Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 5.3-BETA6 Available
ulib writes "The FreeBSD 5.3 testing cycle goes on with a brand new BETA Release. Eager for the Final? Then try this Beta out (mirrors) and help them find/fix bugs!
Here are the announcement (check it for fixes, enhancements & known issues), the schedule (could be updated soon), and the todo list."
The open issues page shows the SCHED_ULE as "needs testing" for the 5.3 release -- the last release still used the old 4BSD scheduler. Have the issues with preemption been ironed out?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
You could try to load up the first install disc, or even better the miniinst disc if you don't want to waste bandwidth, and see during the boot messages if all the hardware in your box is probed.
;), I would recommend either Knoppix 2.6 or Fedora Core 2 as a better starter unix. With these, you won't be dropped to a prompt after a fairly mimimalist install to fend for yourself. You'll also get a chance to run a ton of pre-configured desktop applications, so when you finally do attempt the BSD desktop, you'll know what you want to install beforehand.
Don't worry if it can't find your sound card though, install kernels don't have multimedia features.
However, as a hard core BSD user, I would say if you're looking for a desktop replacement, you may not find the joy here. First, getting BSD up and running as a desktop requires a bit of work and a certain comfort level working with the command line.
Being Bi-OS-ual (I swing Linux and BSD where necessary
If however you're wanting to setup your first server environment, I would recommend FreeBSD over everything else. You will learn unix the proper way, which is at the command line and manually configuring your service config files. (Yes I've used Debian and Gentoo for this in the past, and I still think FreeBSD is better suited).
Success is as dangerous as failure, hope as hollow as fear.
The FreeBSD install process is easy. Check here to see if the stuff in your box is listed. I am almost positive that box will work.
what I really want before wiping windows off my box is a throrough HW compatibility list
See the Hardware Notes page. This page is for 5.2.1 because 5.3 is still in beta, but you can get the latest page off of CVS or on the beta ISO.
While this page isn't thorough, it should meet most people's needs. Thoroughness would require a vastly larger document. For example, not every USB flash drive is listed, but 9999 out of the 10,000 available will work with FreeBSD out of the box.
If you have hardware that is not mentioned, then ask about it on a support forum.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Once you get your GUI running you won't notice any difference.
In terms of administration and setup I'd compare FreeBSD with Slackware Linux. You will need to do some config file editing to get stuff done, but FreeBSD has a very well documented and easy-to-understand configuration system (you can basically set all the important system preferences in the /etc/rc.conf file).
Give it a shot, you just might like it.
you could also try FreeSBIE http://www.freesbie.org/, a very nice freeBSD live CD. it worked fine on my DELL laptop (except for the wireless card, but that's expected) and on another old DELL PIII desktop I had lying around but of course since your machine is new YMMV.
s.
Yeah, you can get everything with Ports, but you have to compile it! That's a serious investment in time, even with a multi-GHz P4, if you long for a recent - say - KDE? (You sure want _THAT_ or a full Gnome on a desktop machine, in recent versions).
I actually have a pal sitting in the lab next to me, doing Ports compiles and configuring since days because he wants to "truely evaluate" the system (he has a P4 with good horse power and HT).
Accepted: The base system is a perfect match for the kernel, lean and mean, but that won't give you you most stuff considered to be part of a full desktop. And X, Gnome and KDE are not as neatly adapted to FreeBSD as the base system, not by far. Recent versions need to be compiled. You aren't suggesting a base system is enough, aren't you? Command line is fine, but X would be nice. And Slackware isn't a very popular distro by today's standards...
5.x is very performant system that is in its strengths a true match for Linux 2.6.x. It replaced a lot of code though, and as 2.6.x, needs time to mature - it's beta for a reason and not yet fully stable. 4.x is the tried and true proven solution. I bet 4.x and the base system are one of the most stable and reliable foundations for a server out there, but not the most performant and scalable one. 5.x is not stable yet, it still has teething troubles: Even it's new and powerful SCHED_ULE (O(1)-Scheduler) is not fully stable yet. It's a good and commendable design, though (the whole kernel), as always.
A beginner is for sure in for more fun than he expected with the Ports tree. It's a solution that works, but does not really increase usability a lot for BSD beginners.
Install FreeBSD 4.10. It is the current stable version of FreeBSD. 4.10 will give you a good idea of all that FreeBSD has to offer. FreeeBSD 4.10 is not outdated. It was released in May 2004 and includes gnome 2.6 and KDE 3.2.2.
The FreeBSD install is easy provided that you follow the documentation. If you don't have a second computer on which to view the installation guide, print it out.
Yeah, you can get everything with Ports, but you have to compile it!
If you don't want to compile ports, then use prebuilt packages! Why is this so hard of a concept to understand?
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
5.x is very performant system that is in its strengths a true match for Linux 2.6.x.
What makes you think that? In single threaded performance, Linux 2.6 is faster than Linux 2.4, which is faster than FreeBSD 4, which is faster than FreeBSD 5.
In SMP scalability, the last test I saw between FreeBSD 5 and Linux 2.6 had FreeBSD unable to scale MySQL to 2 Opteron CPUs (which is an inherently very scalable architecture). Linux scaled linearly.
So, can you share your facts?
Since you are new to FBSD, dont try the 5.x series just yet.. Its not 100% done, yet.. almost..but not quite..
Stick with the 4.x ( stable, released ) series for the moment, if you are going to try it TODAY.. so you dont get left with a bad impression by starting out with a TESTING version.....
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I would say that OpenBSD is a better starter server; it's easier to secure and the afterboot man page tells you pretty much everything you have to know to get started with a variety of different services. The man pages in OpenBSD are just outstanding, and the quality of the code is unmatched.
If only it had the desktop apps I need, I'd use it as a desktop machine. As it is, I have it on my laptop so I can learn to do more through the CLI (email, IRC, learning vi, maybe get into C programming).
And this is coming from someone who uses FreeBSD as his main workstation OS.
-Jem
Okay, I'll bite.
:-P
I think it's really good that FreeBSD is getting this amount of attention - the plunge from FreeBSD 4 to 5 is *huge*, and hence needs lots of testing to ensure we don't have a repeat of the 3->4 saga (if you weren't around back then, there were numerous issues in the early FBSD4.x releases, and the jump from 3 to 4 wasn't as big as it is from 4 to 5).
If you dislike seeing the BSD posts, don't worry, BETA6 is the last scheduled beta (though there will be RC1 shortly).
Also somebody mentioned that *BSD is dead...
Hey, Gopher boy.
:) There will be a BETA7.
Check the schedule again.
-If God wanted people to be better than me, he would have made them that way.