NetBSD 1.6.2 Released

kairi writes "NetBSD 1.6.2 has just been released, supporting over 40 architectures. See the release announcement! Be sure to use one of the many mirrors when you grab your ISO!" MobyTurbo adds "A preliminary source of bittorrents has been announced on the NetBSD users mailing list."

Comments

Re:Tell me... :)

[saintlupus]

So, is there going to be a linux distro with something similar to ports (as I said, I only have experience with FreeBSD ports, and only assume here that pkgsrc is something similar).

Yes, there is. Pkgsrc is remarkably similar to what Free and OpenBSD call Ports. It also works on a lot of OSes, including Linux, Irix, and (I think) Solaris.

Check out the NetBSD page for info. It's pretty cool stuff.

--saint

Re:Mac68K build-from-scratch in emulation?

[bccomm]

Alright, I've got a hankering to build 1.6.2 from scratch for my Mac Quadra (25MHz 68040), but I KNOW building the whole thing would take weeks. Is there an emulator for my x86 box that would allow me to get this done faster? BasiliskII can emulate my Mac much faster than it really is. I'm sure this is a problem on a lot of the 40 architectures, some of them are way old and limited to the sub-100MHz range. Cross-compiling seems like a hairy mess.

You should be able to cross-compile the entire distribuiton from your x86 box using the build.sh frontend. It seems like it would be messy to build it and copy it over, but it's actually quite easy. The alternative would be to *not* build it yourself and instead just install the binary distribution---there really aren't many benefits of compiling it unless you need a custom kernel or -current sources.

Also, is there a way to build the whole distribution via gcc-3.3.x? I'd like to see how well it performs against the gcc2-built system I used a while ago.

The 1.6.x releases use gcc-2.95 for the basis of the toolchain. If you want to try gcc-3.3.x, this may be another reason to look at -current (just yesterday they updated gcc to v3.3.3). Current may be a better choice anyway: its faster, more feature-rich (think native threads), and more widely-used by the community.

-Bruce

Re:Geez

[bccomm]

I'd go with -current anyway, there are more features in it, and it's generally more widely-used by the community.

PS: I believe the next NetBSD formal release will be 2.0. It will have kernel threads, SMP, ACPI, and all that other good stuff. (:

-Bruce

Re:Tell me... :)

[Anonymovs Coward]

I suppose NetBSD has some sort of port system as well.

Weird that you ask that, since you answer it a few lines later. It's pkgsrc, thus called because "port" is NetBSD's term for a separate architecture on which it runs. Pkgsrc originally came from FreeBSD's ports system.

Re:Geez

[kivaapina]

SMP will never go to 1.6 branch. You have to wait for 2.0 or use current. If you don't like to build current you can download it from releng.netbsd.org.

Re:Tell me... :)

[pschmied]

I really like NetBSD as a desktop OS. NetBSD's clean approach means that they often get cool new drivers and features before anyone else, including linux. Cases in point: IPv6 and USB Visor support, IIRC.

Pkgsrc is a nice evolution of the ports. It has some neat additional features like a security audit.

I've said it before: NetBSD gets a bum reputation as being only for obscure hardware. Not so! People alway make the connection that FreeBSD==server, OpenBSD==security and NetBSD==suitable for toaster. I'd posit that NetBSD should be considered for desktops.

So, give it a shot on your desktops. I think you'll like it.

-Peter