Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 6.0 Released
Reyad Attiyat writes FreeBSD 6.0 is ready for release! New features, and there are lots, can be reviewed at the official site. One of the biggest and most anticipated features (mentioned before on Slashdot) is wireless support, which has been greatly improved upon. This includes support for a lot more cards, WAP support, and integration into the dhcpd client. This release comes only mere days off NetBSD's release and an OpenBSD release. Version 6.0 was intended to be released way back in August but due to a number of factors it had to be delayed till now. Aside from this major release the FreeBSD project has also had some major changes, including most recently a new logo and also a brand new website."
Uhm, i don't think that WAP (like html for mobiles) has something to do with wifi,
most probably the article means this sentence:
"In addition to architectural changes, it includes completed 802.11g, WPA [...]"
WPA = security standard (stay back from WEP, guys!)
Why should it affect it at all? Just because Apple used FreeBSD code in OSX doesn't mean that they care what changes FreeBSD makes later on.
ug, you didn't even look. Snarl, FreeSBIE, PCBSD . . . . not 6.0 yet but there are several LiveCD projects out there, most have 5.2-5.4 vintage.
If you're upgrading a 5.x machine, the usual cvsup / build / install routine will give you a shiny new system. It's a much easier upgrade than from 4 to 5.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Anyone know if there's a torrent available?
Yes. The official release announcement (which for some reason wasn't linked in the story) has a link to the torrent files.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
The 6-STABLE branch starts with 6.0-RELEASE. The 5-STABLE branch started with 5.3-RELEASE.
From what I've seen, 6.0-RELEASE is more stable than 5.3 or 5.4.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
Well, it's not directly based on FreeBSD. OSX runs on top of Darwin (a different open source project), which was originally based on FreeBSD, but with a different kernel, and other changes. The people maintaining Darwin may choose to bring some of the new things over, but there's no direct connection (afaik) between an improvement being released for FreeBSD and seeing that improvement show up in OSX.
http://www.freebsd.org/java/ !
:o)
There are several ports, one of them being native. Google!
"Good news, everyone!"
Gcj is becoming more and more capable, however. I believe it's now possible to build OOo with gcj as your compiler for the java bits.
Find free books.
Good grief. BSD was once the great, now its like a garage hobby, albeit at an expensive elite univeristy.
Impossible.
1. A beta of OSX wasn't even released until 1999.
2. Although FreeBSD can trace its roots to the 4.4BSD from Berkley, the univeristy has nothing to do with active FreeBSD developemnt today (unless students & profs do work on their own).
I read
Alright, can't you google for your own info?
http://www.freesbie.org/ - Latest release is based on FreeBSD 5.3.
It's harder to find LiveCDs of Open/NetBSD, but you can create your own -
http://ezunix.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sect ions&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=88&page=1
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2005/07/14/openbsd _live.html
Gee golly, and all of that was on the first results page after searching for "Open/Net/FreeBSD LiveCD".. Whooda thunkit?
"We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
Unfortunately, we probably won't see a new release of DragonFly BSD until after the new year.
0 05-10/msg00030.html
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/kernel/2
For those who are unaware, DragonFly BSD is a heavily modified continuation of FreeBSD 4.x. It is done by Matt Dillon and many others who are/were prime FreeBSD developers in the past, but disagreed with the current FreeBSD development path.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Well, yes and no. Darwin has a mach-based "microkernel" but there's only one thread running under it - the FreeBSD kernel. So while the VM was supplied by Mach, the entire process model, network stack, filesystem code, and system calls all came from FreeBSD. The suite of userland tools that came with Darwin were all also from FreeBSD. They are, or at least were- I'm not sure how actively they merged things, but if the OP is right then they've kept up- very closely related.
-bugg
I sorta find that astounding (not that I have a 386 around myself). Oh well, the world has moved on.
The core of OS X, Darwin, is already available from Apple:
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/
"People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
fak3r.com
Or, at least, kernel code based on BSD - but developed independently; it's not just FreeBSD lifted up and modified to plug into Mach. In Tiger, for example, the MP locking, and VFS layer, are significantly different from FreeBSD.
As for userland, the system library (called libSystem on Darwin/OS X, unlike the libc on most other UN*Xes) is based on BSD, but not identical to FreeBSD's - for example, a lot of the get*by* routines just communicate with lookupd in Darwin/OS X.
You do realize that JDK 1.4 is not JDK 1.5, correct? There have been significant improvements.
I recently set up several servers running FreeBSD 5.4, the native JDK 1.5, and Tomcat 5.5.12. They work perfectly, each handling upwards of 9 to 10 million hits per day.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
6 just came out, [so] how can one possibly proclaim that the newer release is even more stable? Enough time hasnt passed yet.
Not at all. I (and many other people) have been running 6.0-BETAs since mid-July, and 6.0-RC1 since early October. This isn't just a random snapshot of HEAD; the code which became 6.0-RELEASE was frozen apart from patches approved by the release engineering team for months leading up to the release.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
The upgrade from 4.x to the 5.x branch was a significant change, everything from a major compiler version upgrade, compatibility libraries, and other core files changed.
/etc/make.conf variables.
I have migrated 6 machines from 5.4-RELEASE to 6.0-RC1 without any problems with recompiling ports (including: Postfix, Perl, SpamAssassin, Python, Apache 2.0, PHP 5, PostgreSQL). You may want to go with the stock GENERIC kernel configuration file that comes with 6.0-RELEASE and trim it back down as some of the options have changed.
Also, check out the changes in
The more I look around MacOS X, the more it seems to me it has as much relationship with a normal Unix as Plan9 has. So they are kind of related, but there also are lots of diferences.
The major one being the insane filesystem layout. A number of links to more orthodox locations helps but it still is pretty weird and finding something isn't easy. Expecially since the included search system only looks in $HOME, so enabling locate is a good first move...
For most users who will never see the system anyway, this is a non issue. For all the Unix people who grabbed a Mac because the Unix side was important (for me it was the best value I found for a Unix laptop), it's a bit of a letdown. Of course it's always fun to explore something new. I probably need to find some proper documentation though (OReilly has a site on Unix/MacOS).
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
I have been using this for quite some time now: [12:49pm exs@kirov /usr/ports/security/vpnd]> more ../vpnc/pkg-descr
VPNC - Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator[12:49pm exs@kirov /usr/ports/security/vpnd]> more ../vpnc/pkg-descr
VPNC - Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
A VPN client compatible with Cisco's EasyVPN equipment.
Supports IPSec (ESP) with Mode Configuration and Xauth. Supports only
shared-secret IPSec authentication, 3DES, MD5, and IP tunneling.
It runs entirely in userspace.
A VPN client compatible with Cisco's EasyVPN equipment.
Supports IPSec (ESP) with Mode Configuration and Xauth. Supports only
shared-secret IPSec authentication, 3DES, MD5, and IP tunneling.
It runs entirely in userspace.
FreeBSD is ridiculously easy to use as Unix-like operating systems go. The installer is friendly and efficient, and generally (in my opinion) much easier and much faster than the installer for any Linux distribution I've ever used. It's entirely possible to go from a bare system to a working FreeBSD install with a generic kernel in fifteen minutes or less.
In addition, the ports system makes installing software a snap, and the online FreeBSD Handbook and FreeBSD FAQ are very well-written and kept up to date if you have any questions.
Is that it's hard to use.
Rubbish. It's BSD, which means it's a Unix derivative. If you're familiar with one, you're familiar with them all. There are some differences, of course, but a skilled administrator or gifted hacker could bring themselves up to speed in an afternoon. If by "hard to use", you mean "there's no pointy-clicky administrative interface" then perhaps. However, most system administrators who have to deal with production systems all day long (FreeBSD's target audience) don't want any of that anyway.
I'm not sure what kind of environment FreeBSD is deisgned for (servers, desktops?)
FreeBSD is almost entirely geared toward servers. There are various movements and projects underway to help bring FreeBSD closer to the desktop, but it's nowhere near as strong as Linux in that arena. Linux is a good general-purpose Unix-like OS, but FreeBSD is typically regarded as a more solid server.
but the fact that I don't even know that says a lot
Forgive me for being blunt, but it only says that you didn't even bother looking into it. All of what I've stated here is fairly common knowledge to those who care enough to find out for themselves. We live in the age of the Internet. If you're curious about FreeBSD or any other operating system, go read up on it, don't just sit around to hear about it.
You probably don't need to, but it's a good idea. Here's how I do it:
Use "find" to find and delete all files in /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /lib, /usr/lib, /usr/libexec, and /usr/include that are older than the day I upgraded the machine. At this point, I have a 99% "pure" base system, but almost all ports on the machine are temporarily broken. Note that FreeBSD 7 has this feature built-in.
Is portupgrade installed?
- If so: cd /usr/ports/lang/ruby18; make deinstall; makereinstall; make clean. This rebuilds ruby against the new system libraries so that portupgrade will work again.
- If not: cd /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade; make install; make clean to install it.
Upgrade all the ports in one swoop: run portupgrade -fa and walk away for a few minutes/hours/days until it's finished.
There might be trickier ways to do it, but that way's pretty much guaranteed to work. Regardless, this is an excellent time to join one of the FreeBSD mailing lists. Everybody's going through this together, and you're very likely to get some friendly, useful advice.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
http://www.filerush.com/download.php?target=FreeBS D-6.0-RELEASE-amd64
Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes.
At least cvsup rebuild to RELENG_6 from 5.4 is much easier and painfree than moving from 4.11 to 5.x.
Performance on OpenBSD is important but it's not the primary focus. If someone put an OpenBSD mail server in place knowing performance was going to be critical, then they chose the wrong system. If they chose it with security as the most important criteria then the move to FreeBSD will mean that this area isn't as strong as it was with the old system.
We all want the best tool for the job but the poster seems to imply that in moving from OpenBSD to FreeBSD there's a win in the performance arena without any loss elsewhere. OpenBSD focusses on security. On top of the system-wide security features, the in-tree OpenBSD sendmail instance has lots of OBSD specific patches (http://www.openbsd.org/security.html). For example, when OpenBSD chose their MP implementation, they deliberately chose biglock because of it's (relative) simplicity. This is important because the OpenBSD codebase is actively audited. The fine grained locking in the FreeBSD MP implementation is obviously going to blow OpenBSD away but at the cost of simplicity (bugs and security issues are harder to find in complex code).
You are also correct that the ports tree is unrelated to the release version. The base system in 6.x comes with a new utility, "portsnap", that you can use instead of cvsup to update your ports tree, but it's perfectly OK to ignore that for now and use cvsup as usual.
I'm puzzled as to how portupgrade is supposed to know I want everything fresh and shiny with the 6.0 kernel.
Basically, the portupgrade (and the underlying ports sytem itself) will build everything to run on your current system. Running 5.x? It builds 5.x binaries. Running 6.x? It builds 6.x binaries. So, you'll want to run upgrade the base system and be booted into it before you start upgrading your ports.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?