Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

October-December 2003 FreeBSD Status Report

Posted by Hemos on from the the-state-of-the-union dept.

Dan writes "FreeBSD Release Engineering Team's Scott Long has posted the 2003 FreeBSD year-end edition status report. He says many new projects are starting up and gaining momentum, including SGI XFS port, MIPS, PowerPC on PPCBug-based embedded boards, and networking locking and multithreading. The end of 2003 also saw the release of FreeBSD 4.9, the first stable release to have greater than 4GB support for the ia32 platform. Work on FreeBSD 5.2 also finished up and was released early in January of 2004."

182 comments

  1. Don't forget... by SCO$699FeeTroll · · Score: -1

    ...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.

    1. Re:Don't forget... by Can+it+run+Linux · · Score: -1

      I love you. Let's get married and run Linux together.

    2. Re:Don't forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Since Linux users are gay, marrage is illegal.

  2. Status report, boiled down to three short words by sulli · · Score: -1, Troll

    "*BSD is dying"

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  3. ATTENTION: TROLLS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Please post any porn stories (preferably gay porn stories) that you might have involving Slashdot editors as replies to this post.

    Thanks!

    1. Re:ATTENTION: TROLLS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      One day Robert Malda was outside taking a walk on the sidewalk (it was quite amazing for him to be outside at all never mind a walk on the sidewalk). A van pulled up next to him and too thugs jumped out.

      "You're coming with us", one said.

      The thugs grabbed Malda, handcuffed him, and took him back into the van and drove away. While in the van they blindfolded him, and strapped him to the floor of the van.

      "What is the meaning of this?" Malda said him a demanding voice(like he was actually going an answer).

      The van came to a stop, Malda was still blindfolded, and he was taking inside an abandoned warehouse. The thugs uncuffed Malda and threw him into a cage. The cage looked like that of a lion's cage that you would find in a circus.

      "The boss is going to have fun with you"

      The two thugs left the building leaving Malda by himself with only one light to illuminate the area. Being left there the entire day, Malda grew tired. He went to sleep in that cold metal cage.

      The next morning Malda woke up with severe pain in his groin region. He was strapped down again but his time to a metal table. Malda looked up and saw that he was completely naked on the table and numerous rubber bands were wrapped around his scrotum. A man dressed in a lab coat was starring at him from about ten feet away.

      "Why am I here?" Malda asked.

      "The boss has chosen you as his next companion. You will serve him well."

      "What are you doing to me."

      "I'm preparing you for the boss, he wants your genitals removed as well as adding breasts."

      With that statement Malda passed out. The doctor began he operation to remove Malda's penis and scrotum. He also gave him breast implants. Size
      "DD".

      Taco awoke back in his cage, he found both his penis and scrotum gone, and all that was left was a hole to urinate from. He also saw his new pair of breasts. He was saddened by this transformation of his. He began to cry, but just then Michael Simms entered the warehouse.

      "What's wrong Rob?"

      "LOOK at me", screamed Malda in a high-pitched voice (his voice however was not modified).

      "Oh. I see, well the doctor did a splendid job."

      "WHAT?!, said Malda"

      "I am the boss that they were speaking of. I must have you Rob, I am madly in love with you, I want to be with you forever."

      Michael entered the cage. He undressed himself, and Malta was to weak to fight back. He penetrated Malda's anus and caressed his newly created breasts. He was gentle at first and quickly go rougher. He ejaculated heavily into Malda's anal canal. This went on for the rest of their lives.

  4. first post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    woo woo. sorry, but I always wanted to do that.

    1. Re:first post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Did you always want to fail it, as well?

  5. BSD is dying! by Mateito · · Score: -1, Troll

    With so much activity in the last year, BSD is obviously heading for a stress induced heart-attack.

    Maybe it should slow down a little and put its feet up.

    --
    Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
  6. [high pitched whirring noise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    followed by stone-faced comment]

    He's dead, Jim. [end of high pitched whirring noise]

  7. Roses... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Roses are red
    violets are blue
    In soviet russia,
    BSD's dead too

  8. How to Be an American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    HOWTO: Be an American
    Version 1.0 / M

    America, eh folks? It's a pretty screwed up place. Unfortunately, but not indefinitely, the USA's weapons of mass destruction make it the most powerful country in the world (militarily). As a result, it helps to be aware of American society and fit into it, and our quick 8-step guide should have you on the path to burger-munching enlightenment.

    1 - Buy yourself a gun
    To become a fully-fledged Yank, you'll need to get a weapon. Americans think that having more killing machines magically makes their country safer, and it helps them to walk around saying "I'll put a cap in your ass". Even though the concept of "no guns = no gun-related crimes" is alien to the average Yank, it'll give you a false sense of security in this country with the highest crime rates in the developed world.

    2 - Put on at least 25 stone
    Skinny? Medium? Chubby? That won't cut it in the good ol' US of A. Because America has the highest obesty levels on the planet, you'll need to get those rolls of flab built up. Eating 18 waffles with Maple syrup for breakfast (and visiting Burger King five times in a day) is all natural when much of the world is suffering massive poverty. Get fat and fit in.

    3 - Learn the lingo
    We've talked about issues affecting society, but on a personal level you'll need more knowledge (or ignorance as it may be) to fit in. First, forget proper English. Confuse "your" with "you're". Say "must of" instead of "must have". Whenever anything interesting occurs, say "shucks" repeatedly. Instead of clever spontaneity or witty insults, call people "asswipes". It's funny!

    4 - Throw away all maps, history books etc.
    To really feel a part of American society, you must lose all knowledge of the world. Forget where Poland is. Scrap your knowledge of the lengthy Chinese history. Make cretinous remarks like "India? Is that in Africa?". Because ALL that matters is America, and it doesn't matter how pathetic you look to educated people the world over.

    5 - Become totally irrational and nonsensical
    Spout on about the Constitution, and then make drastic changes to it. Talk about "freedom of speech" and watch TV programmes about the Ku Klux Klan. Rant on about market freedom, and sit back as companies run riot and destroy the economy with their anti-competitive practices. Essentially, act idiotic at all times.

    6 - Sue everyone you ever meet
    The USA doesn't produce many decent quality products, so the society is crumbling into a litigation-happy joke. With so many jobs going overseas to talented workers, your only option left is to start legal proceedings. About anything. Someone step on your toe? Get some hotshot downtown lawyer to sue their ass!

    7 - Get a "shrink"
    Americans have a hard time dealing with their own problems in a mature manner, and prefer to spend hundreds of dollars sitting in front of someone and whinging. However trivial your problems may be, blast them out like a baby!

    8 - Watch abysmal TV
    Forget educational programmes and incisive documentaries. Your ideal night in is with your gun, six cheeseburgers and a Friends box set. Watch as some over-paid talentless "actor" enters the scene, and whoop and scream hysterically as he delivers some ridiculously poor wisecrack.

    So there you have it! Those 8 steps should have you killing innocent people, piling on pounds and acting like a moron in no time. America awaits you, brave hero! Just get out before it collapses in disarray.

    END

    1. Re:How to Be an American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      add "rediculous", "that good of a system", "dubya", and you're almost spot on.

    2. Re:How to Be an American by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: -1, Offtopic
      To really feel a part of American society, you must lose all knowledge of the world. Forget where Poland is.

      I know this is a troll, but I've heard these arguments enough to know that quite a few people actually think this way.

      OK, my counter: find Kentucky on a US. OK, now New Hampshire. How did the settling of Arizona differ from the Western-immigration fueled growth of the railroad towns in Missouri?

      For some reason, Europeans like to think of the United States as one amorphous region on a map. Bluntly, it's not. Poland has as much in common with England as Louisiana has with Wyoming, but noone claims that non-Americans are ignorant for not knowing the distinct histories of the vastly different states. The common bond is that most Americans speak English as their native tongue, but everything else is as different between two states in the US as between two "states" in the European Union.

      So, enough with the "ignorant American" jokes. Sure, there's a lot we don't know (and aren't interested in) about your history, and there's a lot you don't know (and aren't interested in) about ours. Drop the smugness.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    3. Re:How to Be an American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Silence, you ignorant american infidel!

    4. Re:How to Be an American by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      "Poland has as much in common with England as Louisiana has with Wyoming"

      No offence, but you are incredibly, amazingly ignorant. I can't even begin the list the flaws in that comparison. Suffice to say, both England and Poland have 2,000+ years of unique history each, both have totally separate governments, both have different languages, etc. etc. etc.

      You've only served to reiterate the OP's point. Your comparison is not only laughable, but worrying.

  9. How can BSD have XFS? by emil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    XFS is GPL. Is SGI changing to a BSD license?

    Good heavens, that is a ridiculous quantity of acronyms!

    1. Re:How can BSD have XFS? by The+One+KEA · · Score: 1

      XFS will probably be relicensed as Dual BSD/GPL - choose your license if you want to work with the code.

      --
      SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
    2. Re:How can BSD have XFS? by VojakSvejk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NTFS is not GPL, but Linux can have it.... the implementation of XFS in Linux is GPL, but there's really nothing stopping someone from implementing it the spec themselves.

      And then I suppose OSX could have it, too...

    3. Re:How can BSD have XFS? by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Implementations have copyright, ideas do not. Hence as long as the file system handler code has been written from scratch, it can be any license the author chooses.

      As opposed to any license the author cheeses, which makes no sense whatsoever.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:How can BSD have XFS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Look at this British nerd !

      Hahahahahaha !!!!!

    5. Re:How can BSD have XFS? by rsidd · · Score: 4, Informative
      There is GPL code in the FreeBSD kernel tree (eg, ext2fs, some pcm code, etc), it's just not compiled into the GENERIC binary kernel that the FreeBSD project actually distributes. You are free to compile it into your own kernel if you like.

      There is also a fair bit of GPL code in the userland (starting with gcc), and it is distributed in binary form by the FreeBSD project, but of course the virality clause of the GPL doesn't affect that, because it's "mere aggregation".

    6. Re:How can BSD have XFS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they don't ship with XFS they won't infringe the licence. Actually if they DO infringe the GPL..it's free software..who will sue them??

  10. anybody else by AlabamaPride · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Continually disappointed by the available *bsd's ? Linux does everything they can do and do it better in one package, so why bother messing freebsd/obsd/netbsd etc at all ? I imagine the motivating factor in a persons decision to use a *bsd is the *geekiness* factor and not much else.

  11. OS X? by monstroyer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Has OS X, being semi-derived from FreeBSD, been a contributing factor to this growth? As a slashdot user, i see a lot of "FreeBSD is dying" trolls, but with a major computer manufacturer like Apple on the BSD train, this seems more false then ever. However, the only thing i see in the article that could be Apple related is "shared key authentication interoperability with systems like OS X". To me, this doesn't seem like anything major in BSD source code contribution . In fact, Apple seems to give more back to KDE (i.e. Safari) than FreeBSD. Does Apple help or hinder BSD growth?

    1. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Look at this British nerd !

      Hahahahahaha !!!!!

    2. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple has a lot of local changes that likely will not be incorporated back to FreeBSD, similarly to the local changes they have in GCC.

      I think the primary reason there was more contributing back in the KHTML/Safari case was that there is a lot of user-visible improvement to be done there that everyone can agree on. Apple's focus in the lower-level parts of the system is often different enough from other projects that they aren't applicable directly.

      Open source projects (especially the BSDs) have a bit more of a perfectionist "find a good solution before doing anything" mentality compared to proprietary software, where it's more often "we want feature X, make it work somehow".

      Actually sometimes I think (feel fee to disagree) Linux has a sort of "lets do it somehow right away and then improve it" mentality, i.e. more by evolution than by design, which also gives good functional results but less consistency.

    3. Re:OS X? by ysagal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I certainly don't think Apple hinders FreeBSD growth in any way. But I don't think the fact that Darwin was derived from the 4.x FreeBSD branch (and to some extent included 5.x stuff) had much impact on the growth of FreeBSD. What it did do is put the FreeBSD name in the mainstream by including references to it in its advertisements and such.

      It would be interesting to hear from Mac OS X developers on their interaction with the FreeBSD developers community. I doubt there is much, if any. It seems to me that Apple chose FreeBSD as a good starting point and ran with it, on occasion checking back to see if there's any good new stuff made. They are not after the hardcore FreeBSD users, but the folks that once in a while would like to have a shell and basic *nix functionality available to them, without sacrificing the pretty windows. Not surprisingly these are rarely the people that actively contribute to fbsd.

      (I think I dug a hole for myself. I didn't mean the Apple users don't run fbsd or can't contribute, but that most users that seek *nix in OSX don't need fbsd [otherwise they'd just run fbsd]. As such, there is little user feedback to Apple and no feedback to BSD.)

      -s

    4. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple seems to give more back to KDE (i.e. Safari) than FreeBSD.

      You do realise that KDE runs on FreeBSD, don't you? Whilst it may not be a direct contribution, such a large contribution to the quality of a fundamental application is bound to help the FreeBSD desktop quality.

    5. Re:OS X? by TechnoWeeniePas · · Score: 1

      FreeBSD is dying about as much as Linux, Windows, or the MacOS is...they are all viable operating systems and they all have their place in the computer world. They all have good support, a good sized user base, and perform well at their intended tasks. That is my genaric rant/reply to all the "X is dying" people.

    6. Re:OS X? by ph43thon · · Score: 2, Insightful


      well.. here is the trail of logic for the "BSD is dying" troll: BSD is dying -> major computer manufacturer like Apple uses BSD?? -> Apple is dying Then again, I'm not inclined to refer to Apple as a major computer manufacturer (with about 5% of the world personal computer market). Then again, the world computer market is farly big.. so 5% isn't really that shabby.

      Anyway, I use FreeBSD. I figure it will maybe change into something else.. but it won't die. Also, I don't see how Apple could hinder the growth of BSD. Also, scroll to the bottom of this page to see where Apple at least implies that they make most, if not all, of their modifications available to the community. That is a pretty good contribution. Yes, it would be nice if they just ported their windowing system to FreeBSD.. but you can't really expect that from them.


      p

    7. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Open source projects have a bit more of a perfectionist "find a good solution before doing anything" mentality compared to proprietary software


      Which doesn't explain why FreeBSD and Linux (in particular) suck ass compared to OS X for just about everything. OS X has a better GUI, better/more abundant apps, runs the top performing supercomputers in the world, and everything "just works" without the need for command line switches and recompiling. FreeBSD and Linux are total shit by comparison, so you assertion that open source means perfection is obviously flawed. Really what is needed is professional programmers who are inventive and dedicated to what they do. Apple has many of those, Linux and FreeBSD have very very few. The difference: pay. Apple's coders are paid, open source coders are not. For that reason, open source OS's will always be second-best when compared to OS X.

    8. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting that you would say that. I myself used to use FreeBSD exclusively. Our ISP up here in Seattle used BSD for both the servers and the office desktops. Being a small company we could afford to skip the Microsoft crap. Anyway, since late last year we have been migrating everything (and I mean everything) to OS X. The cost savings in setup and configuration time alone over BSD has saved our company hundreds of thousands of dollars. And it seems we are not alone, as some of our competitors have been coming up with more and more OS X as well in our "research" using Netcraft.

    9. Re:OS X? by kernelistic · · Score: 4, Informative

      You knock the very process (and projects) that brought you OSX. If it weren't for Mach, you wouldn't have a kernel for Darwin. If it weren't for FreeBSD, you wouldn't have a lot of OSX. After all, a quick look at the binaries in /sbin on an OSX machine (10.3.2 Build 7D24) reveals the following:

      $FreeBSD: src/sbin/md5/md5.c,v 1.20.2.5 2001/12/26 09:44:56 phk Exp $
      $FreeBSD: src/sbin/mount_msdos/mount_msdos.c,v 1.19 2000/01/08 16:47:55 ache Exp $
      $FreeBSD: src/sbin/ping6/ping6.c,v 1.4.2.6 2001/07/06 08:56:47 ume Exp $
      $FreeBSD: src/sbin/reboot/reboot.c,v 1.17 2002/10/06 16:24:36 thomas Exp $
      $FreeBSD: src/sbin/reboot/reboot.c,v 1.17 2002/10/06 16:24:36 thomas Exp $
      $FreeBSD: src/sbin/shutdown/shutdown.c,v 1.23 2002/03/21 13:20:48 imp Exp $

      The command run was none other than "strings /sbin/* |grep FreeBSD | sort". Try it on /bin and you'll get 34 more FreeBSD CVS $Id$ strings. Surely FreeBSD doesn't suck so that bad if the almighty OSX incorporates it's code!

    10. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cost savings in setup and configuration time alone over BSD has saved our company hundreds of thousands of dollars.

      Then you did it wrong.

    11. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's your point? That Apple shouldn't take free code from naive open source developers and use it to its own advantage? Do that same thing on Windows, and you will see BSD code, and now try to claim that Windows "doesn't suck". The fact is, Apple's programmers have taken an (at best) mediocre set of free programs available on the internet and combined them with far more innovative and revolutionary closed source technologies to create the gold standard operating system for both desktop and server use. The BSD code is, in fact, irrelevant to this, since it contributes almost nothing to the aspects of OS X that make it so much better than FreeBSD. The GUI, the apps, Rendezvous, the list goes on. All proprietary technologies that Apple invented that are used by thousands of corporations today to save millions of dollars in productivity that the amateur programmers of the FreeBSD and Linux communities could never hope to match. Just compare the atrocious state of the "open sores" GUI desktops to OS X. Yeah sure, I'll give you that Apple owes a tiny fraction of its success to the miniscule amount of code it took from BSD, but why would Apple re-invent the wheel for stuff that the BSD community has given away for a decade anyway? Where it really counts is the new stuff and Apple is leading the way while everyone else follows, including your much-vaunted "open sores" created FreeBSD.

    12. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you haven't used OS X.

    13. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you haven't used OS X.

      You assume I haven't used OS X. You claim setup and configuration times as being the great cost eater on BSD, whereas someone who had a lot of machines to set up would configure one machine, then use shell scripts or a ghost-like utility to copy that configuration over to the other machines.

      What the OP really said was that they don't know enough about FreeBSD to be able to beat the cost of paying someone to configure machines for them.

    14. Re:OS X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All proprietary technologies that Apple invented that are used by thousands of corporations today to save millions of dollars in productivity that the amateur programmers of the FreeBSD and Linux communities could never hope to match.

      And the low-level foundation that this sits atop was modified by Apple from preexisting work, thus freeing them to get their marvellous system out of the door that much quicker.

      Oh, and just because you say "open sores" in quotes, doesn't stop you being a dick.

      IHBT.

    15. Re:OS X? by kernelistic · · Score: 1
      Don't dump two tons of rubbish on the projects which are the foundation of your operating system. As far as innovation, user applications are more an exercise in UI design than sheer computer science. Consider the following:

      OSX's kernel is a PPC port of the Mach microkernel.

      OSX's VM is tailored after the likes of FreeBSD 4.

      OSX's networking stack implements *BSD* sockets.

      OSX's programming documentation prominently features "FreeBSD" at the bottom of nearly every manpage

      JKH, one of the main founders (and long-time innovator) of FreeBSD is working at Apple.

      Apple's own "revolutionary" UI has borrowed concepts from NeXT.

      Apple has felt the need to make their offerings more appealing by supporting the very window system that you're crapping all over. Yes, I'm talking about X11.

      If you knew your history, you would know that Apple's System 6, 7, 8 and 9 did not have protected memory hence any process could overwrite any location in memory, including kernel space. Guess what they adopted to fix that problem... :) As you can imagine, the PC UNIX world has had protected memory since the introduction of the Intel 386 in the mid-eighties.

      Don't get me wrong, I am the proud owner of Dual 2.0Ghz G5 but please, don't throw garbage out there when you have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.

    16. Re:OS X? by overbom · · Score: 1

      I can tell you've never really tried to get freebsd working *just right* on a laptop.

      That's why I got an apple, anyway -- to get a laptop that behaved like BSD but I didn't have to endlessly tweak. That, and to run NetBSD on PowerPC so I could endlessly tweak.

    17. Re:OS X? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure use of FreeBSD and OS X are mutually exclusive. I have a couple of FreeBSD boxes around the place (one hosts my website, and the other drives a few dumb X terminals around my house and is used when I feel the need to tinker with something).

      The thing I like about FreeBSD is that I can set it up, and then forget about it. Upgrading is easy, and requires minimal downtime (upgrading from 4.8 to 4.9 produced about a minute of downtime, and the fact the ports are upgraded separately from the base system is a huge bonus).

      The thing I like about OS X is that I can set it up, and then forget about it. I use OS X when I need to get any work done, and I never actually think about what OS I'm using. Things just work, and work the way I expect them to. Exactly the same is true of FreeBSD on the server. Gnome and KDE have a long way to go before they come close to OS X on the desktop (they're about on a par with Windows at the moment). I've not tried OS X on a server, because I don't get enough traffic to justify the expense of using Apple hardware, so I go with FreeBSD. I wouldn't use anything other than OS X on the desktop/laptop.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re:OS X? by rollthelosindice · · Score: 1

      I agree. I'd wager apple has already given back more to KHTML with its work on safari, than it has to FreeBSD

    19. Re:OS X? by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I spent just a half hour yesterday doing just that. Its a fairly new dell with wireless and acpi power management. Every problem that plauged me with linux was gone from FreeBSD. My acpi support worked fresh of the install with Suspend and battery monitoring working without any further configuration. acpi on linux often conflicted with my sound card and caused lots of strange noises. Even with windows, the ACPI implementation did not work. FreeBSD is the first OS that actually works correctly on this machine. It found my wifi card all by its lonesome and configured it correctly as well. Maybe you haven't run it in a while but the 5.2 release is killer.

  12. Month by month breakdown: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    October: putrefaction
    November: liquifaction
    December: dry decay

  13. GOD Bless America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    God Bless America

    God Bless America , with the worst crime levels in the first world
    God Bless America , where "democracy" means a rich, white male as Presiden t
    God Bless America , the biggest consumer of the world's natural resources
    God Bless America , where "freedom of speech" means race-hate groups like KKK
    God Bless America , and its massive and ever-growing poverty gap
    God Bless America , with the highest obesity levels in the developed world
    God Bless America , all its appalling "sitcoms" with no grasp of irony
    God Bless America , because corporations should be allowed to run amok
    God Bless America , wasting billions to attack foreign countries

    God Bless America , and thank God I don't have to live there.

    1. Re:GOD Bless America by gregarican · · Score: 4, Funny

      Since we're so fat as Americans shouldn't we add another branch to the *BSD tree and call it OBSD?

    2. Re:GOD Bless America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
      God Bless America , and thank God I don't have to live there.

      And we thank god you don't live here, too.

    3. Re:GOD Bless America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is many like minded individuals do live here. Hence California.

    4. Re:GOD Bless America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Wonderfully on-topic. I wonder if this will make it into the next version of FreeBSD?

    5. Re:GOD Bless America by Quill_28 · · Score: -1, Troll

      >God Bless America , and thank God I don't have to live there.

      And I thank God you don't live here either.

    6. Re:GOD Bless America by 0xfc · · Score: 2, Funny

      As usual FreeBSD is way behind linux. I mean come on, look at this little porky... linux. Tell me you cannot grab roll of that! Reminds me of a recent picture I saw of someone in a dunk tank. :pPpPpPpp

    7. Re:GOD Bless America by 0xfc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Heh, and I saw this for the first time today. Just look how slim and fit this mascot is! freebsd. OBSD btw, has a mascot contest going on right now! My vote is for a traditional daemon.

  14. How good is digital camera support? by James+A.+E.+Joyce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm just curious to know as a digital camera photographer. For instance, I often use a Samsung 800k camera and on Linux the only support is via an obscure little tool you may have heard off, gphoto which is a bit clunky to set up. How is camera support on FreeBSD? I've considered switching.

    --

    FloodMT: crapflood Movab
    1. Re:How good is digital camera support? by dizzy+tunez · · Score: 5, Informative

      FreeBSD has gphoto too. It`s in /usr/ports/graphics/gphoto2.
      Just do a 'make install clean' in that directory, and it will install gphoto and all of the depedencies it requires.

      FreeBSD also got some(all of them, maybe?) of the GUI applications that uses gphoto, like gtkam. KDE probably has one too.

      --
      "If you loved me, you`d all kill yourselves today"
      Spider Jerusalem
    2. Re:How good is digital camera support? by rsidd · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can confirm that my digital camera (Canon, PTP protocol) works fine with gphoto2 under FreeBSD. Cameras that use the USB mass storage protocol "should" work, but YMMV.

    3. Re:How good is digital camera support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Look at this British nerd !

      Hahahahahaha !!!!!

    4. Re:How good is digital camera support? by welloy · · Score: 2, Informative

      My camera, a Kodak DX-3500, works fine with gphoto and FreeBSD. I did have to update libusb because of this bug which may affect other USB cameras.

    5. Re:How good is digital camera support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me, gtkam worked out of the box.

    6. Re:How good is digital camera support? by Cronopios · · Score: 1
      KDE probably has one too.
      Digikam is pretty cool, and I believe it compiles on FreeBSD too (I use it on Debian).

      --
      Windows users:
      Internet Explorer is obsolete. Please upgrade to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.
  15. BSD Status report..... by kidgenius · · Score: -1, Troll

    Umm....dead?

    j/k

  16. That's a lotta stuff! by bc90021 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I read the report, and it's good to see that so much work is being done on BSD. Having tried it (and gone back to Gentoo), I was unaware that there was so much community support for it. I may just have to give it another look!

    --
    libertarianswag.com
    1. Re:That's a lotta stuff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Look at this British nerd !

      Hahahahahaha !!!!!

    2. Re:That's a lotta stuff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      You were right to go back to Gentoo. BSD is dead.

    3. Re:That's a lotta stuff! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh for a "KharmaWhore" modifier...

      You should see this guy's comments in the past...

  17. I think the word you're looking for here is... by ToadSprocket · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    "Yesterday".

    Work on FreeBSD 5.2 also finished up and was released early in January of 2004."

    Don't say in 7 words what you can say in 4. -- Brad Pitt in Ocean's 11

    --


    If this article confuses you, don't worry. It was posted yesterday in a much clearer fashion.
  18. I like BSD by queen+of+everything · · Score: 2, Informative

    I run FreeBSD on a webserver and I have been quite satisfied with it. I tried 5.2 and ran into some problems so I currently run 4.8. I think it makes a great server, I had a decent uptime, until the #$@#$ power was tripped, but it recovered perfectly. I'm glad that they are continuing to work to develop it and I will definitely install 5.2 once it is in stable release.

    --
    "Wisdom is not a product of schooling but of the life-long attempt to acquire it." -Albert Einstein
    1. Re:I like BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      But will it support my Wildcat BBS that I'm running? I have a bank of eight 2400 baud modems so it better be compatible, dammit!

    2. Re:I like BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Look at this British nerd !

      Hahahahahaha !!!!!

    3. Re:I like BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confusing the terms "release" and "stable" FreeBSD 5.2-release is the first "stable" release of the 5.2 development branch. 5.2-stable is merely a semi-stable version of 5.2-current. You would do well to run 5.2-release, and then just track security updates and a -stable snapshot once a month.

  19. OK, I'm guilty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I didn't read the article. I just came in here to check for "BSD is dead" jokes.

  20. Re:Don't forget about Ninnle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I'm not gay, I'm transsexual. But my girlfriend and I are getting married before my surgery, so we can circumvent these silly-assed, fundie christian laws against gay marriage.

    Linux forever!

    Especially Ninnle Linux!

  21. Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    It's nice work and all, but seriously...

    XFS: in Linux
    MIPS: Linux, 32-bit + 64-bit, big + little
    PowerPC w/ PPCBug: Linux has it
    networking locking: For NFS? Linux has it!
    multithreading: in Linux for ages
    4GB on ia32: in Linux several years ago

    Got anything that isn't old news?

    1. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      > Got anything that isn't old news?

      No, because *BSD is dying.

    2. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by proj_2501 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      getting features hacked in as quickly as possible: linux
      ridiculous stability as priority: freebsd

    3. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by geniusj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As far as platform support, freebsd has never been one to have much outside of x86 and alpha.. This is all new in 5.x.. If you want broad platform support, I'd use NetBSD.

      As for your response to networking locking.. It has nothing to do with NFS and everything to do with Giant (the giant mutex that exists in the kernel). FreeBSD 5.x is largely an attempt to break away from this giant lock.

      As for multithreading, both linux and freebsd have had it for ages. And it hasn't been that great in either one of them up until KSEs in FreeBSD 5.x and the revamped threading in Linux 2.6. FreeBSD had very good userland threading performance for processes needing to use threads on a single processor, but no native SMP threading support outside of using Linux's threading library (clone()).

      As for PAE, correct me if I"m wrong, but it has NOT been several years. PAE, officially AFAIK, is still relatively new to Linux as well.

    4. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A thing that is not in Linux? A license that will not *steal* your driver source code?

    5. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by runderwo · · Score: -1, Troll
      getting stuff done efficiently: linux ivory tower arrogance and superiority complex: freebsd

      --
      LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
    6. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Quill_28 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Insightful?

      What idiot modded this up.

    7. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      stability in a well thought out os.

    8. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      multithreading isn't so true.

      NPTL (Native POSIX Threading Library) is a new addition in just over the past year.

      You did mean POSIX compliant threads right? Not heavyweights? (cough processes cough)

    9. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      arguing over which is better, Linux or FreeBSD: Linux and FreeBSD


      getting things done: Apple OS X

    10. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by runderwo · · Score: -1, Troll
      Haha, I should have known better than to criticize the BSD zealots in a BSD story. The BSD mods all hang out here after all, with nothing better to do with their spare time than to silence criticism.

      --
      LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
    11. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by proj_2501 · · Score: 2, Funny

      the best part is that i don't even run bsd

      i guess that makes me a karma whore. AWESOME!

    12. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      1) Doing feature comparisons is pointless. Checkbox marketing is not the way to select a server. If I had a server admin that changed machines often to get new features, I'd fire him.

      2) PAE has not been in there for years. It was a collection of hacked patches for years, finally getting released into linux 2.6, and backported to the RedHat Advanced Server 3.0 (Linux 2.4) kernel.
      Both Linux and FreeBSD had badly designed multi-threaded subsystmes for a while. They both just came up with sane, though different approaches very recently. Linux with NPTL in V 2.6 (also backported to RH AS 3.0) and FreeBSD with KSE in 5.x.

      Not sure why I'm feeding a troll, but someone may be able to use this info.

    13. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you're getting a LOT done this afternoon, right?

    14. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too retarded to put a linefeed into his HTML: runderwo

    15. Re:Anything NOT in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent may be a troll for inflamatory remarks, but you're just as bad because you're spreading FUD. At least OP didn't lie.

      PAE has been in Linux for years. It was in Linux 2.4 when it was first released.

  22. Here's My Routine.... by Not+The+Real+Me · · Score: -1, Troll

    response -- BSD is dying.

  23. explain this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does a Penguin have to do with Linux? What the hell is the association there?

    I run FreeBSD because it has a better mascot.

    1. Re:explain this by grimiore1 · · Score: 0, Funny

      yes, and i ran Windows XP so i can float around and have an XP experience. Yup, the logo and mascott of a software company determines what i recommend to my boss. Management: What should we use, Windows or this Linux thing? user: Don't use Linux. Their penguin mascot sucks. Use BSD. I have a fetish for devils. Management: Hm...devils are evil, right? Naw, we'll use Microsoft. What's their logo? user: $$$

      --
      Ben, you've become an UberGeek! Take me as your padawan!!!
    2. Re:explain this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A penguin once tried to attack Linus Torvalds (the original author of Linux, you may have heard of him) at a zoo.

      No, seriously. That's the connection. It's the origin of the following quote:

      Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen a angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100 mph. They'd be a lot more careful about what they say if they had.
      -- Linus Torvalds
    3. Re:explain this by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Funny

      What does a Penguin have to do with Linux? What the hell is the association there?

      Besides the obvious similarities between Linux users and penguins, such as the propensity towards pear-shaped anatomies and strict black-and-white orthodoxies about software licenses, there's also something very fishy about them waddling around talking like Burgess Meredith.

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

      Wile BSD users are all tanned Apollos kicking sand in the faces of the pasty, overweight Linux users snoozing in the sun? ;-)

  24. Merging in OpenBSD PF.. by zulux · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OpenBSD Packet Filter is *really* cool - I can't wait for it's availabiltiy in FreeBSD.

    --

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

    1. Re:Merging in OpenBSD PF.. by Helevius · · Score: 4, Informative
      Pf is available via the /usr/ports/security/pf/ port.

      Helevius

    2. Re:Merging in OpenBSD PF.. by drdink · · Score: 1

      It is available now via ports. See /usr/ports/security/pf/. It requires FreeBSD 5.x, though.

      --
      Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
    3. Re:Merging in OpenBSD PF.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Look at this British nerd !

      Hahahahahaha !!!!!

    4. Re:Merging in OpenBSD PF.. by jmartinp · · Score: 2, Informative

      You don't have to wait, it's already been done. Have a look in /usr/ports/security/pf and see for yourself.

    5. Re:Merging in OpenBSD PF.. by Homology · · Score: 1
      OpenBSD Packet Filter is *really* cool - I can't wait for it's availabiltiy in FreeBSD.

      As other posters mentions, it's in the FreeBSD ports. But why use the port when you can use the real thing on OpenBSD ;-)

  25. Hey, asswipe! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Funny

    What the fuck is you're problem? Quit bashing the Yanks. Shucks, you must of been dropped on you're head as a baby. I oughta come over to your India country in Africa and pop a cap in your ass with my .357, then I'll sit my fat ass on you're face till you suffocate. Then I'll sue your family for causing me grief, and they'll have to pay my medical bills for the visits to my shrink because of my mental anguish. I bet you don't even have freedom of speec, you godless KKK motherfucker! I'd come kick your ass if Friends wasn't on right now.

  26. So... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1


    BSD isn't dying then? I thought with Apple onboard it would be dying faster or something like that since they are on the way out as well. Btw mods, i have an Apple mac. ;)

    --
    Jonathanjk.com
    1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like they've been on the way out for the past twenty years? How they're dying right now because their share price is over twice what it was in, say, the mid-90s?
      You may or may not be a troll, but just because you own a mac doesn't mean that you aren't wrong.

    2. Re:So... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      Well I hope I am wrong :)

      --
      Jonathanjk.com
    3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I'm not sure if this counts or not, but FreeBSD is dying because so many BSD users are now switching to OS X that it is actually kind of sad. I used to be hard core FreeBSD user myself, but when OS X came out and I gave it a try it was like God himself came down from the heavens and showed me what real coders and power users should have been using all the time. Most of the people at work at our ISP have also switched from BSD to OS X for our desktops and with the new Xserve's, we are dropping BSD servers faster than Bill Clinton was getting laid in the oval office.

    4. Re:So... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      I suppose that is sad, but there will be a die hard group who will carry it on i'm sure.

      --
      Jonathanjk.com
    5. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. I guess they can join all those "die hard" Amiga users and Atari XL users in the dustbin of history.

    6. Re:So... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      You sir are an optimist to the max! :)

      --
      Jonathanjk.com
  27. FACT: This is the Final Release of Any BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    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 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. 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.

  28. Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Off topic but what the hell. This is the only place I'll get some help!

    Hey I need some help all you advocates. I've ran X before on Slackware years ago but then switched back to windows.

    I've used OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD for serving before, but now I want to run FreeBSD on the desktop.

    My question is, which is better, 4.9 or 5.2 for a desktop OS and why? I'd like to use KDE not Gnome if that makes a difference, so KDE 3.1 or 3.2? I guess it is now... which comes with this already on the CD? I'm guessing 5.2 cause its the latest?

    1. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf it was an honest question and now it won't get any attention :(

      I'd sincerely like a reply

    2. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FreeBSD 4.9 comes with KDE 3.14 and gnome 2.4. 5.2 is still in the release candidate stage, so it's considered slightly less stable than 4.9

    3. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      For desktop use you are doing yourself a disservice if you use anything except for Apple OS X. Sure, you have to buy a new computer, but so what? BSD is only "free" if your time has no value, and the time that you will save using OS X for your desktop compared to BSD will save you thousands of hours in a single year. With OS X you have apps that JUST WORK, a GUI that completely rocks anything the KDE or GNOME people can imagine, and the whole thing is backed up by a corporation that employs paid, professional, American programmers. Not amateur communists and freeloaders who spend company time writing kernel hacks for those servers noone knows they installed.

    4. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks mate!

      I read on the FreeBSD site, the release notes and the comments from the team about why I should use 4.9-stable over 5.2 but I just wanted further insight.

      They've taken perl out of the base GAH! ;)

      Thanks for letting me know about KDE 3.14 though, I'm not that great at X and would hate to bother mucking around a long time just to get it going.

    5. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Dr.+Shim · · Score: 1

      I really can't help you much because I've never delt with FreeBSD. Try going to JustLinux and asking there. You probably won't find help here.

      I'll give my left pinky if you don't find help there.

      --
      People discover the meaning of life between getting piss drunk and the following hangover.
    6. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by cepler · · Score: 2, Funny

      > They've taken perl out of the base GAH! ;)

      Uhm, thats a GOOD thing.

    7. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by doobray · · Score: 0

      Thats funny, I own three Macs with OS X and still use FreeBSD/Fluxbox on x86 as my primary desktop. Luckily, I am a communist freeloader as well..

    8. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 4.x series of FreeBSD is production branch, designed to be run in high-reliability environments. The 5.x series is the new technology branch, with many new advancments in the system. I would advise you to run the 5.x series, which in this case is 5.2, soon to be 5.2.1 (mostly amd64 fixes). You'll find the performance to be better, along with a generaly better desktop user experience. I run 4.9-stable on my fileserver, and 5.2-current on my laptop. I don't have problems with either, but I sort of expect things to randomly break on -current. 4.9-stable is rock solid with my mixed IDE and SCSI raid arrays.

    9. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by ph43thon · · Score: 1


      I'm doing 5.2-Current with Fluxbox for my desktop. I suggest you just make boot floppies for 5.2-Release and do a net install. Otherwise, just download 5.2-Release ISO and do minimal install.. then CVSup the sources to Current and make buildworld, make installworld. Though, if you don't have a very new computer, 5.2-Release will be just fine. I haven't used 4.9-Release so I can't offer much on it. I use 5.2 because ifconfig and acpi weren't working good enough for my laptop when 5.1 and 4.8 were out. (ifconfig from 4.8 was lacking functionality that it had in 5.1) As for 5.2, acpi is up and running pretty good.

      As for, gnome v kde.. I could care less about that bloated crap. Check out their websites. I will give my vote for XFree86 4.4.0 though. Hopefully it will be released soon and plopped into /usr/ports. I'm using CVS sources from xfree86 at the moment. I use it since I'm able to use vncviewer to control windows xp boxes with it. Wouldn't work with 4.3.0 for some reason.

      p

      PS also, it goes without saying that watching dvds goes great using ogle or mplayer. Read Dru Lavigne's articles on Onlamp to get help with that stuff. use plugger playing media from websites. There are plenty of mp3 players in /usr/ports

      PPS get familiar with portupgrade and cvsup your ports.

    10. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seriously considered getting a Mac laptop (since it offers a combination of a BSD system and important apps like MS Office), but I just can't make myself like the Mac OS UI. The global menu bar, the single-app instance policy, the poor keyboard navigation; it just can't compete with Windows XP, WindowMaker or even CDE. I wish Apple would at least offer the classic NeXT UI as an alternative.

      I guess Apple had to design a UI that would be friendly for existing Mac users, but if it wants to attract non-Mac users, it should offer a more professional UI as an alternative (see the wide variety of X window managers, or the `Classic UI' on Windows XP).

    11. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just out of curiosty... Why would you use VNC with XP when you can use the RDP protocol (using RDesktop [rdesktop.org])?

    12. Re:Which FreeBSD to install?? by ph43thon · · Score: 1

      You got me.. I guess I just assumed a client didn't exist. I installed it from ports and it works great on my local lan. Hopefully, it'll work good from remote locations.

      p

  29. OMG! Thats spooky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    It's the night of the living dead.

    BTW, does anyone know in what state the ppc port is in? Dead, dying or still beta?

  30. I just off the phone with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    their development team. They are taking a break between RC versions. They deserve the rest. Good work guys!

    1. Re:I just off the phone with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1


      Fact: *BSD is mummified!

  31. Re:Don't forget about Ninnle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Would that make her a lesbian?

  32. Re:Don't forget about Ninnle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Once the SRS is done, yes. Me too. Looking forward to it!

  33. tigerhost.com needs to lay off the styles by elcid73 · · Score: 1

    tigerhost.com ranks as one of the worst websites I have ever seen. How could you possibly think it's acceptable to have links appear as normal text? Ok.. that's really all I care to look at, so there may be more things wrong with it, but that in and of itself is pretty darn bad.

    1. Re:tigerhost.com needs to lay off the styles by bc90021 · · Score: 1

      - All the links are available in the menus on the left.
      - Links that "surprise" people tend to make them more inclined to see what else they can find.
      - If you can find them, then I imagine just about anyone can, huh? :P

      --
      libertarianswag.com
    2. Re:tigerhost.com needs to lay off the styles by elcid73 · · Score: 2
      Given that a link is intended to "navigate", navigation should not "surprise" people... unless of course, you're Colombus. Navigation by definition is a controlled course. To navigate is to plan a course. None of those lend themselves to a "surprise" of any sort.

      And in closing, it does not make me more inclined to see what else is there. Unless I'm at "Homestarrunner.com" I don't want to hunt for easter eggs, your site (being a business) should not make me hunt for information. Everything I need should be easily accessible.

      And in closing again.. the tigerlink.org link on your main page is not on the left menu (I know.. it's at the bottom of the page w/icon). But my question is: why have links if you don't want people to click on them? If everything is on the left, why not leave it there only? What if I didn't realize all the information is on the left and I wanted to show someone one of your links? "Hmm I think that tiger link was here somewhere! Let me move my mouse over this entire page to find it!"

      And not to further nitpick.. but the orange highlighing when you try to enter a domain name to check? That's strange.

    3. Re:tigerhost.com needs to lay off the styles by elcid73 · · Score: 1
      If you can find them, then I imagine just about anyone can, huh? :P
      Your witty jab at my intelligence aside, I browsed your website with stylesheets turned off in order to find them. I'm sure not too many people browse with their own stylesheets instead of yours.
  34. No, one short word...Ninnle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    You may thing BSD is dying, but NinnleBSD is almost as popular as Ninnle Linux!

    1. Re:No, one short word...Ninnle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Now I know something's seriously fucked at /.

      First, Ninnle Linux gets ruled offtopic, now NinnleBSD does too!

      What would happen if Microsoft bought Ninnle? Would that satisfy you?

      Ninnle forever!

  35. eh, Close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    1) making guns illegal, would work just as well as making drugs illegal has. At least you've got a fighting chance if everyone can get them

    2)Fat=Rich. Its really our sedintary lifestyle that has made us so fat. That is due to all of our wonderful inovations that have made all of our jobs easier. Eh, oh well. Don't worry the world will catch up sooner than you think.

    3) Webster started it. Purposely put different spellings into his dictionary to distinguish it from the Brittish language. Languages evolve. Why isn't Eurpope speaking Proper LATIN? Its such a stupid point.

    4)What use is it to know Chinese history? Seriously? Geography knowledge is on the rise. Just don't take Leno's street walkers as the average. I'd bet that we are actually on par with the rest of the world on this one.

    5) Quite an Ironic point. Its obvious that you haven't studied the constitution. Its build to be changed, hence its brillence. If you want to know about freedom of speach watch "Skokie". That should clear things up.

    6)The court system is one of the best. However, it is prone to abuse recently. At least the government listens to everyone.

    7)Most people don't have shrinks. You've been watching too much seinfeld( a great american show). If you had actually watched Friends, you would learn that we usually talk to friends about problems and then make fun of them.

    8)You have Friends confused with married with children. The best shows aren't on network tv. Discovery channel, history channel, comedy central,Catroon Network, PBS, HBO. The list goes on. Besides, right now CSI is the highest rated show. I don't care for it, but you do learn from it while being entertained.

  36. Enderly And so by noerej · · Score: 1

    Judging the number of Score=0 posts i thing Rob Enderle is posting at slashdot.

    Anyway I only used FreeBSD with bochs and i would say it is ok.

  37. not as good as DragonFlyBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    FreeBSD 5.2 release is so unusable, they had to quickly cover their asses and immediately withdraw it. FreeBSD 5 is going backwards. At this rate, it'll never be as good as DragonFlyBSD.

    1. Re:not as good as DragonFlyBSD by sremick · · Score: 1

      Whatever, troll. I've been running FreeBSD 5.2 on my desktop for a while now and have not had any problems. Also, 5.2 has not been withdrawn.

  38. yes by Triumph+The+Insult+C · · Score: 0, Redundant

    free software

    --
    vodka, straight up, thank you!
  39. Re:FACT:Sells ok on Ebay by poppageek · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I sell CDs of Linux and FreeBSD and NetBSD on Ebay. So far I have done ok on FreeBSD. Not getting rich but I have sales and interest enough to keep listing them. Am getting interest in NetBSD and expanding the sellection there too.

    The FreeBSD and NetBSD listings get alot of views. Never know why poeple look and not buy, price? Just curious? I dunno but so far I have sold as many FreeBSD CDs as any Linux Distro. Just listed NetBSD this week and have one sale already.

    Linux wise Fredora and Rehat are my top sellers. I do not sell Mandrake anymore. They do not seem to have the same open mindframe of the other distros to sharing. It was demanded I remove the downloadable version from my listings. Ebay was even contacted and told to remove the listings.

    I am doing ok enough with the others that I do not need Mandrake. In reading the info on the *BSD and other Linux Distros web sites they have very open and sharing minded policies except for Mandrake, OpenBSD and SUSE. No matter, it's their work they can demand what they want I guess.

    But the openess of Fedora, Debian, Slackware, Gentoo, FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenOffice.org is so inspiring I have decided to doante a portion of every sell to their respective organizations to help and to share back.

    These guys are really cool and what they are doing is really cool. I know you already know that but after the Mandrake acted the point has been further driven home to me.

    Blantant self promotion:
    http://stores.ebay.com/poppageeks

  40. Are they starting from scratch? by vxvxvxvx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree that they can have it BSD licensed no problems if they program it from scratch, but somehow referring to it as the "SGI XFS port" sounds like they're taking the existing GPL implementation and porting it. My guess is it'll be like the ext2fs parts, GPL code on BSD.

    1. Re:Are they starting from scratch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >My guess is it'll be like the ext2fs parts, GPL code on BSD.

      Correct. The goal is not to make a political statement, but to provide an access to XFS systems to ones who need it.

  41. deadly.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    BSD
    iS
    Dead

  42. some BSD Jokes for ya.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Why did the BSD user cross the road?

    Who cares, we have walking dead people.

    How many BSD users does it take to change a light bulb?

    None at all. The lights have been out on this project long ago.

    Why are BSD users so jealous of Tux?

    Even though Tux is a bit overweight, at least he can show himself in public and not be chased down the street by a bunch of zealous Christians.

    Why is BSD dying?

    10 000 Slashdot readers can't be wrong.

  43. FreeBSD: Project Evil by metal_priest · · Score: 4, Funny

    That project certainly deserve the "coolest name" award. Basicly it's the freebsd equivalent of ndiswrapper to get wireless chips to work.
    It's remarkable how applicable this name is :)
    Here is a more detailed description.

    1. Re:FreeBSD: Project Evil by TechnoWeeniePas · · Score: 1

      Personaly I prefer SATAN (security administartor tool for analysing networks)

      http://www.porcupine.org/satan/

    2. Re:FreeBSD: Project Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't SATAN a development of SAINT? :)

  44. BSD Theme Song, by Our Lady Peace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    OUR LADY PEACE - *BSD's Dead Lyrics

    do you worry that you're not liked
    how long till you break
    you're happy cause you smile
    but how much can you fake
    an ordinary OS an ordinary name
    but ordinary's just not good enough today

    alone I'm thinking
    why is *BSD dead
    is it in my head
    we'll just laugh instead
    you worry about the weather and
    whether or not you should hate

    are you worried about your faith
    kneel down and obey
    you're happy you're in love
    you need someone to hate
    an ordinary OS an ordinary waist
    but ordinary's just not good enough today

    doesn't anybody ever know that the
    world's a subway...

  45. Want digital camera support? Use OS X. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OS X has perfect digital camera support. FreeBSD: sketchy. Why would you use FreeBSD when OS X is available NOW?

    1. Re:Want digital camera support? Use OS X. by cepler · · Score: 1

      'cause OSX won't install on the 3 spare i386 architecture boxes I have laying around and 'cause it costs money. :)

  46. I prefer OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FreeBSD is "ok" if all you are interested in is not paying for your operating system. For just a little money, you can pick up OS X and have the best operating system ever developed. It has a way better GUI than anything BSD/Linux has, all the system components on your G4 or G5 are fully and totally supported without hacks and compiling necessary. It's faster, more elegant, and better engineered by professional American programmers, rather than a loose collection of amateur programmers who just barely graduated from the university of india, or whatever.

    1. Re:I prefer OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so disappointed in you. All this time you've spent trolling Slashdot could have been much better spent making out checks to me for "upgrades". Uh oh, I feel another $129 coming on...

      Steve Jobs

  47. Linux 2.6 Kill *BSD - version 0.1 - please fix. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I heard you on the wireless back in Fifty Two
    Lying awake intent at tuning in on you.
    If I was young it didn't stop you coming through.

    Oh-a oh

    They took the credit for your second symphony.
    Rewritten by machine and new technology,
    and now I understand the problems you can see.

    Oh-a oh

    I met your children
    Oh-a oh

    What did you tell them?
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.

    Pictures came and broke your heart.
    Oh-a-a-a oh

    And now we meet in an abandoned studio.
    We hear the playback and it seems so long ago.
    And you remember the jingles used to go.

    Oh-a oh

    You were the first one.
    Oh-a oh

    You were the last one.

    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    In my mind and in my car, we can't rewind we've gone to far
    Oh-a-aho oh,
    Oh-a-aho oh

    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.

    In my mind and in my car, we can't rewind we've gone to far.
    Pictures came and broke your heart, put the blame on VTR.

    You are a *BSD User.
    You are a *BSD User.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.
    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD.

    Linux 2.6 killed *BSD. (You are a *BSD User.)

  48. i pity you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple's mascot for OS X should be a guy in a business suit driving an Audi TT. Why? Because with OS X you can get actual work done, rather than sitting around all day trying to get your kernel to recompile or your port to update. With OS X you make more bling, and it shows.

  49. A dose of truth against the troll by bonch · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Even though the concept of "no guns = no gun-related crimes" is alien to the average Yank, it'll give you a false sense of security in this country with the highest crime rates in the developed world.

    Criminals will still have guns. They'll have them illegally.

    England has a higher crime rate for muggings, rapes, and burglary, and their rate of successful prosecution for crimes is lower. Our murder rate is higher, but ours has steadily declined for the past 10 years, while theirs has risen.

    Horribly off-topic, I know.

  50. networking locking: got that too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, so you mean removal of Giant.
    The Linux term for that is the BKL.
    This was removed for the 2.4.xx kernels,
    excepting oddball protocols like
    DECnet and rare operations like ifconfig.

    So, got that too.

    For the 2.6.xx kernel of course, the BKL
    has been removed from other places. The
    ext3 filesystem is free of it now, etc.

  51. why it deserved to be moderated up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It beats your post for sure, being far more
    interesting, and thus deserving of more points.
    (or at least equal -- but the moderators have
    shown unkindness toward pointing out the
    obvious in a pro-BSD story)

    Besides that, it's correct. Never mind the
    confusion over locking; Linux was first
    either way you interpret things.

    So it is reasonable to ask, what is new?
    If there is anything, please tell!

    1. Re:why it deserved to be moderated up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flamebait correctly refers to the manner in which you replied, nothing to do with the facts you are describing.

      No, I'm not the previous poster.

  52. threads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The whole "heavyweights" idea isn't meaningful
    when dealing with Linux. It applies to Solaris,
    Windows, Mach+BSD (NeXT, Darwin, OSF/1), VMS,
    OS/400, and zOS (OS/390). To some extent, it may
    apply to any BSD or real UNIX.

    No full-featured server or desktop OS can do a
    fork() faster than Linux can. (vmware, pSOS,
    eCos, and so on are not full-featured OSes)

    NPTL speed has nothing to do with lightweight
    versions of fork() or clone(). NPTL beats the
    old LinuxThreads library because NPTL avoids
    having an extra management thread to funnel
    lots of library calls through. A non-leader
    thread can now directly create another thread,
    without needing to register it with the leader.
    A non-leader thread can cause the whole group
    of threads to exit, instead of needing to pass
    messages around asking threads to exit.

  53. Independent Commission Reports: *BSD is Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll


    Yet another crippling blow has struck what's left of the *BSD community, as a soon-to-be-released report by an independent commission doing a year-long study concludes: *BSD is dead and mummified.

    Here are some of the commission's findings:

    Fact: the *BSDs have balkanized yet again. There are now no less than twelve separate, competing *BSD projects, each of which has introduced fundamental incompatibilities with the other *BSDs, and frequently with Unix standards. Average number of developers in each project: fewer than five. Average number of users per project: there are no definitive numbers, but reports show that all the projects are on the decline, because *BSD is dying.

    Fact: Apple is quietly changing the base kernel for OS X from *BSD to Linux. Insiders report that Apple's technical leadership has grown tired of the licensing battles and is seeking a more modern license; they find Linux's license more appealing. Many Apple technology experts -- from OS developers all the way up to Steve Jobs -- find Linux to be a more advanced OS, which will enable Apple to release a more mature product. The frequent hallway arguments and fistfights among the *BSD developers Apple has hired has also contributed to the decision.

    Fact: XFree86 is dropping support for *BSD. The remaining core group believes that the *BSDs have strayed too far from Unix standards and have become too difficult to support along with Linux and Solaris x86. "It's too much trouble," said one anonymous developer. "If they want to make their own standards, let them doing the porting for us."

    Fact: Many user-level applications will no longer work under *BSD, and no one is working to change this. The GIMP, a Photoshop-like application, has not worked at all under *BSD since version 1.1 (sorry, too much trouble for such a small base, developers have said). OpenOffice, a Microsoft Office clone, has never worked under *BSD and never will. ("Why would we bother?" said developer Steven Andrews, an OpenOffice team lead.) With fewer and fewer apps available, it is only a matter of time before *BSD dies and is mummified.

    Fact: According to a brand new Netcraft survey yet to be published, the number of internet servers running *BSD has shrunk to a heartbreaking .02% and is sinking further. Netcraft comments that the constant in-fighting among *BSD developers is probably to blame.

    Fact: servers runningOpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."

    Fact: NetBSD, which claims to focus on portability (whatever that is supposed to mean), is slow and cannot take advantage of multiple CPUs. "That about drove the last nail in the coffin for BSD use here," said Michael Curry, CTO of Amazon.com. "We took our NetBSD boxes out to the backyard and shot them in the head. We're much happier running Linux."

    Fact: There are almost no FreeBSD developers left, and its use, according to Netcraft, is down to a sadly crippled .005% of internet servers. "It's just not reliable," said Christine McGee, VP of Technology for eBay, Inc. "Nor do we find it a very modern OS. I would recommend Linux to anyone contemplating a server OS, or maybe Windows, before I would recommend a BSD."

    Fact: DragonflyBSD, yet another offshoot of the beleaguered FreeBSD "project", is already collapsing under the weight of internal power struggles and in-fighting. "They haven't done a single decent release," notes Mark Baron, an industry watcher and columnist. "Their mailing lists read like an online version of a Jerry Springer episode, complete with food fights, swearing, name-calling, and chair-throwing." Netcraft notes that DragonflyBSD is run on exactly 0% of internet servers.

    With these incontroverible facts staring (what's left of) the *BSD community in the face, they can only draw one conclusion: *BSD is dead and mummified.

  54. More than OSX using BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are a number of other specialized applications out there that use a BSD variant. Juniper routers and Nokia firewall appliances come to mind. These are widely deployed and highly trusted systems, which have found BSD to be the best way to run, which I agree with. In a stripped down, no-BS system that is purpose built, it's hard to argue BSD's virtues in this respect.

  55. Commission: *BSD is Dead and Mummified by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Yet another crippling blow has struck what's left of the *BSD community, as a soon-to-be-released report by an independent commission doing a year-long study concludes: *BSD is dead and mummified. Here are some of the commission's findings:

    Fact: the *BSDs have balkanized yet again. There are now no less than twelve separate, competing *BSD projects, each of which has introduced fundamental incompatibilities with the other *BSDs, and frequently with Unix standards. Average number of developers in each project: fewer than five. Average number of users per project: there are no definitive numbers, but reports show that all projects are on the decline.

    Fact: Apple is quietly changing the base kernel for OS X from *BSD to Linux. Insiders report that Apple's technical leadership has grown tired of the licensing battles and is seeking a more modern license; they find Linux's license more appealing. Many Apple technology experts -- from OS developers all the way up to Steve Jobs -- find Linux to be a more advanced OS, which will enable Apple to release a more mature product. The frequent hallway arguments and fistfights among the *BSD developers Apple has hired has also contributed to the decision.

    Fact: XFree86 is dropping support for *BSD. The remaining core group believes that the *BSDs have strayed too far from Unix standards and have become too difficult to support along with Linux and Solaris x86. "It's too much trouble," said one anonymous developer. "If they want to make their own standards, let them doing the porting for us."

    Fact: Many user-level applications will no longer work under *BSD, and no one is working to change this. The GIMP, a Photoshop-like application, has not worked at all under *BSD since version 1.1 (sorry, too much trouble for such a small base, developers have said). OpenOffice, a Microsoft Office clone, has never worked under *BSD and never will. ("Why would we bother?" said developer Steven Andrews, an OpenOffice team lead.)

    Fact: servers running OpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."

    Fact: NetBSD, which claims to focus on portability (whatever that is supposed to mean), is slow, and cannot take advantage of multiple CPUs. "That about drove the last nail in the coffin for BSD use here," said Michael Curry, CTO of Amazon.com. "We took our NetBSD boxes out to the backyard and shot them in the head. We're much happier running Linux."

    Fact: There are almost no FreeBSD developers left, and its use, according to Netcraft, is down to a sadly crippled .005% of internet servers. "It's just not reliable," said Christine McGee, VP of Technology for eBay, Inc. "Nor do we find it a very modern OS. I would recommend Linux to anyone contemplating a server OS, or maybe Windows, before I would recommend a BSD."

    Fact: DragonflyBSD, yet another offshoot of the beleaguered FreeBSD "project", is already collapsing under the weight of internal power struggles and in-fighting. "They haven't done a single decent release," notes Mark Baron, an industry watcher and columnist. "Their mailing lists read like an online version of a Jerry Springer episode, complete with food fights, swearing, name-calling, and chair-throwing." Netcraft notes that DragonflyBSD is run on exactly 0% of internet servers.

    With these incontroverible facts staring (what's left of) the *BSD community in the face, they can only draw one conclusion: *BSD is dead and mummified.

  56. BSD: a lively corpse by puzzled · · Score: 2, Funny



    Despite the numerous BSD is Dying trolls on here, it seems to be quite a lively corpse.

    I have half a dozen 4.9 servers, a couple of 5.2 laptops, and I'm playing with the Motorola 88k RISC port of OpenBSD trying to get it to load on an MVME187 ...

    One of these days I'll get all crazy and complete the family by putting NetBSD on my toaster oven ...

    --
    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
  57. Re:FACT:Sells ok on Ebay by RLiegh · · Score: 1

    When I browse the Linux/alt-os listings on ebay and see people selling home-burned cds, I tend to wonder why anyone would buy them, instead of simply downlaoding the iso themselves or going to cheapbyts.

    On the other hand, I am [overly/highly] suspicous of buying software on ebay and have not bought anything from there for that reason, so I may not be a representative sample. ;-)

  58. The magic 8-Ball never lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Insightful?

    >What idiot modded this up.

    Possibly the same one you're appealing to now.

    1. Re:The magic 8-Ball never lies by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

      Clever

  59. Good Copy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Never know why poeple look and not buy, price? Just curious? I dunno but so far I have sold as many FreeBSD CDs as any Linux Distro."

    I just saw why, it's your ad's tagline:

    FreeBSD for sale! Get your hot (gifs of Ceren naked) FreeBSD!

    FreeBSD for sale!...

  60. BSD Dead? *CACKLE* NOT! by cepler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think you're confusing death with a workoholic that doesn't have time to talk:

    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

    From those uptimes I'd say that BSD is most certainly not dead, it's quite hapily humming along reliably.

  61. Hey Eurofag: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    I so wish we didn't save you guys from the Nazis. It wasn't worth it. Hitler is just what you deserve.

    1. Re:Hey Eurofag: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Sure, and who killed Malcolm and JFK what you deserve.

  62. Re:BSD Dead? *CACKLE* NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The fact that those servers have been up for so long can mean only one thing: there haven't been any updates to *BSD in years!

    Just another fact to bolster the obvious conclusion: *BSD is dying.

  63. Re:FACT:Sells ok on Ebay by poppageek · · Score: 1

    The comment I get is they have a dialup connection.

  64. Re:BSD Dead? *CACKLE* NOT! by puzzled · · Score: 2, Informative



    Maybe those uptimes are load balancer => N=1 FreeBSD boxes.

    FreeBSD still just rocks for overall uptime - I've gone four years without any trouble except on my much abused R&D boxes - the production stuff just keeps on producing ...

    --
    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
  65. A Dead Corpse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll


    Yet another crippling blow has struck what's left of the *BSD community, as a soon-to-be-released report by an independent commission doing a year-long study concludes: *BSD is dead and mummified. Here are some of the commission's findings:

    Fact: the *BSDs have balkanized yet again. There are now no less than twelve separate, competing *BSD projects, each of which has introduced fundamental incompatibilities with the other *BSDs, and frequently with Unix standards. Average number of developers in each project: fewer than five. Average number of users per project: there are no definitive numbers, but reports show that all projects are on the decline.

    Fact: Apple is quietly changing the base kernel for OS X from *BSD to Linux. Insiders report that Apple's technical leadership has grown tired of the licensing battles and is seeking a more modern license; they find Linux's license more appealing. Many Apple technology experts -- from OS developers all the way up to Steve Jobs -- find Linux to be a more advanced OS, which will enable Apple to release a more mature product. The frequent hallway arguments and fistfights among the *BSD developers Apple has hired has also contributed to the decision.

    Fact: XFree86 is dropping support for *BSD. The remaining core group believes that the *BSDs have strayed too far from Unix standards and have become too difficult to support along with Linux and Solaris x86. "It's too much trouble," said one anonymous developer. "If they want to make their own standards, let them doing the porting for us."

    Fact: Many user-level applications will no longer work under *BSD, and no one is working to change this. The GIMP, a Photoshop-like application, has not worked at all under *BSD since version 1.1 (sorry, too much trouble for such a small base, developers have said). OpenOffice, a Microsoft Office clone, has never worked under *BSD and never will. ("Why would we bother?" said developer Steven Andrews, an OpenOffice team lead.)

    Fact: servers running OpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."

    Fact: NetBSD, which claims to focus on portability (whatever that is supposed to mean), is slow, and cannot take advantage of multiple CPUs. "That about drove the last nail in the coffin for BSD use here," said Michael Curry, CTO of Amazon.com. "We took our NetBSD boxes out to the backyard and shot them in the head. We're much happier running Linux."

    Fact: There are almost no FreeBSD developers left, and its use, according to Netcraft, is down to a sadly crippled .005% of internet servers. "It's just not reliable," said Christine McGee, VP of Technology for eBay, Inc. "Nor do we find it a very modern OS. I would recommend Linux to anyone contemplating a server OS, or maybe Windows, before I would recommend a BSD."

    Fact: DragonflyBSD, yet another offshoot of the beleaguered FreeBSD "project", is already collapsing under the weight of internal power struggles and in-fighting. "They haven't done a single decent release," notes Mark Baron, an industry watcher and columnist. "Their mailing lists read like an online version of a Jerry Springer episode, complete with food fights, swearing, name-calling, and chair-throwing." Netcraft notes that DragonflyBSD is run on exactly 0% of internet servers.

    With these incontroverible facts staring (what's left of) the *BSD community in the face, they can only draw one conclusion: *BSD is dead and mummified.

  66. But *BSD Is Dying! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Yet another crippling blow has struck what's left of the *BSD community, as a soon-to-be-released report by an independent commission doing a year-long study concludes: *BSD is dead and mummified. Here are some of the commission's findings:

    Fact: the *BSDs have balkanized yet again. There are now no less than twelve separate, competing *BSD projects, each of which has introduced fundamental incompatibilities with the other *BSDs, and frequently with Unix standards. Average number of developers in each project: fewer than five. Average number of users per project: there are no definitive numbers, but reports show that all projects are on the decline.

    Fact: Apple is quietly changing the base kernel for OS X from *BSD to Linux. Insiders report that Apple's technical leadership has grown tired of the licensing battles and is seeking a more modern license; they find Linux's license more appealing. Many Apple technology experts -- from OS developers all the way up to Steve Jobs -- find Linux to be a more advanced OS, which will enable Apple to release a more mature product. The frequent hallway arguments and fistfights among the *BSD developers Apple has hired has also contributed to the decision.

    Fact: XFree86 is dropping support for *BSD. The remaining core group believes that the *BSDs have strayed too far from Unix standards and have become too difficult to support along with Linux and Solaris x86. "It's too much trouble," said one anonymous developer. "If they want to make their own standards, let them doing the porting for us."

    Fact: Many user-level applications will no longer work under *BSD, and no one is working to change this. The GIMP, a Photoshop-like application, has not worked at all under *BSD since version 1.1 (sorry, too much trouble for such a small base, developers have said). OpenOffice, a Microsoft Office clone, has never worked under *BSD and never will. ("Why would we bother?" said developer Steven Andrews, an OpenOffice team lead.)

    Fact: servers running OpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."

    Fact: NetBSD, which claims to focus on portability (whatever that is supposed to mean), is slow, and cannot take advantage of multiple CPUs. "That about drove the last nail in the coffin for BSD use here," said Michael Curry, CTO of Amazon.com. "We took our NetBSD boxes out to the backyard and shot them in the head. We're much happier running Linux."

    Fact: There are almost no FreeBSD developers left, and its use, according to Netcraft, is down to a sadly crippled .005% of internet servers. "It's just not reliable," said Christine McGee, VP of Technology for eBay, Inc. "Nor do we find it a very modern OS. I would recommend Linux to anyone contemplating a server OS, or maybe Windows, before I would recommend a BSD."

    Fact: DragonflyBSD, yet another offshoot of the beleaguered FreeBSD "project", is already collapsing under the weight of internal power struggles and in-fighting. "They haven't done a single decent release," notes Mark Baron, an industry watcher and columnist. "Their mailing lists read like an online version of a Jerry Springer episode, complete with food fights, swearing, name-calling, and chair-throwing." Netcraft notes that DragonflyBSD is run on exactly 0% of internet servers.

    With these incontroverible facts staring (what's left of) the *BSD community in the face, they can only draw one conclusion: *BSD is dead and mummified.

  67. Re:FACT:Sells ok on Ebay by RLiegh · · Score: 1

    So do I, but I still tend to think of cheapbytes before I think of ebay.

  68. Ode To BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Very few use BSD,
    those that do smoke PCP!

    You know your not hearing someone lying,
    when they say that BSD is dieing.

    I know of many who are sick of trying,
    to install BSD without screaming and crying.

    Most complain BSD has no graphical interface,
    while a minority scream "but it still has it's place."

    BSD was once well renowned and great,
    but I'm afraid recent releases have sealed it's fate.

    To all of you who say BSD is here to stay,
    You're probably right but I'll keep trolling anyway!

  69. A Long Way in a Year... by Coocha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and by that I'm referring to FreeBSD and myself.

    I tested it for the first time about a year ago, and was seduced by the ports tree... it gave me the impression that BSD is a little more sleek in structure than most Linux distros.

    I upgraded my home server to 4.9 a few months ago, and the only downtimes were due to power outages... and after finding a little BIOS tweak in my Tyan Tiger, I think those will be minimized too :-)

    This weekend, I migrated from XP to 4.9 for my desktop machine after drag-n-drop of all things decided to quit working... wtf? There's a few things that I anticipate will be tricky, like Xinerama support for my Radeon 7000 VE dual display, tweaking Vmware so it'll work correctly, and openoffice is being strangely adamant at not compiling. I'm not much of a coder, so things like this tend to make me run to the 'net for assistance, but that's what a supportive userbase is for.

    Kudos to the FreeBSD team for attracting yet another user with a well-structured and well-executed OS.

    --
    May the threads progress competently.
    1. Re:A Long Way in a Year... by sirket · · Score: 1

      There's a few things that I anticipate will be tricky, like Xinerama support for my Radeon 7000 VE dual display

      This is an X-windows/ATI problem. The issue is that most ATI cards are simply ATI branded and don't work exactly the same as another ATI branded card of the same model. I had this same problem both under FreeBSD and Linux. ATI manufactured cards would work fine, but ATI branded cards would not.

      openoffice is being strangely adamant at not compiling.
      Do _NOT_ attempt to compile OpenOffice. It simply is not worth it. Install the package and get on with your life. OpenOffice is so big and so complex that compiles will inevitably fail on some obscure error that you can't possibly fix.

      -sirket

  70. Re:BSD Dead? *CACKLE* NOT! by TheLink · · Score: 0

    You want uptimes you might want to try VMS or Tandem Non Stop (both now under HP).

    --
  71. Re:BSD Dead? *CACKLE* NOT! by puzzled · · Score: 0



    VMS uptimes are due to it being cracked and then patched by the 'administrator', who wants no more downtime :-)

    type cluster_name::*.*;*

    I mean really ... of all the bi-curious insecure methods of passing email - a world readable directory in the cluster? Who'd have thought ...

    --
    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
  72. HE'S DEAD JIM by Anonymous Coward · · 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

  73. Nice troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    good stuff.