Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NetBSD Adopts NetBSD/xen for Internal Use

Posted by timothy on from the do-not-take-orally dept.

agent dero writes "With NetBSD 2.0, the NetBSD Foundation also released support for a new port, NetBSD/xen. A version of NetBSD meant to run on top of the Xen virtual machine monitor. In this press release the foundation has announced that it is using the port and Xen for much of its internal development, citing security, and ease of use as main reasons for its adoption."

34 comments

  1. Xen is cool by Usquebaugh · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe I'll switch from using Qemu for my kernel sabotage. I would call it kernel hacking but that would indicate some proficiency :-(

  2. BSD dying by kinema · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now multiple BSD instances can die on a single machine, securely.

  3. A Great Leap Backwards by kiore · · Score: 1
    From the article
    NetBSD 2.0 ... the first to include NetBSD/xen, a port of the NetBSD kernel that runs under the Xen version 1.2 monitor. Significant work to run Xen version 2.0 has recently been completed by Manuel Bouyer and the next release of NetBSD will in all likelihood include this code. The Xen project already supplies a version of NetBSD/xen that runs under later versions of the Xen monitor.

    So Xen supplies a NetBSD kernel that runs under Xen 2.0. NetBSD now supports Xen 1.2. How is this a great advance? Why didn't they just pick up the Xen supplied pathces and go with the latest version of Xen?

    1. Re:A Great Leap Backwards by Nimrangul · · Score: 4, Informative

      Looks like you need to read harder: NetBSD/xen can run in both privileged and unprivileged virtual machines under Xen 1.2, and in unprivileged virtual machines under Xen 2.0. Perhaps that is the why of it?

      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams - I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later.
    2. Re:A Great Leap Backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One issue with Xen is that you've got to have a base management OS, which needs privilages to run tools to create, destroy, migrate, manage and monitor virtual machines. Linux is well supported for management, however this means that you have to run Linux as your base kernel, and run unprivilaged clients of your choosing.
      So this is a step forward as it means you can ditch that Linux vm and use a NetBSD one instead! :)

  4. Where to get Xen? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

    When I saw it in Linux Journal (or was it Linux Magazine? Not sure...), I tried to get Xen. I went to their website, but couldn't find a download link.

    Of course, now that I've seen it on Slashdot, it's a cinch to find. (Go figure...)

    --
    tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
  5. If only we had the WindowsXP port by mnmn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... I could switch between a build world of netbsd, and Counter Strike real fast!!!.

    That makes me wonder if I can share one nic between the OSes, or put in two NICs, assign one for each OS.

    Apart from Zen, would be cool to do a complete replace-boot, as in the OS state is frozen and written to harddisk (some laptop bioses do this), and the state of another OS is read... making switching between OSes, as fast as reading the same amount of data as your used up ram.

    Heck I'll just buy another machine and use a KVM switch.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    1. Re:If only we had the WindowsXP port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I believe there actually is a windows port, although it might be something earlier than XP. However, you need to jump through some hoops to get educational researcher status (or whatever it's called) from MS.

    2. Re:If only we had the WindowsXP port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Apart from Zen, would be cool to do a complete replace-boot, as in the OS state is frozen and written to harddisk (some laptop bioses do this), and the state of another OS is read... making switching between OSes, as fast as reading the same amount of data as your used up ram.

      VMWare Workstation (and I assume the rest) can do this. You can also take snapshots, which copy "RAM" and "disk" state to files on the host disk. It seems to only support a single snapshot, but is great for taking a snapshot of a clean system, doing something potentially nasty and then moving back to the snapshot to undo the damage.

      I suppose you could copy the files to keep multiple snapshots, however if they are based on diffs of the current disk image and snapshot image, then that could get tricky depending on which is being updated and which is left static (disk image and disk snapshot). Then again, you could always take a snapshot and keep copies of the various versions of the whole directory for that virtual machine. Assuming you had the space.

    3. Re:If only we had the WindowsXP port by LizardKing · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My understanding of Xen is that NetBSD is one of several operating systems that can run as the primary or "monitor" OS within Xen. Other operating systems (including Windows and Linux) can then be run as secondary OS'es. A research version of Windows could run as the primary / monitor OS, but it is not readily available.

      I should add that I've not actually tried Xen yet, but if my understanding of Xen is correct then I'm keen to try it. I'd ideally like to have NetBSD as the primary OS, and Linux as a secondary to test the portability of server side C++ code I'm writing.

    4. Re:If only we had the WindowsXP port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virtualization technology will be built into the next generation of Intel and AMD chips, starting in 2006. This means that software like VMware and Xen will be able to run the hosted operating systems at full speed, because the hardware will assist, rather than requiring fancy software tricks. This probably means you'll be able to run multiple copies of Windows on Xen by then. Probably.

  6. Official speaks out: "What Killed FreeBSD" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The End of FreeBSD

    [ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. I

    1. Re:Official speaks out: "What Killed FreeBSD" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Good News Everyone!
      Mike Smith now works for Apple, whose OS is based on BSD.
      Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
      and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
      He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple, where he is still works today.

  7. Death be not proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? Why did *BSD die? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems.

    *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personae?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead.

    As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  8. Requiem for the FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    // Please *don't* mod this up. It has already been done! Thx

    ... facts are facts. ;)

    FreeBSD:
    FreeBSD, Stealth-Growth Open Source Project (Jun 2004)
    "FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
    Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (Jun 2004)
    "[FreeBSD] has secured a strong foothold with the hosting community and continues to grow, gaining over a million hostnames and half a million active sites since July 2003."
    What's New in the FreeBSD Network Stack (Sep 2004)
    "FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."

    NetBSD:
    NetBSD, for When Portability and Stability Matter (Oct 2004)
    NetBSD sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (May 2004)
    NetBSD again sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (Sep 2004)

    OpenBSD:
    OpenBSD Widens Its Scope (Nov 2004)
    Review: OpenBSD 3.6 shows steady improvement (Nov 2004)
    OpenSSH (OpenBSD subproject) has become a de facto Internet standard.

    *BSD in general:
    Deep study: The world's safest computing environment (Nov 2004)
    "The world's safest and most secure 24/7 online computing environment - operating system plus applications - is proving to be the Open Source platform of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) and the Mac OS X based on Darwin."
    BSD Success Stories (O'Reilly, 2004) (pdf) ~ from Onlamp BSD DevCenter
    "The BSDs - FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Darwin, and others - have earned a reputation for stability, security, performance, and ease of administration."
    ..and last but not least, we have the cutest mascot as well - undisputedly. ;)

    --
    Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.

  9. FUD, you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Requiem for the Requiem for the FUD's FUD

  10. Erm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Maybe I'm missing something, but how is Xen different from VirtualPC or VMWare?

    1. Re:Erm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it requires some cooperation from the client OS

    2. Re:Erm by vulcan_pupil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Xen has been benchmarked to outperform VMWare in certain applications. In addition, Xen allows you to migrate a domain (instance of client OS) to another machine running Xen, live over the network.

      Although, another difference is that the OS must be ported to run on Xen. But Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD have been ported.

    3. Re:Erm by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 3, Informative

      VMWare is a hardware virtualization layer. It exports what appears to be (or damn close to it) a full machine to the OS.
      Xen can be thought of as a micro-micro (nano?) kernel. it exports a minimalist subset, just enough to virtualize the hardware, absolutely nothing more. as such it's not that hard to "port" your OS to run on this kernel, but there is work to be done,

    4. Re:Erm by smartfart · · Score: 1
      In addition, Xen allows you to migrate a domain (instance of client OS) to another machine running Xen, live over the network.

      VMware's ESX can do this. I saw a demo of this last year in Baton Rouge, LA.

      However, the really cool thing to me is the fact that the entire client environment is one file. Backing up or restoring a corrupted instance, or even cloning new servers, is trivial... you copy one file from A to B, and you're done.

      --
      Need a Linux consultant in New Orleans?
    5. Re:Erm by setagllib · · Score: 1

      Would Xen be called a kernel? It just provides hardware-like virtual devices (on a virtual bus itself) which require specific drivers and support from the running OS, but in exchange for this you get very good performance and it's pretty simple to implement. The drawback of course is that it /requires/ support from the running system, but NetBSD (and others..) already supports it. Not hard really, all of the abstraction for new busses and hardware is there, and of course the glory of cross-compilation (which is only needed for the kernel).

      --
      Sam ty sig.
    6. Re:Erm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd describe it as a nano-kernel - a software layer between the hardware and the client kernel's+OS's, and memory mapper and scheduler. It emulates where absolutly neccessary, and requires co-operation from the client kernels so they can all play ball.

  11. Grandparent is accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I'll try to be polite, and I'll assume (not that I really believe it..) that you're not trolling.

    The ancestor is pretty much a collection of facts. Where do you see the FUD exactly?

    It's true that FreeBSD can route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon while Linux, *on the same hardware*, can't do much more than 100kpps (200kpps? 300kpps? Still quite far from 1Mpps).

    It's true that, even if Linux is the current record holder, last year NetBSD broke the Internet2 Land Speed World Record twice.

    So, where's the "Requiem for the FUD's FUD" again?

    1. Re:Grandparent is accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      The ancestor is pretty much a collection of facts. Where do you see the FUD exactly?

      Where do you get the idea that a fact isn't FUD? Factual FUD is the best kind, because it can't be simply proven wrong.

      But I'll oblige:

      It's true that FreeBSD can route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon while Linux, *on the same hardware*, can't do much more than 100kpps (200kpps? 300kpps? Still quite far from 1Mpps).

      No. This is *wrong*. The FreeBSD guys never tried Linux on that hardware.

      It's true that, even if Linux is the current record holder, last year NetBSD broke the Internet2 Land Speed World Record twice.

      Yes, and it is true that by selectively choosing facts, you can paint your position in a better light than it is.

      So, where's the "Requiem for the FUD's FUD" again?

      Ask your mom.

    2. Re:Grandparent is accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Where do you get the idea that a fact isn't FUD?

      From the dictionary.
      "the term FUD [...] has become generalized to refer to any kind of disinformation used as a competitive weapon."
      Don't worry, it's never too late to get some actual education.

      >Factual FUD is the best kind, because it can't be simply proven wrong.

      "Factual FUD" is actually a very creative expression, if it weren't complete bullsh*t of course.
      Everybody with a brain knows very well there's a very sharp line separating facts from FUD - and, just as a bonus, one can also consider the number of people that used the expression "factual FUD" before (0, of course).

      >>It's true that FreeBSD can route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon
      >>while Linux, *on the same hardware*, can't do much more than 100kpps
      >>(200kpps? 300kpps? Still quite far from 1Mpps).
      >No. This is *wrong*.
      >The FreeBSD guys never tried Linux on that hardware.

      Nope. That was *right*. And yes, they did.

      >>It's true that, even if Linux is the current record holder,
      >>last year NetBSD broke the Internet2 Land Speed World Record twice.
      >Yes, and it is true that by selectively choosing facts,
      >you can paint your position in a better light than it is.

      Every time - *every time* - anybody says anything that's true, he selectively chooses facts somehow.
      Nonetheless, facts are facts.

      It takes much more than a dishonest slashdot moderator to turn a pathetic troll's crap into truth.

    3. Re:Grandparent is accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually someone has a much wider definition than you do.

      But whatever dude. Even if if FUD were strictly untruths, then the original poster is still spreading FUD, because:

      >>No. This is *wrong*.
      >>The FreeBSD guys never tried Linux on that hardware.
      >
      >Nope. That was *right*. And yes, they did.

      No, that was *wrong* for the millionth time. Are you retarded? Let me put it in the simplest terms I can - they never tested Linux.

      And your link is to a quote from a *FreeBSD* developer, you twit. All he made was a vague statement about Linux. I actually provided a link to what Linux developers had to say, and lo and behold they're routing over 1Mpps.

      But I guess that's not factually wrong either, because 1Mpps isn't much more than 100Kpps, for some definitions of much, right? Moron.

      Every time - *every time* - anybody says anything that's true, he selectively chooses facts somehow.

      And if you're a deviant FUDster, you can selectively choose facts to imply your position is better than it actually is.

      It takes much more than a dishonest slashdot moderator to turn a pathetic troll's crap into truth.

      Shut up and stop your whining you blathering fuckwit.

  12. KVMs (are evil) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Beware the KVM switch my son,
    The mouse emulator that bites,
    The cords that catch.
    Beware the loss of functionality.
    And shun buttons 3 4 and 5, natch.

    Now that I've set the Reverend Dodgson spinning in his grave, let me translate.

    Smarter KVMs have a big problem with fancy pointing devices. Many are designed to emulate a mouse to each attached CPU. For various reasons, they emulate a two button MSFT scroll mouse. So anything fancier is lost functionality.

    I did find (just after purchasing a different one, natch) a USB KVM that is more like the old hard switches, and doesn't do emulation, that should avoid this problem. Of course you can no longer switch CPUs from your keyboard, because it doesn't trap the keyboard output.

    1. Re:KVMs (are evil) by O · · Score: 1

      I keep my USB KVM on the floor, where I can switch it by pressing the button with my toe. Even more handy than switching with the keyboard!

      --

      1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
  13. Again: Grandparent is accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    It's funny how posts that are offtopic but correct get modded down, but posts that are offtopic AND wrong, like parent, don't. So, even if this slashdot moderator won't like to hear it, here's my question again.
    ---------

    I'll try to be polite, and I'll assume (not that I really believe it..) that you're not trolling.

    The ancestor is pretty much a collection of facts. Where do you see the FUD exactly?

    It's true that FreeBSD can route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon while Linux, *on the same hardware*, can't do much more than 100kpps (200kpps? 300kpps? Still quite far from 1Mpps).

    It's true that, even if Linux is the current record holder, last year NetBSD broke the Internet2 Land Speed World Record twice.

    So, where's the "Requiem for the FUD's FUD" again?

    1. Re:Again: Grandparent is accurate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      It's funny how posts that are offtopic but correct get modded down, but posts that are offtopic AND wrong, like parent, don't. So, even if this slashdot moderator won't like to hear it, here's my question again.

      The irony about this situation is that your post was wrong, and the parent was factually correct.

  14. Server side yet? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    While running it as the client is cool, are there patches to run the BSD's as the server side as well?

    Nothign against the use of linux in general, I just prefer FBSD for servers..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Server side yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothign against the use of linux in general, I just prefer FBSD for servers..

      hey, it's ok, we're in the red zone here. you don't need to pretend having nothing against linux.

  15. Xen is GPL. The others cost $$$. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to flame you, but that is a pretty big detail to miss.