NetBSD v3.0 Released

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Friday December 23, 2005 @10:32AM from the happy-christmas dept.

FullMetalAlchemist writes "After six release candidates, the NetBSD project has finally released a gold version of a major mile stone; v3.0. I'm looking forward to this release a good deal. If I wanted to, I could build our entire office infrastructure on it thanks to Xen. Major Changes can be found on the NetBSD website, and there are several ways to get the release. Get downloading!"

29 of 132 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-23 10:37 · Score: 4, Interesting

Hrrmph. As a loyal VAX owner, I need to note that it seems that although NetBSD claims to support some gawd-awful high number of architectures...many are left behind to basically fend for themselves.
Just because NetBSD v3 is out, doesn't mean it runs on anything except a few of the common Intel/PPC chips.

It would be nice to be able to complete a full VAX build without some bizarre GCC error forcing me to go look for a workaround.

VAX 4-ever!
1. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by SillyNickName4me · 2005-12-23 10:44 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Heh, the last version that actually builds and works correctly on my VAX is 1.4
2. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by dgatwood · 2005-12-23 10:58 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Yes, but 3.0 will boot on my electric toothbrush. That's all that matters.
  :-D
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
3. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by possible · 2005-12-23 11:20 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Why does VAX need to be supported?
  Because porting to non x86 architectures forces you to fix bugs. If the code is faulty, it may work for 99% of the x86 users, but crash for the remaining 1% of x86 users. But since none of the developers can reproduce the problem, it's a case of "I dunno, works on my machine, I'm not going to spend time looking for it". Whereas on other architectures, incorrect code may fail 100% of the time due to aligment, different exception handling, etc.
  
  NetBSD doesn't just suck on VAX. It sucks on ppc (aka, Macs) too. And up til recently it sucked badly on amd64. Most of NetBSD's "supported architectures" haven't worked for years, because they often cross-build instead of doing native builds.
4. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by Homology · 2005-12-23 11:43 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  In other words, it runs on 90% of their users' computers, and the developer time on those architectures was well-spent. Sorry, but pandering to hobbyist users of obscure hardware (yes, today it is) is a waste. In a world of finite resources, tasks must be prioritized.
  How kind of you tell the developers what to develop and prioritize on something they do for free.
  By releasing first for x86, the NetBSD devs demonstrate their sanity by working on the software that would benefit the most users. Today, VAX doesn't matter, so why should they support it at all?
  I got news for you: Developers work on certain architectures because they want to.
5. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by darkjedi521 · 2005-12-23 11:45 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  They claim the VAX is a supported platform. Therefore, NetBSD/vax should work for the most part (barring any inherent limitations in the VAX architecture.
6. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by Nimrangul · 2005-12-23 11:49 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It's funny, on OpenBSD stories people ask for cross compiling and on NetBSD stories people talk smack about it. Not that you're wrong, cause you're not. I just find that funny that the OpenBSD people are always saying why cross compiling isn't an answer when NetBSD fans talk about it on OpenBSD stories and here it is spilling in the opposite direction.
  
  --
  I'm sick of following my dreams - I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later.
7. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by darkjedi521 · 2005-12-23 12:01 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  There is a happy medium between the two. A cross build can save time, but the code should be tested on the real hardware. Especially if one is claiming to support some of the more interesting CPUs out there. I've heard stories of DEC redoing parts of VMS/Ultrix/Tru64 to work around CPU bugs. Just cause something works on paper or builds fine on i386 doesn't mean the binary will run on VAX, Alpha, PA-RISC, PDP-11, MIPS, etc, etc, etc.
8. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by zaft · 2005-12-23 12:02 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I agree that it's frustrating to not be able to natively compile the VAX port, that's not really the same thing as saying (as in the subject line) that the VAX port "stopped working". It works just fine.
9. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by SillyNickName4me · 2005-12-23 12:46 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Hmm... just wondering, if I post what version each of the obscure pieces of hardware I have lying around manages to run, will all of those posts get a +5 interesting moderation?
  
  Anyway, its a vaxstation 3100 m20 with 16mb ram and monochrome graphics with a local (scsi) disk for swap and temp storage, it is netbooted. When trying to run 1.5 or 1.6 and build a world, the machine just hangs after some 2 days of work. 1.4 finishes building a world but it takes forever to do so (actually, something like 7 or 8 days). I never tried 2.x and current however, maybe I should when I can be bothered to connect it again and setup mopd on some machine here.
10. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by c9a9t · 2005-12-23 18:10 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I just downloaded macppccd-3.0.iso hoping it would be an improvement over 2.1 but the 3.0 cd doesn't even boot on my b&w G3.
  
  Perhaps they should consider timely complete release notes for each architecture? I don't think 2.1 macppc release notes and errata have yet appeared...
  
  Meanwhile, much as I love BSD (preferably FreeBSD) on i386 I haven't found it terribly useful on powerpc. If it weren't for Debian my macs would have to run mac os.
11. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by LizardKing · 2005-12-23 23:54 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Bullshit, the VAX port works fine. What doesn't work is building it natively using the default settings. This is because of a problem building groff - it triggers some undiagnosed compiler bug. You can work around this by building groff without optimisation, or cross compiling on another architecture (which if you do it on a modern PC is much faster than building on any VAX). The releases and snapshots of NetBSD are cross compiled, which is why the longstanding groff compilation bug still exists.
12. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by LizardKing · 2005-12-24 00:07 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  NetBSD claims to be extremely portable - portability is the main stated goal.
  
  Well, one of the goals, third down on the official list.
  
  f it only runs well on x86, NetBSD becomes basically irrelevant - FreeBSD is far better on x86, and OpenBSD (whose goal is security and implenetation and correctness) is more portable (OpenBSD runs fine on VAX). Essentially, if NetBSD doesn't actually talk the talk they have about portability, all they are is an inadequate OpenBSD that is less secure and less portable - and it has no advantages.
  
  Since FreeBSD 5 and NetBSD 2, performance on x86 has been very close and often better on NetBSD. Check out the benchmarks and studies posted on the advocacy mailing lists. FreeBSD is suffering portability issues thanks to the original focus on x86 alone. OpenBSD only works on a reasonable number of platforms because it absorbs a lot of work from NetBSD, the VAX port is a good example, where NetBSD supports more models of the VAX. NetBSD is arguably as secure as OpenBSD, but has far more features and performs much, much better.
  
  One of the more proactive NetBSD/VAX users complained recently about the native build problems and a personal fear of "featureitis". It looks like some Slashdot cretin has picked up on that and decided to try and piss on the NetBSD 3.0 announcement with what is largely a non-issue.
13. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by LizardKing · 2005-12-24 00:13 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  I installed NetBSD 2.1 on my VaxStation 3100 m30, and it works fine. My DEC monitor broke, so I don't know if the monochrome framebuffer driver still works, but there has been considerable work on the VAX framebuffers recently so I would expect so. I've never needed to bootstrap an install with mopd, because the bootable CD's work fine with an old Sun CD-ROM drive - you can pick them up dirt cheap on Ebay.
  
  I can't comment on the uptime with the 3100, as it only gets switched on for a few hours at a time. However, my 4000VLC has been running continously for several months acting as a minimalistic intranet server.
14. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by Alioth · 2005-12-24 00:58 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Well, I'd disagree that NetBSD performs better on a VAX - it's currently uninstallable and un-runnable on most VAXen due to the problems already stated in this thread (starting with inadequate netbooting documentation, and a MOP booting procedure that doesn't even work). Essentially they say they support the platform, but haven't really supported it since 1.4.
  
  --
  Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
15. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by LizardKing · 2005-12-24 01:53 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Care to try out version 3.0? The netbooting issue was solved, perhaps as long ago as versions 2.0.1. Version 1.6 shipped with a broken boot.mop, but worked find if you booted the install from a CD or used the boot.mop from 1.5. As for NetBSD/VAX being "unrunnable" once installed, that's just bullshit, or else I must be imagining the VS4000 VLC and VS3100 m30 humming away next to me.
  
  NetBSD supports more models of VAX than OpenBSD - try comparing the lists on http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/vax/ and http://www.openbsd.org/vax.html. NetBSD also supports more devices, such as framebuffers and SCSI controllers.
16. Re:The VAX port stopped working a long time ago by Alioth · 2005-12-24 05:04 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It was actually only recently I tried NetBSD - approximately 4 weeks ago. What I found - the documentation for MOP booting a VAX with NetBSD is 404 - Not found. Googling brings up at least three or four different documents, none of which matched the files that were actually on ftp.netbsd.org. I spent quite a bit of time looking for documentation that actually matched what seemed to exist on the ftp site.
  
  I eventually gave up and found that not only did OpenBSD have the documentation for MOP booting right where it should be (in the same document as all the other installation notes, rather than on a different website altogether), OpenBSD _does_ support SCSI controllers.
  
  I notice the website is now fixed and documentation now exists, so I may give it another go, however, I'm less inclined to do so since OpenBSD is running on the machine very satisfactorily.
  
  --
  Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Only the good die young... by NotFamous · 2005-12-23 10:38 · Score: 3, Funny

Two, we hardly knew thee.

--
Some settling may occur during posting.
NetBSD v3.0 Released.... by rune2 · 2005-12-23 11:00 · Score: 5, Funny

Netcraft surrenders...
Obligatory by m50d · 2005-12-23 11:18 · Score: 3, Funny

I'm compiling it on my toaster right now!

--
I am trolling
Hmmm, the other BSD by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-23 11:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

I've run OpenBSD and FreeBSD but what compelling reason would there be for me to run this variant? Riddle me this, is it worth my time installing this on a test box?
1. Re:Hmmm, the other BSD by Nimrangul · 2005-12-23 12:03 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It's supposed to be comparable to the FreeBSD 5 series for speeds, I've seen no benchmarks against the newer 6 series, but can assume they're still within a pretty reasonable range of eachother, not too much else unless you want to run on a platform other than i386.
  
  As far as OpenBSD comparisons go; performs better overall, less secure, pf is not integrated into the system as tighly, and it's support of it's various platforms aren't always as good as those of OpenBSD's, since they do their support through cross compiling instead of native work.
  
  You may prefer NetBSD's speed over OpenBSD or NetBSD's support for alternative platforms, it's all in what you're trying to do.
  
  --
  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:Hmmm, the other BSD by LizardKing · 2005-12-24 00:18 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  It's worth emphasising that pkgsrc is not just for NetBSD. It works on OpenBSD, DragonflyBSD, Solaris, Irix, Darwin and others. It even works on various flavours of Linux, including Debian.
3. Re:Hmmm, the other BSD by ci4 · 2005-12-24 01:40 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I was about to say the same. It started with my laptop - OpenBSD not supporting the modem part of a Xircom combo cardbus adapter, FreeBSD completely failing even to begin installation - and that's the whole sequence of them between 4.4 and 5.3 (haven't tried since). NetBSD (1.6 at the time) ran first time and the Xircom got me connected to the ISP first time. Since then I have it running permanently on some five machines in the office doing various In(ter|tra)net serving and desktop duties; only one box is running FreeBSD (6.0 currently) because NetBSD's INSTALL kernel (at least) did not find the RAID part of a HighPoint card; FreeBSD did - I wanted it mirrored and setting up RaidFrame on a boot disk was a bit over what I wanted to do quickly... Anyway, I carried on adding additional software on that box via source ports; this has been mostly succesful, but nowhere as smooth as is normally with pkgsrc. I do run two or three OpenBSD firewalls (including several at customer sites), but generally performance issues have stopped me from other deployment.
  
  NetBSD performance has been excelent recently; BTW I run -current on all but one system (that one follows the latest release, therefore will get 3.0 this Wednesday).
  
  I also maintain some five Solaris(mostly 10/11) systems - the latest Express with the ZFS id awesome!
  
  Haven't touched the L*x thing for some three years now - don't start me on it...
Re:Time to go find my Dreamcast... by Mancat · 2005-12-23 13:07 · Score: 2, Funny

Cry when you go to sleep at night.

--
hello dear sirs my name is jamesh i are india (bihar) can u guide me install red had linux 9?
Re:I'm underwhelmed. by xwin · 2005-12-23 13:54 · Score: 2, Interesting

Exactly. It is just about the only thing that runs on my Qube. The OS is actually pretty good, easy to use and secure. Very good server OS to run on mips hardware.
Re:Time to go find my Dreamcast... by SpinJaunt · 2005-12-23 14:09 · Score: 2, Informative

Well if you've got a BBA --I dont sadly-- and you've cross compiled the apps you want to use on another *faster* machine, then pretty much anything.

Also a VGA cable would be good too, trying to read NetBSD's console on TV at 47Hz really Hz the eyes.

--
/. is good for you.
does it fulfill portability promises? by drwho · 2005-12-23 15:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

"Of course it runs NetBSD" - the old saw, it seems. But I think that NetBSD is falling down in this regard. Many ports don't work properly, or haven't been updated in ages. Mailing lists lie dormant, waiting for attention, such as SBMips (BroadCom Sybyte MIPS) - in spite of Wasabi Systems (which is basically the commercial arm of NetBSD) having a press release about Broadcom support back in 2002, not much is being done in extending NetBSD to the CPUs used in consumer-grade equipment like Linksys routers. It's not even available for a fee: Wasabi doesn't have it in their development products and doesn't plan to. Linux is clearly quite far out in front in this regard.

And it's not only MIPS: VAX ports are stale as well, from what I see here. This is sad. I like the idea of portability, and I like NetBSD - but I don't find that it lives up to its repuation in portability. Yes, someday I'll shut up and work on ports to the platforms I care, but in the meantime I am using Linux on the Broadcom CPUs and finding I enjoy it..almost too much to bother with NetBSD.
Re:Time to go find my Dreamcast... by Mr+Smidge · 2005-12-23 23:36 · Score: 2, Funny

Run a Sega Saturn emulator :-).