Slashdot Mirror
BSDVault Interviews Rick Collette of EkkoBSD
An anonymous reader writes "BSDVault has interviewed Rick Collette of the EkkoBSD project. Among other things they discuss project goals and roadmap for this new distro."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
ekkoBSD is OpenBSD with an as yet unwritten web front end to the config files.
Good luck to them but I can't help thinking
"quick, set up a bit torrent mirror before it gets
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
From the neglected-to-be-mentioned web site:
What is it?
The goal of the ekkoBSD project is to provide a safe, secure, and simple to administer network operating system. This will be accomplished in a democratic manner, with a well-defined hierarchy, and an eye towards new ways of thinking.
The Operating System
ekkoBSD as a core OS offers security, stability, and flexibility to your infrastructure. As a default installation, ekkoBSD gives you an E-Mail server, Web Server, ssh, and several other services that would normally need to be added and secured.
Single Servers
A concept that has been with ekkoBSD since it's beginning are the implementations of "Single Servers". These are much like the single-floppy firewalls, rescue discs, etc. found within PicoBSD. ekkoBSD/TF is a single server example of a transparent nat firewall on a single floppy, hard disk, or CD.
It always helps when you use something newer than 4.3 on Lites. Cheers!
On the more serious side, there could be a few reasons (likely a combination). Your disk could be slow, dying, or both. You partitioned stupidly, or at least in a way that is not as good as it could be. Your filesystem could be mounted with the wrong options (perhaps a bug in the installer?). You might want to patch for softupdates in your filesystem (you are using a BSD UFS right?), or enable it because it is likely there.
You also might want to check for resource utilization. Most BSD-based systems that aren't brand-spankin'-new have low default values for MAXUSERS and other kernel variables that can dramatically affect system performance. Newer versions of FreeBSD detect your memory size at boot-time and set this for you, but others you may have to edit your kernel config and recompile.
For the record, I have never seen a BSD (Free, Net, Open, 4.4 on Lites) machine transfer a file that slow unless the disk is bad or I fucked up a config. For more information, I suggest reading the tuning manpage (www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi if you aren't on bsd now) and reading the freebsd handbook (www.freebsd.org). If you're using an older copy of BSD, you also might want to upgrade to a newer copy.
Brandon
Losing JKH from -core was to say the least, unsavory, yet you think FreeBSD is dependant on 1 or 2 members of the -core team? I mean... come on, seriously? If FreeBSD is "dead" because of a 'decline in market share' or due to losing a member or two of the core team, you're just sadly mistaken. To play devil's advocate: Let's assume you're correct, and we lose half our user base. What a pity! /*sarcasm*/ Regardless, we'll continue to hack away, we really don't care - and our success is NOT measured by how many use our "Product." If that were the case around the board, Linux might as well be refered to as "dead", since Microsoft reigns supreme, still.
.. I think I might know why *BSD trolling has seen a sharp increase in the last 6+ months or so, Hmm, gee..
I quote:
Seven of the top nine sites run on FreeBSD. The exceptions are Datapipe, which is doing a fine job of promoting the reliability of Windows 2003, and German hosting company komplex.net which runs on Linux.
Posted by mhp at 08:54 AM UTC on Jan 11, 2004 in Hosting, Performance.
Reference: news.netcraft.com
FreeBSD seems to have been whooping ass in the hosting field for a while now according to NetCraft surveys. (Long before this article's 6 month window as well.)
This NetCraft article proves nothing about say, Linux vs. FreeBSD or FreeBSD vs. Win2k3, to me it says, FreeBSD isn't dying off, and if it is, it sure is a pain riddled, horrifcally slow death. (if less people are running FreeBSD, good, less morons to have to help , I'm sick of being asked how to update the locate database after all these years..)
Before you put words in JKH's mouth: See JKH's resignation
Why did Apple hire JKH? Not because he looks good in a push-up bra, I can promise you that.
If JKH thinks FreeBSD is no longer viable code, why does Apple continue to develop a branch off FreeBSD, and why is Panther based from FreeBSD 5.x? OS X Panther(features column)
FreeBSD isn't a "clique" of elites, we didn't all install FreeBSD because it's "Cool". So many Linux zealots have called FreeBSD users out, saying we're trying to "fit in." Which is ironic, since many of them installed it because their buddies said, "Oh l00k, itz 31337 d00d."
I've run Linux since kernel 0.99, there was a time I prefered Linux(0.99 - 2.0.34) over any BSD, those days are long passed. However, I DO NOT look down my nose at Linux users, and I certainly don't troll any Linux "forums", yet why is this occuring vice versa? It's unfortunate, the Linux community is also very plagued by the '14 year old zit-faced kids who just installed RedHat, and want to "hax teh g1bs0n."' (I've taken enough abuse from the Linux crowd, talking about "Fat, unwashed, Star Trek watching *BSD nerds" to justify that last comment.) Which is one reason I don't ever want them crossing over to the FreeBSD crowd, thus if we have less 'market share', in that respect it's a VERY GOOD THING(tm).
Many of my sysadmin friends run purely Linux based networks(server-side), and when I ask why they don't even try a *BSD, the common answer I've received is, "It's too hard." Which in turn makes me chuckle to myself because they're really missing out on something great. I don't make fun of them and/or their networks, nor try to say they're running an antiquated or conviluted system. (To say FreeBSD is either of these, is to deny the facts.) To each his own, and if they choose to live in ignorance, MORE POWER TO THEM, it's their prerogative.
We were around in 1992, and we'll continue to be, regardless what the slashdot trolls attentively (or not so attentively..) splurge in digital form.
-mpf
P.S. I wonder how long Yahoo!(tm) will run a dead operating system (FreeBSD) across it's server pools?
( Next time don't post out of date,
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.
I think you need to check your facts again. Did you just actually say "Cheaper"? Oh you make me laugh. (The "faster" and "stable" comments are even funnier.)
See NetCraft For proof of what is more stable.
Just because you're unable to comprehend how to utilize BSD, doesn't in any way lesser it's value, to anyone but you. All the same, if some Windows user tried to use Linux, and was completely lost, You'd just flame him and tell him to "get a clue" or "rtfm". The person who's too uneducated to utilize it, is the only one who's missing out.
There's more reasons than I can list, I've been running *BSD variants since 1993, and Linux (before any distributions existed) since 0.99. BSD is cleaner, the -core teams usually have brighter developers on them, FreeBSD ports are still number 1, the BSD layout is just far superior IMHO, (I usually tend to run slackware, which is the closest to BSD you can get in a Linux basically) my memory footprint is slightly over 3 MB on most of my servers, with a minimal set of services running, (obviously my mysql, apache, and such servers eat more due to the daemons tieing it up) and the list continues on.
Don't flame BSD because you can't figure it out.
Sounds like a personal problem.
-mpf