Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 5.4 Review
gammelgul writes "Jem Matzan has written a review of the new FreeBSD 5.4 release on NewsForge. He writes about enhancements and the 64bit edition of the OS."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
The FreeBSD 5.4 Release is dedicated to the memory of Cameron Grant. Cameron was an active FreeBSD Developer and principal architect of the sound driver subsystem despite his physical handicap. His is a superb example of human spirit dominating over adversity. Cameron was an inspiration to those who met him; he will be fondly remembered and sorely missed.
l
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.4R/announce.htm
This is a rather shallow review and has been discussed over at OSNews. Just read the comments and you'll finde you don't need to read the actual review.
Someone mentioned a better review here. Enjoy!
Parent, Dragonfly is pretty unusable in its current state.
Most of the entries in ports are broken and the team even insist it is only for development use.
If it can sustain its initial growth it could be a BSD contender in some time. But not just yet!
Here is the formula for the review of incemental updates to Unix-alike OSes.
1) Describe the OS, being sure to mention its Unix origins. If the OS is not Linux-based, mention Linux.
2) Comment on the weird piece of hardware by brand name in your box that made it crash
3) List the new and improved features in the kernel and the daemons. (Note: security patches are feautures too)
4) Base everything else on how easy it was to install.
Why not fork?
the box couldn't run Apache 2.0 (worker MPM) compiled with libpthread for a single day without a panic!
at some point apache child starts boimbarding kernel with syscalls (500k syscalls/second), soon, if left unattended, the box panics.
had to get back to i386 for stability.
this is all on common hardware - Intel (EM64T) Xeons, Pro/1000 (em) network. and mind you, we still use SCHED_4BSD.
conclusion? 5.x is by NO means -STABLE on amd64 yet.
One employee lost a whole project due to the OS corrupting the filesystem. ... A few days later I was looking for another job
So you were fired because you hadn't been making backups, right?
That might be funny, but only if it were true: amd64 support isn't new in 5.4.
This is sad. I too remember fondly the 4.x days. FreeBSD hasn't made the transition to these "enterprise" features like the ULE scheduler, and getting out from under the "big lock" SMP.
The 4.x series is still alive and well, but the writing is on the wall. If the FreeBSD 5.x series doesn't start fixing some of those show-stoppers, it risks becoming irrelevant.
NetBSD and OpenBSD seem to have found their niche to a certain extent. I suspect that some network equipment vendor like HP will start putting OpenBSD in switches and routers. It seems like Cisco and IOS have the most to lose from OpenBSD gaining ground.
NetBSD seems to chug away at its own pace making solid incremental gains. They tend toward evolutionary rather than revolutionary changes. When they do make more revolutionary changes, they tend to include them in small numbers, and only after a long period of vetting in the current branch.
The laundry list of improvements to FreeBSD 5.x makes me wonder if that project didn't bite off more than it could chew. That the BSD faithful are starting to raise questions about the long road to stability with FreeBSD 5.x should be a warning to other Open Source projects to stick to regular release cycles with clearly defined and narrowly scoped improvements.
I suspect that FreeBSD development may have slowed somewhat due to the "fun factor" waning. Announcing Big Gigantic Changes can be good to generate enthusiasm in a user base, but it can be oppressive to the poor developers caught doing the work. Lots of small, discrete tasks can be fun for experienced developers, and a good way to snag novices.
Despite these problems, FreeBSD has very recently been a very vibrant project. They have traditionally had a level of coordination rarely seen in any other Open Source project. I think this can work, but FreeBSD 5.x may fall into the "lessons learned" category.
Or, as I mention in my blog, Darwin may see a surge in popularity following Apple's Intel announcement.
-Peter
. Penguins Surely Ca
Here's what you need to do:
options COMPAT_43 # Compatible with BSD 4.3 [KEEP THIS!]
options COMPAT_IA32 # Compatible with i386 binaries
options COMPAT_FREEBSD4 # Compatible with FreeBSD4
options COMPAT_LINUX32 # Compatible with i386 linux binaries
# Linux 32-bit ABI support
options LINPROCFS # Cannot be a module yet.
linprocfs
to
May this post be indexed by spiders, and archived for all to see as my Internet epitaph.
Everyone pleae stop reading reviews done by this guy. They're uninformative, biased, and it's blatently obvious he's unwilling to actually learn FreeBSD beyond installing it two or three times each new release and writing a review catering to the already pre-established opinions of Linux users.
scott