ports
or make search key={keyword}
or make search name={name}

On-lamp also has some useful articles:
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2003/09 /18/FreeBSD _Basics.html
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2003 /08/28/FreeBSD _Basics.html
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2003 /08/07/FreeBSD _Basics.html
Re:Ports by Jerk+City+Troll · 2004-01-02 02:15 · Score: 1, Troll

$ lynx /usr/ports/<branch>/<package>/README.html

I know, monumentally complicated.

--
Join Tor today!
Re:Ports by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-04 17:16 · Score: 0

Check out /usr/ports/INDEX
Re:Ports by Quill_28 · 2004-01-11 05:53 · Score: 1

Well you understand it so I'll assume you are being sarcastic.

Don't complain about being unfairly modded down when you are a jerk to modders.

Bones said it best by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 07:07 · Score: -1, Troll

It's dead, Jim.

Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 07:21 · Score: -1, Troll

When all those ports die will bsd be tried posthumously for portocide?

10,000 ports... by cperciva · 2003-12-31 07:29 · Score: 4, Interesting

... and three of them are mine.

Makes one realize how insignificant one's own contribution is, when one has contributed less than 0.03% of the total.

--
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid

Re:10,000 ports... by MikeX · 2003-12-31 08:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yea, but if you factor in my 0 ports, then your 0.03% is comparably astronomical.
Re:10,000 ports... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 21:30 · Score: -1, Flamebait

Hey Colin asshole, FUCK OFF.

Troll Glass
Re:10,000 ports... by geniusj · 2004-01-06 02:19 · Score: 1

I only have two myself. I do wonder who has the most. I know someone who has quite a few though:

> find /usr/ports -name "Makefile" -exec egrep "MAINTAINER=[[:space:]]*knu@" {} \; | wc -l
313

It is now official - Netcraft has confirmed: e by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 09:11 · Score: -1, Troll

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 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

Why is the parent modded up? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 09:36 · Score: -1, Offtopic

This guy needs to be depenguinated Please mod parent down

Re:Why is the parent modded up? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 19:56 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Oct. 23 -- BSD resumed receiving life-sustaining care yesterday in a
Florida hospital room, but many experts said there is virtually no hope
that it will ever recover, despite it fan boy's desperate hopes.

"IF IT'S over a year, BSD's not ever going to get up," said Fred Plum, a
professor emeritus at Weill Cornell College in New York. "You'd just
don't see it. It just doesn't happen."
BSD, 39, has been in a persistent vegetative
state since its heart stopped for unknown reasons in 1990. A feeding
tube in BSD's stomach was removed this past Wednesday after its husband,
Theo De Ratt, who said his wife had told him she (BSD) would not want to
be kept alive under such circumstances, won a long series of court
battles to have life-sustaining nourishment withdrawn so she (BSD) could
die.

heh. by pb · 2003-12-31 10:05 · Score: 1

Way to go, guys; the comparative newcomer that I use (Gentoo) is only up to 7,167 or so packages!

--
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.

Re:heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 13:07 · Score: -1, Offtopic

That's because gentoo is dying, you fucking troll.
Re:heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 18:03 · Score: 0

s/gentoo/BSD/;
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 18:32 · Score: -1, Offtopic

fag
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 01:27 · Score: -1, Offtopic

s/BSD/linux/;

SCO rulez man. Die Linux, die!
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 03:45 · Score: -1, Troll

_d8b____________________d8b_______d8, _?88____________________88P______`8P __88b__________________d88 __888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b, __88P_`?8b_?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b, _d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P' ______d8b________________________d8b ______88P________________________88P _____d88________________________d88 _d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888 d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__d8P'_?88 88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b `?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 15:19 · Score: -1, Offtopic

r u gay ?
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-03 04:25 · Score: -1, Troll

_d8b____________________d8b_______d8, _?88____________________88P______`8P __88b__________________d88 __888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b, __88P_`?8b_ ?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b, _d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P' ______d8b________________________d8b ______88P________________________88P _____d88________________________d88 _d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888 d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__d8P'_?88 88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b `?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-04 16:31 · Score: -1, Troll

_d8b____________________d8b_______d8, _?88____________________88P______`8P __88b__________________d88 __888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b, __88P_`?8b_?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b, _d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P' ______d8b________________________d8b ______88P________________________88P _____d88________________________d88 _d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888 d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__ d8P'_?88 88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b `?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b
Re: heh. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-05 10:43 · Score: -1, Troll

_d8b____________________d8b_______d8, _?88____________________88P______`8P __88b__________________d88 __888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b, __88P_`?8b_?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b, _d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P' ______d8b________________________d8b ______88P________________________88P _____d88________________________d88 _d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888 d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__d8P'_?88 88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b `?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b

Please Die, Please Die, Please Die... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 10:44 · Score: -1, Offtopic

I don't want to have to troll for the whole of 2004. So die and do me a favour.

Please Die.

Re:Please Die, Please Die, Please Die... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 20:02 · Score: -1, Flamebait

Feel free to nip off and shoot yourself anytime.

No one here will miss your sorry ass. And with your lack of crap postings people might just assume the /. crew actually did something.
Re:Please Die, Please Die, Please Die... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 20:21 · Score: -1, Offtopic

dont like trolls?

THEN STOP RESPONDING TO THEM!

this is the stuff that feeds them!

but you folks never listen and it keeps happening

The End of the road for BSD by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 13:17 · Score: -1, Troll

BSD is dead. It's a shame to see people waste their time porting apps to it...but I am heartened by the fact that it seems most of these "ports" don't actually compile under BSD.

Re:The End of the road for BSD by bsd_usr · 2004-01-01 06:17 · Score: 0, Troll

Would you like to list which these are? Also, how many of the 10,000 or so ports would you consider to be most?

Seems like there's only like 64 ports that are considered broken. Either you have some fucked up logic, but 64 out of 10,019 doesn't sound like most to me.

Congrats to the FreeBSD. Keep up the good work! You're doing great!
Re:The End of the road for BSD by linimon · 2004-01-01 09:02 · Score: 1

Harv, this is factually incorrect as per my last reply to one of your threads. There are 237 broken on i386-current, about half due to gcc3.3 issues.

Coping Stratagies by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 18:07 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Although it is true that BSD is dying, there are some helpful steps you can take ease your sorrow:

deal with the inevitable.
grieve for your loss.
move on.

Never let your emotions get mixed up with something as silly as a computer operating system. It isn't healthy. So BSD fails. Big whoop. Deal with it and move on. Hope this helps.

YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 18:19 · Score: -1, Offtopic

dont like trolls?

THEN STOP RESPONDING TO THEM!

this is the stuff that feeds them!

but you folks never listen and it keeps happening.

Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 10:57 · Score: -1, Troll

Geee, and you are SUCH an x-spurt. A has-been drip under pressure.
Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 11:21 · Score: -1, Troll

don't be a sore loser. we all fall for them now and then
Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 11:23 · Score: -1, Offtopic

I want to put my pee pee in your poo poo hole
Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 16:16 · Score: -1, Offtopic

THEN STOP RESPONDING TO THEM!

Was tried a year ago. Did not work then.
Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 06:25 · Score: -1, Troll

Was tried a year ago. Did not work then.

Proof? I've never seen an example of the *BSD community ever ignoring troll posts, or being able to shut its mouth from trolling in Linux threads for that matter.
Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-03 04:27 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Was tried a year ago. Did not work then.

Proof? I've never seen an example of the *BSD community ever ignoring troll posts, or being able to shut its mouth from trolling in Linux threads for that matter
Re:YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-04 18:34 · Score: 0

Was tried a year ago. Did not work then.

Proof? I've never seen an example of the *BSD community ever ignoring troll posts, or being able to shut its mouth from trolling in Linux threads for that matter.

OK, I'll have to declare a jihad against BSD now! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 20:41 · Score: -1, Troll

Sigh, more wasted time for my employer. More IP bans. Sigh.

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by Anonymous Coward · 2003-12-31 22:23 · Score: -1, Offtopic

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 from 2001 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.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with 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. A 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).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few o

Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by linimon · 2004-01-01 08:37 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Hey Harv, apparently the moderators haven't had a chance to notice that this is one of your usual reposts to all *BSD threads. That's the only way this post could still be labeled 'interesting'.
Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 08:52 · Score: -1, Troll

Interesting to see that the only dissent here is someone who says 'Uhh, its just a troll and should be moderated down!11!!'
Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by linimon · 2004-01-01 09:20 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Now Harv, you know that's because most people have better sense than to reply to your incessant trolling, reposting the same N postings over and over and over again. There's just not much point trying to discuss anything BSDish on Slashdot, because of that. But I guess it's really safe for you to do this, for whatever bitter reasons you have, as long as you can be Anonymous Coward. Never was the default username more appropriate than in your posts ... Of course, you could prove me wrong by telling us all who you are, and how it was exactly that you came to be kicked out of the project -- or am I assuming too much, here? Am I wrong to also assume you're the person who subscribes FreeBSD mailing lists to other mailing lists to waste people's time? And files false Problem Report after false Problem Report to help gum up the works? So, Harv, tell us who you are, and what exactly it is that you've done to *create* something --anywhere -- rather than just posting venom, and prove me wrong here. I'll be man enough to admit it.
Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 11:19 · Score: -1, Troll

Just for your information, I didn't post it.

Your failure to actually ATTACK THE POINTS OF THAT POST proves that you are TROLLING.
Re:My personal experience in the FreeBSD world by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 17:40 · Score: -1, Troll

This troll needs more background information. I can hardly be annoyed by it if I don't know what they're talkin' about. Who's Matt?

Please clean up this shit and repost. Thanks.

MOD ABUSE ALERT by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 05:27 · Score: -1, Offtopic

this is not a troll

it is a legitimate criticism of *BSD.

If you dont agree with it, respond and tell us why its wrong. Otherwise you are showing to us that your argument is weak by censoring the opposing viewpoint.

Re:MOD ABUSE ALERT by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 02:44 · Score: -1, Offtopic

This is the BSD section. The people who visit this place are snobbish BSD jerks who can't stand one bit of criticism against the great and holy BSD. Wait till a BSD thread gets posted on the front page, then we'll see fairer moderation.
Re:MOD ABUSE ALERT by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-02 06:31 · Score: -1, Troll

Dear moderators:

If you keep on modding down my posts that reveal your censorship, I will crapflood this story with messages revealing the censorship that occurs here.

Re:OK, I'll have to declare a jihad against BSD no by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 06:45 · Score: -1, Troll

more wasted time for my employer.

Stealing money from your employer via being paid for work you are not doing.

Nice of you to affirm you are a ethical loser.

YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 08:01 · Score: -1, Offtopic

you fell for a troll

FreeBSD -- a failure by anyone's measure by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 09:32 · Score: -1, Troll

Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced modest 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 personae?

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.

I WANT TO PUT MY PEE PEE IN YOUR POO POO HOLE by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 10:33 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Fact: *BSD Is Dying

Browse SourceForge - Shop ThinkGeek - freshmeat Downloads - Newsletters - Personals (ha!) All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest (C) 1997-2003 OSDN Browse SourceForge - Shop ThinkGeek - freshmeat Downloads - Newsletters - Personals (ha!) All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest (C) 1997-2003 OSDN Browse SourceForge - Shop ThinkGeek - freshmeat Downloads - Newsletters - Personals (ha!) All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest (C) 1997-2003 OSDN Browse SourceForge - Shop ThinkGeek - freshmeat Downloads - Newsletters - Personals (ha!) All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest (C) 1997-2003 OSDN

I WANT TO PUT MY PEE PEE IN YOUR POO POO HOLE

I WANT TO PUT MY PEE PEE IN YOUR POO POO HOLE

Browse SourceForge - Shop ThinkGeek - freshmeat Downloads - Newsletters - Personals (ha!) All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest (C) 1997-2003 OSDN

I WANT TO PUT MY PEE PEE IN YOUR POO POO HOLE

I WANT TO PUT MY PEE PEE IN YOUR POO POO HOLE

I WANT TO PUT MY *BSD PEE IN YOUR DEAD POO HOLE by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-01 14:01 · Score: -1, Offtopic

Browse SourceForge - Shop ThinkGeek - freshmeat Downloads - Newsletters - Personals (ha!) All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest (C) 1997-2003 OSDN Your comment has too few characters per line Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)