Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE Review
MRE writes "Well it's been out for a week an a half, but here's the first review of FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE. Or if you want to download the new release and try it for yourself, it's only one ISO image away."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Got it and just finished with the install - everything you'd expect and more!
Eat recycled food - it's good for the environment, and OK for you.
how can anyone claim an OS is dieing right after a new release?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
My experience was pleasent, and I am very happy. I have noticed a speed enchangement over 5.1. But I did have a problem with the update. I blew my whole system to pot when I did not uninstall the NVIDIA drivers. Other than that I have noticed that the ports collection is working very nicely, with a few new toys, and that the system is very stable. In fact, I must say that I like the new version much better.
Not much of a review if you ask me. The reviewer did not address anything other than the install. I did not HAVE ANY trouble with the dhclient. In fact I had quite a bit of fun with it and MAC spoofing.
The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
That's good, because they don't want you to. FreeBSD 5.2 is production-ready, but it's not "stable" yet, which is why this is 5.2-RELEASE instead of 5.2-STABLE. They seem to be aiming for STABLE with 5.3, but there's not much incentive for someone like you to switch just yet.
I don't know where to begin with this. He installed on an AMD64 and complains that Linux binary support didn't work. However, there's trouble finding ANY binaries for AMD64. Java doesn't work? That's binaries. If he did Java from source, I bet that'd work.
/. would realize these people have no idea what they're talking about and stop linking the stories.
He complains about the license. I am so sick of people crapping on anything that isn't GPL. "in fact Microsoft at one point took a great deal of BSD code relating to networking to include in early versions of Windows NT." - alot of people got the stack from BSD. Why? It's good code.
Lastly, if he had read the main FreeBSD page, he would see that 5.x isn't production quality. Why did he use this version? He doesn't even mention that it's the "New Technology" release and doesn't highlight the fact that he's using a new CPU type.
After the hack job done on FreeBSD and on Sun's Blade 1500, I wish
What about MEEPT?!?!
I tried 5.1 right after RedHat announced no more Linux just enterprise or Fedora.
I liked it real well except for the fact it was missing more than a RedHat or Fedora release.
No screensavers and no sound drivers.This is something that might have been fixed but it was the end of a long day and I was through. I put Slack 9.1 back on that box.
Other than that is was a nice quite desktop setup.
I am sure that the BSDs make very good server's but Joe SixPack (Me) it is not the best OS to use.
I like sound and multi media apps.
Of course I am typing this from my Fedora Core setup.With lots of add ons. Mp3 Ogle etc..
I liked RedHat 9 better(7.3 was even better)and still have it on my other Harddrive but this 8mb cache really flys compared to the 2mb on my RH 9 HardDrive.
Bsd is not dead it is just that servers don't really get folks excited the way a desktop distro does.
It all comes down to "BSD versus Linux". The licensing is just a red herring. Linux users have been taught that Linux is the only worthwhile Free Software operating system. They think it's the pinnacle of creation. So when they're forced to think of the equally worthwhile BSD systems, they're minds twist up. One popular way out of this mental quandary is to attack the license.
Evidence: continual and constant attacks on the BSD license in relation to the BSD operating systems, but absolutely no attacks on the virtually identical licenses of XFree86 or Apache. Every slashdot article that even tangentally mentions a BSD system will be plastered with GPL vs BSDL posts. But it never happens on articles about XFree86 or Apache.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Oh really? Thats nice for you.
I couldn't use FreeBSD because even the latest FreeBSD 5 code scales like a scale that doesn't work anymore.
Yep, their almighty SMPng is unusable for more than 2 CPUs.
regardless of whether freebsd 5 is in osx or not, OS X does have various features of Freebsd 5 integrated into darwin. for example, softupdates was a FreeBSD 4.x thing ... that's been integrated. in Freebsd 5, there is the background fsck and filesystem snapshots work that resulted directly from the work on softupdates.
that is being integrated into OS X for those snappy power-on to usable times for Mac OS X. OS X powers on, checks all the devices, then just loads into the User interface. The fsck'ing happens in the background ... so that is an example of a part of FreeBSD 5.x getting backported into OS X
Glossary for the above post:
"handicapping them to death": turning off HTT
"quite a few features i cant live without in kernelspace": stuff Linux roxors at
"cant run it in production": FreeBSD suxors
"i like fbsd": FreeBSD suxors
"not possible": part of the Handbook I haven't read yet
Here's a Ph.D. duscussing the results of dual xeon stress testing and benchmarks under FreeBSD 4.4 back in November, 2001. It was apparently quite ready for production use on dual-xeons back then and 4.9 is running just fine on my production dual xeons today.
If you need some help, rusko, just ask.