Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 5.3 Released
cpugeniusmv writes "FreeBSD 5.3 has been released! This release marks a milestone in the FreeBSD 5.x series and the beginning of the 5-STABLE branch of releases. For a complete list of new features and known problems, please see the
release notes and
errata list. Bittorrent Download."
November 1st, you know "Day Of The Dead" and all that.
November second is Day Of the Dead (all souls day).
If you're going to troll, at least do it with some intelligence... If not, you're just another stroke (pun intended) repeating the same warmed over hash.
'Completely automated' does not include such vital information as your real name (notice how no serious UNIX-like asks for your name? It's a relic from the old single-user Windows), your serial key (about a third of which are real :)), your sperm count, etc.
Sam ty sig.
That's exactly right. The BSDs' "release infrequently but release it well" has let them make consistently solid releases which really do well for their introduction into production environments. FreeBSD 5.3 is not such a release, it was rushed through expectation and because they weren't making any real progress on the existing problems. Maybe 5.4 will be better, maybe 6-STABLE will be better, but by that time nobody will care.
See sig.
Sam ty sig.
Yes, except the DragonFly community/developer base are comprised entirely of flaming assholes. I'd use Linux before I'd use DragonFly again.
-Jem
You are an ignorant moron, and have no idea what you are talking about. DragonFlyBSD is based on FreeBSD 4. This is FreeBSD 5.3, completely different. FreeBSD will never copy DragonFlyBSD's model. In fact, DragonFlyBSD directly copied, literally, FreeBSD's model. Next time do a little reading before you try to represent DragonFlyBSD.
I'm sorry, I must have omitted that I've been using FreeBSD for ages and have been a very devout advocate, up until a few weeks ago when it hit me hard that FreeBSD 5 is a trainwreck. I DO know what I'm talking about, I've been reading the mailing lists, the TODO list, the CVS logs, the anecdotes and scientific tests alike, and my own experience using it on my machines. Yes, its functionality is very good, but its huge regression in performance, cleanliness (code cleanliness - just LOOK at it!), and stability certainly wards me away from using it further.
/. where at least some people can admit the truth no matter how much it hurts them to (oh and believe me it hurts).
You seem to be flaming me hard there, assuming I don't know what I'm talking about. I know it all too well. Your performance increase is from an older 5.x, which makes sense. Compare it to a 4.10 on the same box, or a Linux, or certainly NetBSD 2. Any of those will run circles around FreeBSD in UP, and on two-way SMP even the BGL system of Net/OpenBSD is reported to outperform FreeBSD's "fine grained SMPng" through sheer cleanliness more than brilliant synchronization.
I repeat: I wish it wasn't true, but FreeBSD 5 is not a good thing. If, for instance, they had kept Matt Dillon in their team and let him lead the SMP work, it wouldn't have developed the spaghetti necessary to stick with their core SMP model (which, yes, only two people alive truly understand, and I dare you to find more), and then we would have an awesome release. Unfortunately they kicked him out and did a terrible model of their own, which has ruined the system in many technical aspects. Some of the devs even admit it's a flop (PREEMPTION bugs were largely talked about, and the race conditions in the locking even on UP lasted for months on months and certainly got a lot of discussion).
If you think FreeBSD 5.3 is a great thing, do what I always found made it notably suck: block-read off a data CD constantly while in an X environment. There is so much locking tangling going on that responsiveness will reduce to barely workable levels. This sometimes even makes watching DivXs off CD impractical. It may work differently for you right now, or it might be something they worked around (in which case they should fix those network cards they gave up on - read the errata in the release announcement - call that a solid release?), but I certainly noticed it, and root knows I'm not the only one. Yes, before you start smart-assing, I had DMA on. In NetBSD and Linux there is no performance/responsiveness hit from CD access, and they don't have 'wedges' in network cards either. NetBSD especially has very solid hardware support where it exists, Linux drives are usually good too. FreeBSD can no longer claim this - the drivers are as good as any other, but the kernel facilities managing them are tangled in locking and drag the system visibly and measurably.
I'm tired of defending my claims against your blind attack. Either try some more extensive tests and conclude for yourself, or stay off
Sam ty sig.