Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD 6.1 Released

nbritton writes "FreeBSD 6.1 has been released! This release is the next step in the development of the 6.X branch, delivering several performance improvements, many bugfixes, and a few new features. Of note are the major improvements to the filesystem and SATA code, possibly making FreeBSD the number one choice for SATA RAID implementations. For a complete list of new features and known problems, please see the release notes, errata list, Bittorrent Downloads, Mirrors, Hardware Notes, and Installation Guide."

227 comments

  1. I'll believe it when Netcraft confirms it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Until then, I'll stick to OS X.

  2. BSD and clusters by rwhamann · · Score: 0, Troll

    What are the cluster options for BSD? Do they have quickstart options like OSCAR?

    --
    seg fault
    1. Re:BSD and clusters by agent+dero · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not sure how this got modded up, just a quick Google search reveals that FreeBSd clustering is very doable.

      Check out LAM/MPI or see pages by people who've done it

      --
      Error 407 - No creative sig found
    2. Re:BSD and clusters by Ingolfke · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is it possible to imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?

    3. Re:BSD and clusters by agent+dero · · Score: 1

      A beowulf cluster of condescending comments used to assert one's superiority to another?

      On slashdot? Naaaahhhhh ;)

      --
      Error 407 - No creative sig found
    4. Re:BSD and clusters by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      A beowulf cluster of condescending comments used to assert one's superiority to another?

      Just think what we could do if we could harness that power... virtually unlimited computational power!

    5. Re:BSD and clusters by kv9 · · Score: 1
      What are the cluster options for BSD?

      http://www.freebsd.org/ports/parallel.html

    6. Re:BSD and clusters by synthespian · · Score: 2, Informative

      Building a High-performance Computing Cluster Using FreeBSD
      Brooks Davis, Michael AuYeung, Gary Green, Craig Lee
      The Aerospace Corporation
      El Segundo, CA
      {brooks,lee,mauyeung} at aero.org, Gary.B.Green at notes.aero.org
      © 2003 The Aerospace Corporation
      Presented at BSDCon 2003, September 8-12 2003.

      http://people.freebsd.org/~brooks/papers/bsdcon200 3/

      Grid Computing with FreeBSD
      Brooks Davis
      The Aerospace Corporation
      El Segundo, CA
      {brooks,lee} at aero.org
      © 2004 The Aerospace Corporation
      Presented at the UseBSD SIG of the 2004 USENIX Annual Technical Conference, June 27 - July 2, 2004, Boston, MA.

      http://people.freebsd.org/~brooks/papers/usebsd200 4/

      --
      Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
  3. Errata list? by Cambrant · · Score: 1

    What's the point of an empty list of last minute changes? Anyway, could someone who knows please tell me if FreeBSD is still as stable as it was under the 4.x cycle? I've been thinking about running this on a server or two.

    1. Re:Errata list? by debilo · · Score: 3, Funny
      From the mailing list:
      NOTE: It was discovered at the last minute that the errata notes that were packaged with the release are out of date. For a complete list of known problems, please see the online errata list, available at: ...
      The errata page is being updated, please be patient.
    2. Re:Errata list? by archen · · Score: 4, Informative

      6.0 has been very stable for me, and I now run it in production. To tell you the truth I never had much luck with 4x and it was usually a bitch for me to get running for some reason. I really liked the way 5.x did a lot of things but of course there were the stability issues.

      6x is a good branch (so far so good anyway) and MUCH better than 5. Performance is okay, not as good as Linux in some scenarios but not bad either. On my Sokris 4801 (233Mhz pentium class) it seems rather slow, but Freebsd 4x on my 133Mhz Pentium seems to be about the same - so I'd say not a big difference. If you need the most out of older hardware that is already running 4x I'd probably stick with it.

      Hopefully I'll be able to figure this new bridging scheme out and be able to better evaluate performance.

    3. Re:Errata list? by portwojc · · Score: 1

      The point is they make one with every release and keep it updated - along with dates of when they changed things. Check out 5.* errata list.

    4. Re:Errata list? by MPHellwig · · Score: 1

      If you need 4.x performance you might take a look at dragonflybsd.

    5. Re:Errata list? by archen · · Score: 1

      I was going to suggest that... but until dragonfly gets their package distribution replacement for ports in line I wouldn't recommend it. Pkgsrc just doesn't cut it for me.

    6. Re:Errata list? by MPHellwig · · Score: 1

      Well it is possible to sometimes learn something new :-) but indeed I prefer FreeBSD style ports

    7. Re:Errata list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What evidence do you have that Dragonfly performs better than FreeBSD 4? I ask because it took many years (until FreeBSD 6.0) before FreeBSD performed better than the 4.x branch, but Dragonfly has only a small fraction of the number of developers working on repeating the analogous necessary changes.

    8. Re:Errata list? by MPHellwig · · Score: 1

      I didn't implicided that DF has better performance then FBSD4 but indeed on my boxes it actualy does, YMMV.

    9. Re:Errata list? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      Matt has said pkgsrc is it for a long while. And really pkgsrc isn't all that bad.

    10. Re:Errata list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, but without numbers I find it hard to believe since there is often a "placebo effect" in the minds of supporters, i.e. "wow, after the commits that add all this synchronization overhead (whatever that means) I really CAN feel the system getting faster!"

    11. Re:Errata list? by MPHellwig · · Score: 1

      Buildworld without -j; in 4 69 minuten, in df 1.4 62 minutes.

  4. Any reason to switch? by HotBBQ · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I use Gentoo at home, but I like to play around with other distros. Any notable reasons to try FreeBSD?

    1. Re:Any reason to switch? by Colonel+Package · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I tried in vain to setup FreeBSD 6.0 as a SATA software raid machine. I was using a more recent motherboard with graphics, network and SATA integrated on-board. I think they are all VIA chipsets. I eventually hit the eject on FreeBSD as I couldn't even get X up and running. I then tried Debian. All-in-all it was another less than positive experience. Both the 2.4 and 2.6 kernel versions of Sarge had problems with my hardware. I decided to explore Gentoo. Its working great with SATA and EVMS. It did require some source level tweaks but part of the coolness I found with Gentoo is the very active user/support community and the tons of HowTos and guides. Unless they've made a quantum leap in improvements, FreeBSD would NOT be my choice for a SATA raid server.

    2. Re:Any reason to switch? by oscartheduck · · Score: 1

      WHat? Maybe this happens in your browser, but in mine freebsd.org loads up freebsd.org and nothing but.

      To answer the OP, if you're running gentoo then the package administration features of FreeBSD don't really do anything for you, though you'll be pleased to know that once you've learned one or two different commands then you'll be running quick sharp. And the linux compatability layer means you don't have to throw out a lot of the applications you're used to just working.
       
      A lot of FreeBSD's features come about in the network environment. It tends to serve large amounts of data faster than linux. FreeBSD also has, in my opinion, a nicer design than linux on the kernel security level.
       
      When I used FreeBSD for a while, essentially I noticed that most of the time it was familiar, with just a few commands that I needed to learn again. It felt kind of weird because things are done differently to debian, which was what I was using beforehand, but you can surmount the differences pretty rapidly. I moved back over to the penguin side of things because it was what I had learned first and because it seemed that development was going on quicker, but if I need to run a server under heavy load I'll probably throw FreeBSD on there to handle it.

      --
      How to use coral cache: http://slashdot.org.nyud.net:8090/~oscartheduck
    3. Re:Any reason to switch? by HotBBQ · · Score: 1

      Is it any easier than using, say, Solaris 9? If not, I think I'll stick with Linux. One caveat, though, my server is sitting in a closet with a wireless nic. From what I've experienced, Linux + wireless + WPA = ugh. I suspect it won't be any easier on FreeBSD.

    4. Re:Any reason to switch? by kyofunikushimi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I tried out FreeBSD last year and loved it. Until I couldn't manage to get an oracle client installed on it, which pretty much killed its usability within my company. Supposedly I could have done it with some hard work and diligence and the Linux Compatibility port, but I just wasn't up for the challenge.

      That's the only problem I ran into though.

      --
      oo
    5. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      FreeBSD uses the WPA supplicant thing (which is just a config file). I would say it's hard, but it is a big pain in the ass. About the same as Linux so I've heard.

    6. Re:Any reason to switch? by numbsafari · · Score: 1

      If you want to consider a BSD and need it to work with Wireless, I highly recommend openbsd (see http://openbsd.org./ They have quite excellent support for wireless NICs.

      Ease of use?? Well, if you want a CLI then you should seriously consider BSD. However, if you absolutely must boot from KDE the first time the OS is installed, then stick to Ubuntu. OpenBSD in particular has EXCELLENT man pages. I think it's probably the most complete, well written and up-to-date OSS project documentation I've found anywhere. Bar none.

    7. Re:Any reason to switch? by JoloK · · Score: 0

      http://www.learnthenet.com/english/html/12browser. htm

      A great browser tutorial for you to read ;)
      Oh, BTW, what a lame answer to the OP's question.

      --
      JoloK
    8. Re:Any reason to switch? by JianTian13 · · Score: 2, Informative

      So, presumably part of the reason you like Gentoo is for Portage, right? USE flags, compiling from source, etc?

      But if my experience with Gentoo and Portage is any guide, then you've probably also been bitten by Portage -- Masked ebuilds, ~arch, whatever: the build you want is masked, and unmasking and building creates an amazing cascade of broken packages, right?

      Maybe I'm not being fair; I tried Gentoo for the last time maybe two years ago. I *loved* the flexibility and built-from-scratchness. But at some point I got hooked into FreeBSD's ports, and AFAICT, there's no comparison, at least in terms of stability/QA. FreeBSD ports just work.

      Anyway, just my $0.02.

    9. Re:Any reason to switch? by Zemplar · · Score: 0, Redundant

      "Any notable reasons to try FreeBSD?"

      Sure, it's better than GNU/Linux, IMHO. Additionally, FreeBSD is a complete OS, not just a kernel.

      If your preference is for structure and good engineering, you'll like FreeBSD. However, if you use hot glue and duct tape to fix everything, stick with Linux. This isn't a bash on GNU/Linux, since both work, but merely a quick idea of their "personality".

    10. Re:Any reason to switch? by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any notable reasons to try FreeBSD?

      Because it's there, Dude. Because it's there. Honestly, what kind of a geek are you?

      I do, however, feel duty bound to point out that the man famous for saying that ended up dead shortly thereafter.

      If you do manage to survive getting it installed though, what will you have conquered?

      None but yourself, Dude. None but yourself.

      KFG

    11. Re:Any reason to switch? by inca34 · · Score: 1

      I think installing Gentoo a few times is a great way to get to know your computer. Once you think you have it all down, try the FreeBSD installer. It will rock your world. And by rock your world, I mean new levels of RTFM pain. Kind of like going from Sayan to Super Sayan for the first time. Pain and suffering.

      Don't take my word for it. Try it yourself. Then set up benchmarks for the things you care about on your computer, such as startup times, average load times, routing/ping times, etc. and compare between the two. I found, years ago, that fbsd better suited my firewalling/natd needs over a fully optimized Gentoo distro built from scratch (with about a month's worth of kernel tweaking). I base this purely on network performance. This may no longer be the case so I recommend doing your own tests and be your own authority. Portage is a derivative of ports, so you will be fairly comfortable with that system, I think. It's just a little old and hard to use at times compared to its younger and cleaner python offspring.

      In any case, install, learn, enjoy.

    12. Re:Any reason to switch? by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 0

      I suffered through FreeBSD 5.3 and 5.4 on an AMD64 box. Trying to build Java (because of Sun's restrictions) and OpenOffice, trying to get KDE or Gnome stable, and managing the ports tree were horrible experiences comparable to installing OS/2 2.1.

      Then 5.4 crashed fatally because of a file-system problem. I had a choice: try FreeBSD 6.0 or try Ubuntu.

      I chose Ubuntu and it has been bliss. I wish I had never even bothered with FreeBSD.

      Your mileage may vary, but Ubuntu got me there on a quarter-tank... whereas FreeBSD consistently just tanked.

      --
      Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    13. Re:Any reason to switch? by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1

      Umm, Which compiler does freebsd use again ? Will all GNU bashing BSD people please send me an output of 'gcc -v' on their systems.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    14. Re:Any reason to switch? by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      SATA raid on VIA chipsets has worked out of the box for ages, am using it here right now, works perfectly fine. I suppose you can't eexactly say what went wrong in your case?

    15. Re:Any reason to switch? by SirCyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So your familiarty with Gentoo allowed you to make "source level" changes. But your unfamiliarty with FreeBSD prevented you from getting X running. So one is better than the other how??

      FreeBSD does pretty well on new hardward. Sure it might not support the newest bleeding-edge hardware for a few months. But lets face it, not many of us have that kind of hardware AND are looking for a secure, higly stable platform like FreeBSD (or any other BSD for that matter).

      The FreeBSD support community is top notch (mailing lists, handbook, man pages, forums). I've been using FreeBSD at home and in a production environment for a few years now. I know it, I like it, so I may be a little biased. But don't bash on an OS simply because you are unfamiliar with it.

    16. Re:Any reason to switch? by Kartoffel · · Score: 1

      You're right. *BSD use GNU gcc.

      Bashing is silly.

    17. Re:Any reason to switch? by Zemplar · · Score: 2, Informative

      "GNU bashing"? Hardly, you've misunderstood. I'll be the first to say that GNU is the glue that most FOSS uses to actually get any work done. My point was only that the central control and design of FreeBSD and GNU together versus the tacking on of GNU plus a Linux kernel as often apparent on some distro-of-the-week.

    18. Re:Any reason to switch? by freshman_a · · Score: 1

      I eventually hit the eject on FreeBSD as I couldn't even get X up and running.

      Well...
      # Xorg -configure
      # cp xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf
      Edit xorg.conf as needed (if needed) and tada! You're running X. I've installed FreeBSD on all kinds of hardware and have never had a problem getting X running. As far as user/support community, mailing lists and bsdforums.org have provided me with answers to all the *BSD questions I've had.
    19. Re:Any reason to switch? by CRiMSON · · Score: 1

      So your can compile linux from scratch (snicker, typing make, doesn't make the shit) but you couldn't figure out how to setup X or raid. I see, so FreeBSD has to suck, you couldn't figure it out. Good one.

      --
      oogly boogly!
    20. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't we all end up dead anyway? "Because it's there" should be enough reason for any mortal. He might as well said "It's there, I'm here, and I want to be there because one day I won't be here anymore... and I won't be able to get there." But that was probably all implied when he said it. Maybe other people miss that implied message.

    21. Re:Any reason to switch? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      If you plan to use a server machine at home, don't even think a second and try FreeBSD.

      If you are purely a desktop user, Linux will always win.

    22. Re:Any reason to switch? by fak3r · · Score: 1
      I have software RAID 1 (gmirror) setup and working perfectly with two 80Gig SATA drives. How did you set it up? I used Dru's article on OnLamp [http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2005/11/10/FreeBS D_Basics.html], and now I have a fstab that looks like this:
      • Device Mountpoint
        /dev/mirror/gm0s1b none
        /dev/mirror/gm0s1a /
        /dev/mirror/gm0s1e /tmp
        /dev/mirror/gm0s1f /usr
        /dev/mirror/gm0s1d /var
    23. Re:Any reason to switch? by misleb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've been a Linux user for the last 10 years or so... Debian for the latter half. I recently took a new job where they used FreeBSD servers rather than Linux. Instead of using my position to push a migration to Linux, I decided to just learn to use FreeBSD.

      I can't say that I am particularly impressed with FreeBSD. There's nothing WRONG with it, per se, but there is also nothing amazing either. The only redeeming value I can think of off hand is having bleeding edge software available all the time through ports. Where with Debian I would get "stuck" with package versions dated from whenever the last stable release was and mixing unstable packages was not a good idea. Coming from Gentoo, I know you have something like ports and you are used to compiling every darn package you want to run (I hate it). You should probably give FreeBSD a try. You might like it.

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    24. Re:Any reason to switch? by Skuto · · Score: 1

      AMD64 support is still less than stellar from what I know. I'd simply run a desktop system in 32-bit mode for now, be it Linux or FreeBSD, or you'll get bitten by the "missing/broken essential program that I really wanted" problem sooner or later.

      The FreeBSD Java problems has more or less disappeared, given that there's now even an official version.

    25. Re:Any reason to switch? by Rei · · Score: 1

      As someone who recently set up a 4-disk software SATA raid-5 (nforce chipset, new motherboard) on Fedora 5 a couple months ago, I've been more than happy. It's already saved me once. With a simple cron script, it emails me whenever I lose a disk. The only issue I had was that when the disk disappeared and a new one went into its place, the drive letters rearranged and I had to reassemble the array. Not a big deal, but it required an RTFM.

      Now, that said, I wouldn't be using a SATA raid for performance, only redundancy. If you want general desktop performance, you want high seek times rather than high throughput, which means high RPM drives, which still typically means SCSI. Having your root partition as a single 15,000 RPM SCSI will get you a lot better performance (an 18 gig 15k rpm scsi will only cost you $40, and you'll get 3-4ms access times. A 36 gig will run you a little over $80.). SATA raid is great for redundant bulk storage, though.

    26. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, startup scripts in BSD is better laid out than the SYS-5-ish Linux starup scripts. Also one nice sysctl file to control the kernel. Often has better default network speed than Linux. Programs from "Ports" are kept in /usr/local with a /usr/local/etc. At first it seems insane to have more than one version of /etc, but once you upgrade a ports program you will start to see the wisdom in it.

    27. Re:Any reason to switch? by gbobeck · · Score: 1
      I think installing Gentoo a few times is a great way to get to know your computer.


      I couldn't agree more. I have installed gentoo on quite a few machines in my lab over the past few years, and I can't think of a better way to learn about hardware. I never knew the details of fdisk and file systems before installing gentoo either. I also found it interesting to learn a bit about GCC (not enough to become a damn ricer, though).

      Learning about this was good as it made me a better admin and research assistant.

      Once you think you have it all down, try the FreeBSD installer. It will rock your world. And by rock your world, I mean new levels of RTFM pain. Kind of like going from Sayan to Super Sayan for the first time. Pain and suffering.


      I disagree. I played with FreeBSD 5.1 way before I attempted my first Gentoo install. The FreeBSD installer worked nicely on my system and I didn't have to rtfm all that much. Overall, I find FreeBSD installs to be easier and quicker than Gentoo installs (read: non-Gentoo installer installs).

      The only problems I've had with FreeBSD are: (1) Updating ports (some of the ports are very old). (2) Installing Java, (3) Getting X11 to work (this isn't FreeBSD's problem, though). None of these problems were permanent, however.

      Soon I will try running Gentoo on top of FreeBSD.
      --
      Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
    28. Re:Any reason to switch? by neshort · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Some of what you say I find interesting - implying that the Gentoo community is more active than the FBSD group. I know you didn't actually say that; and maybe you didn't even imply as much; so you diserve the benefit of the doubt.

      Anyway, I have never seen documentation as thorough (although still somewhat incomplete) as:
      http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/h andbook/index.html

      The mailing lists are really helpful:
      http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo

      And there is usually very good help to be found at usenet:
      http://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.bsd.freeb sd.misc?hl=en

      There is not a free OS that "just works" with everything I want to do. There are many things that need a little customizing. If you are willing to source-level tweak Gentoo you should be able to get what you want done accomplished with FreeBSD.

      I used Gentoo for a while - a year ago - for a couple months. Here's what I liked:

      • The Linux Alsa audio system is pretty nice and works with more audio equipment than you'll find working on FreeBSD.
      • Portage is almost as nice and the FreeBSD ports system.
      • More ported applications.
      • More current ports.
      Here's what I didn't like:
      • The ports that attracted me to Linux (because they are not ported to FreeBSD) are often unstable. For example: I was attracted to the music composer applications Brahms and Rosegarden-4. Both programs constantly core-dumped on me. I couldn't get anything accomplished. So far, a nice music composing application doesn't seem to exist for 'nix. I'd be willing to pay for a good one that doesn't require winD'OH!s.
      • Console-land isn't nearly as elegant as is on FreeBSD.
      • I never could get the hang of runlevels... but that's just me (grin).
    29. Re:Any reason to switch? by bigbadunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, for one...it's always good to expand the tools available in your toolset. Just because you might not necessarily -have- to use a certain platform/os in your current environment, it certainly can't hurt to at least have a working knowledge of other systems in existance.

      I personally use NetBSD in production environments, but make myself familiar with the various other alternatives out there, just in case some lucrative offer falls in my lap. Then at least, I have some working experience.

      But that's just my opinion, and most everyone around here thinks I'm dumb.

      --

      The older I get, the less I like everyone else.
    30. Re:Any reason to switch? by rhavenn · · Score: 2, Informative

      you're point #2 is now void. Go to the freebsdfoundation page, download the JDK or JRE for 6.0 and then do a pkg_add and you're done. Viola! Java!

    31. Re:Any reason to switch? by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 1
      be it Linux or FreeBSD, or you'll get bitten by the missing/broken essential program that I really wanted problem


      I understand your generalisation but you cannot dismiss Ubuntu's success this way.

      Ubuntu on AMD64 has been nigh-perfect for both essential and "nice-to-have" tools. And Synaptic is far, far ahead of ports management on FreeBSD.

      I'm glad to hear that Java is available for FreeBSD now. But that wasn't the only misery that I encountered, as I said. Ubuntu has performed brilliantly on this computer and has not wasted even 15 minutes of my time.

      FreeBSD was a very bad previous relationship. ;o)

      --
      Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    32. Re:Any reason to switch? by rhavenn · · Score: 1

      Well, I would have to say there isn't anything "amazing" about Debian either. They both just work. As for the ports being bleeding edge? No, I would say they stay caught up with the latest "stable" releases from the respective projects, but they sure aren't bleeding edge.

    33. Re:Any reason to switch? by Ekarderif · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The one thing I love about FreeBSD is the tight base integration. The problem with Linux is largely a separation of developers: GNU and Linux kernel. And whichever distribution you use tends to tack on another layer of complexity. FreeBSD doesn't have that. Well, the ports are very much a separate entity, but the base system is very clean.

      I attempted to use Gentoo about a year ago, and there really is no comparison. The installation process was incredibly painless (the same cannot be said for Gentoo). The packaging system is also far more responsive (the actual programs I mean, the port update is a bit slower from what I remember).

      In fact, Gentoo scared me away from Linux for a good while. I used Redhat (bleh!) and Slackware before then. It wasn't until two months ago that I picked up another distibution: Arch Linux. And I do love both current systems. But I'd have to go with FreeBSD if forced to choose. After all, Arch Linux took up 350 MB in a fresh (no extra packages) installation whereas FreeBSD is currently taking up 300 MB (excluding user files and ports tree).

    34. Re:Any reason to switch? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      *rubs eyes*

      Binaries? Sweet binaries?

      *rubs eyes some more*

      It's Christmas in FreeBSD land! Wheee!

      We haven't seen Java binaries in FreeBSD since 1.1.8! I'm just in awe of this. Now I'm going to have to evict Linux-JDK from my system just to make room for the natives!

    35. Re:Any reason to switch? by Skuto · · Score: 1

      >And Synaptic is far, far ahead of ports management on FreeBSD.

      I don't use Ubuntu, but I'm curious: how does it handle the case where a config file's format has changed for the software you are upgrading?

      In Gentoo this was a horrible mess. FreeBSD has mergemaster which is very good. I'm curious if there are even better ways.

    36. Re:Any reason to switch? by Colonel+Package · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Is it just me or does the insecurity of the FreeBSD community shine through here in blinding fashion?

      I'm giving you a first-timer user experience with both FreeBSD and Gentoo. Say what you want about the "top notch" FreeBSD support forms but I found them to be limited, out of date and more often than not no help. In my opinion there appears to be a whole lot more work put into installation and setup guides of Gentoo in comparison with FreeBSD.

      As far as the X setup goes:
      # Xorg -configure
      # cp xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf

      Yeah, when all goes well this works perfectly. If you honestly think that 1) I didn't try this and 2) that this will work perfectly all the time than you are one naive mofo.

      I'd love to sit here and re-live the week of my life I wasted trying to get FreeBSD and Debian up and running on this hardware but honestly I am trying to get past it.

      Let me just sum up with this. My goal was to get Software RAID-5 on four SATA drives on a A8V-MX motherboard running some form of unix/linux including X-Windows. I gave FreeBSD more than a fair shake. In the end, what got the job done was Gentoo. The only snag was the VT8251 chipset support with AHCI. I found a Gentoo forum where some guys had worked this issue out. Their fix was not in the kernel source tree yet but the patch applied, compiled and enabled my SATA drives.

      I am not trying to hurt anybody's feelings. This was just my experience. YMMV.

    37. Re:Any reason to switch? by thunrida · · Score: 1

      I use Gentoo for desktop and FreeBSD for servers. In Gentoo I like portage and gentoo forums. They are what in my opinion seperate Gentoo from other distributions. On no other forum have I got help so quick (and usually you don't even have to post). Most FreeBSD problems I solved with a help of google. Most (all) gentoo problems I solved on forum. You have to really look hard to find rtfm there. If there were no gentoo, I would use FreeBSD on desktop. What I like in FreeBSD most is stability, packet filter and jails. After learning pf, iptables just seem so ugly.

    38. Re:Any reason to switch? by misleb · · Score: 1

      Well, I would have to say there isn't anything "amazing" about Debian either. They both just work.

      Indeed. I've use a good number of Linux distributions (and Solaris, HPUX, etc) and now FreeBSD and it is all unix (with a lower case "u") as far as I am concerned. As long as it has sane and robust package management and a straighforward upgrade path, I'm happy.

      As for the ports being bleeding edge? No, I would say they stay caught up with the latest "stable" releases from the respective projects, but they sure aren't bleeding edge.

      Coming from Debian, that *is* bleeding edge. ;-)

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    39. Re:Any reason to switch? by thunrida · · Score: 1
      Gentoo was mess? I'm quite satisfied with etc-update, but there are alternatives (cfg-update, dispatch-conf)

      I tried Ubuntu also (Ok, it was Kubuntu but it's quite similar). Contrary to many, I was very disappointed. Synaptec is quite ok, until you want a package that is not in repository. Then you add repository. Then some packages from different repositories fight. And then you want mod_perl and you search 30 min to find some obscure repository on somebody's home machine. I mean, it that normal? And besides, I prefer to compile (but not manually, for I want packet manager to be aware of added packages).

      And there were other obscurities with Kubuntu. I forgot most of them, but one I remember is missing files in tmp. I was very limited in disk space, so I moved some files to /tmp. After reboot, they were gone??? Happened twice. Then I just gave up and went back to gentoo.

    40. Re:Any reason to switch? by value_added · · Score: 1, Informative

      This is probably one of the most absurd and ill-informed posts I've read in a while.

      I tried in vain to setup FreeBSD 6.0 as a SATA software raid machine. I was using a more recent motherboard with graphics, network and SATA integrated on-board. I think they are all VIA chipsets. I eventually hit the eject on FreeBSD as I couldn't even get X up and running.

      I bought a new motherboard without thinking too much about what I was buying and tried to install an operating system about which I knew just as little. Instead of taking the opportunity to make up for my obvious deficiencies, I quit when I realised my approach wouldn't work, but made a mental note to tell everyone about it when I had the chance.

      I then tried Debian. All-in-all it was another less than positive experience. Both the 2.4 and 2.6 kernel versions of Sarge had problems with my hardware.

      I popped in another CD and see what would happen, hoping that doing the same thing again would yield different results. It didn't.

      I decided to explore Gentoo.

      Despite, the fact that some people consider doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is a mark of insanity, I popped in yet another CD

      Its working great with SATA and EVMS.

      I was surprised that it worked.

      It did require some source level tweaks

      Well, it didn't really work, but someone told what I should be doing.

      but part of the coolness I found with Gentoo is the very active user/support community and the tons of HowTos and guides.

      Instead of visiting the FreeBSD website, where I could have found that FreeBSD offers a bewildering collection of well-written documentation in almost every imaginable format, I decided that The Handbook,
      the Books and Articles Online section, Publications, Web Resources, A Section For Newbies or The Documentation Project, or reading the documentation in /usr/share/doc, manpages (also available online, or subscribing to the mailing list or reading its online archives, or the newsgroups, didn't fit with the way I do things. Instead, I found some forum using Google's I'm Feeling Lucky that has little or nothing to do with FreeBSD but is definitely better than all those places I didn't visit.

      Unless they've made a quantum leap in improvements, FreeBSD would NOT be my choice for a SATA raid server.

      I firmly believe my anecdotal experience qualifies me to offer non-sequitors with hyperbole but without embarassment.

    41. Re:Any reason to switch? by nuzak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > I don't use Ubuntu, but I'm curious: how does it handle the case where a config file's format has changed for the software you are upgrading?

      Debian packages typically use dpkg-reconfigure to configure upgrades. Each package "knows" its config format and provides helpers for dpkg-reconfigure to merge in any format changes. Basically, it doesn't try to merge in the changes as a text diff, it programmatically does so, offering you a choice of GUIs or even a batch mode. If you changed an option yourself, it offers that as the default when reconfiguring. I'm a big fan of ports (not so much portage), but debian's approach at handling config files is phenomenal.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    42. Re:Any reason to switch? by kfg · · Score: 1

      Don't we all end up dead anyway?

      Yep, it's just that few realize how life affirming truely understanding that is.

      Maybe other people miss that implied message.

      It's just possible that many people here will think I'm implying Bob Marley's observation with my last sentence, and while it is apropos I actually had another statement of Mallory's in mind:

      Have we vanquised an enemy?
      None but ourselves.
      Have we gained success?
      That word means nothing here.
      To struggle and to understand,
      Never this last without the other.
      Such is the law.


      A mountaineer formed the ultimate geek credo. Go figure.

      "None but Ourselves" is the motto of my ultramarathon bicycle racing team.

      KFG

    43. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so true!!

    44. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      All the good FreeBSD developers have moved on to other projects (Mike Smith, Jordan Hubbard, Terry Lambert, John Dyson, Matt Dillon, etc. etc.). What remains are second and third tier self-annoited "developers". The glory days of FreeBSD are long gone. What you get these days with FreeBSD is an alternative (albeit generally slower) kernel for running Linux and GNU software. Why bother.

      Check out Dragonfly If you want to see where all the BSD noteworthy BSD innovation has gone.

    45. Re:Any reason to switch? by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      Portage is almost as nice?

      I'm glad FreeBSD addressed the SATA problems, that was the wall I ran into when installing one time. I wouldn't compare FreeBSD support and Gentoo support, but I would definately say Gentoo has a very active community. Any problem I've had compiling something in Gentoo, I type the error into google and instantly have an answer from bug reports or gentoo forums, etc. Not that you can't do this with every other distro, I've just found Gentoo to be very consistent and easy to find. It's also very nice to know that many other people have had the same problem and that you're not the first. Although no error in the first place would be good too.

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    46. Re:Any reason to switch? by kfg · · Score: 1

      Serendipitously the current Slashdot FOTD is:

      "It is better to have tried and failed than to have failed to try, but the result's the same." - Mike Dennison

      This is true if you are braindead.

      KFG

    47. Re:Any reason to switch? by oKtosiTe · · Score: 1

      The whole idea about /tmp is that it gets cleared at every boot.
      Temporary, get it?

    48. Re:Any reason to switch? by Colonel+Package · · Score: 1

      Again, here comes another insecure hyper-sensitive reaction to my opinion. Let me be clear, I am just putting out my experience and my opinion. Unlike your bogus self-righteous editorial and para-phrasing that you try to pass off as fact.

      Are you that narrow-minded that you honestly believe that different distributions will NOT install differently on the same hardware? Especially comparing FreeBSD and an average linux distribution? C'mon man, clearly a guy as articulate as you must have a larger grasp of things than this. No?

      In the end, I'm happy with Gentoo. Regardless of the path I took to get there. FreeBSD didn't work out. Maybe with another wasted week I could be more versed in why FreeBSD was a bad choice.

      Cheers

    49. Re:Any reason to switch? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Interesting. When i first set up my SATA-RAIDable box, i was a big Gentoo fan and a big FreeBSD fan. I first tried to install gentoo on it, but had nothing but headaches. I wanted to have the entire system, all paritions, striping, which means the installer had to detect both drives as identical and RAIDable. Gentoo didn't do that. So i grabbed my FreeBSD install CD (it was 5.x at the time), fired that puppy up. In the dmesg output on boot i noticed that it found both my SATA drives, created an arX device (the device used for disk arrays), and i was able to partition and install the OS across both the drives as if they were one without any problems at all. Gentoo was not this simple of a process, so it lost out to FreeBSD.

      Differing experiences, eh? But I guess mine was hardware raid, afterall, and that is a difference for sure. Though, I have software raid setup on my FreeBSD file server, which was extremely easy after reading this page. I guess if you don't know where to look, things are difficult? Good thing all the FreeBSD documentation is centralized and easy to browse, eh?

      I guess it also helps that i'm well-versed in ports. Though, getting X up and running in FreeBSD is EXACTLY THE SAME (not similar, EXACTLY THE SAME -THEY ARE THE SAME SET OF PROGRAMS!) as it is in Gentoo, after you get X installed. The process there is pretty similar, though.

    50. Re:Any reason to switch? by Slithe · · Score: 1

      >>If you plan to use a server machine at home, don't even think a second and try FreeBSD.

      Did you intend to say that we should use FreeBSD as a home server? If so, you should have said "If you plan to use a server machine at home, use FreeBSD."

      Initially, I thought you meant to say "don't even think for a second about trying FreeBSD".

      --
      ---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
    51. Re:Any reason to switch? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      I decided to install Dfly last night. The only thing noteworthy was the lack of support for my sata controller, and thus my lack of ability to install it on my system. The controller works great in FreeBSD, any tips you might be able to send my way? It's a Promise R20378 (aka PDC20378). I'll probably just end up buying a big, cheap ata drive on my way home and install openbsd on my sata drives, instead. It recognizes them.

    52. Re:Any reason to switch? by QuietRiot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A good reason would be to learn more about the various other unices out there and the various ways things are done amongst kernels and distros. Other than that, and the really cool ports system, I can't see it being worth the hassle for the typical home user.

      I would not deter you from trying, and you might end up loving it, but it's not just another linux distro.

      FreeBSD excels not on the single user systems but, in my opinion, where you have multiple users or services running on the same piece of hardware. If you're hosting virtual domains for people and want to make sure that one of your users doesn't disturb things for another, it's great. It's things like login.conf(5) that just come with the OS. I haven't personally run any linux boxen in about 5 years (maybe more) since I started playing with FreeBSD; but some years ago, providing similar functionality in linux was not trivial. It's a stable, feature-filled OS. I'd even suggest it for learning on - like learning to drive on a manual transmission vehicle w/o power steering vs. an automatic. It's great but takes some setting up and might frusturate faster than most linux distros. More powerful, and more knobs. More like pro-audio equipment vs. a typical home-audio component CD player. Less flash, more business.

      "The Power to Serve" is the tagline for this excellent OS. That's what it does best - serve - not hold you by the hand. If you're not interested in getting dirt under your fingernails and instead want point-and clicky interfaces to system administrative functions, do look elsewhere. (Spoken to other readers, not necessarily yourself.)

      Do not mess with this OS without looking to the FreeBSD Handbook. A quick read will give you a feel of the power and it's something you should have close at hand when starting to play with it for the first time.

      Give it a try but be ready for a time investment to get it like you want. Maybe put it on a "closet machine" and let it serve files or web for you so you can take down your regular box for dual-booting, running xine, or the reboots you're sure to have more often with linux than the beastie :)

      It's a great platform, but doesn't come pre-configured.

    53. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After about 5 years on Gentoo, then switching to FreeBSD 6.0, I can say its everything Gentoo could have been.

      Ports is just so much more polished that portage, though the later does have features I miss, sometimes. I do really like how the source and binary support in ports are integrated into each other (each of the roughly 14,000 ports are availible in both formats, and one can use the other as dependancies, IIRC source-builds needed sourc-build deps on Gentoo). I do miss slotting, though and USE flags. Also, everything I've tried to build thus far, has actually build, and worked with no issues; wish I could say the same for Gentoo.

      The install doesn't take two and a half days to complete on FreeBSD. People can bash sysinstall all they want, doesn't change the fact that it makes things easier. The system itself feels much faster, much more responsive and just smoother overall. It's the little things you don't really notice at first that add up, stuff like taking a peek at top and thinking "when the fsck did the loadaverage jump up to 15-ish?" only to remembr that you have 3D rendeing anda build going on the the background, and marveling at how it feels like a freshly booted system. Or finding myself getting more work done, since I'm no longer spening more time maintaining my box than using it (as I felt was a problm with gentoo). the ability to run linux packages out of the box, The fabulous docs, etc.

      Sure, I missed USE flags and init scripts, but after about a week or two, I began to wonder how I ever got along without FreeBSD.

    54. Re:Any reason to switch? by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      > (an 18 gig 15k rpm scsi will only cost you $40, and you'll get 3-4ms access times. A 36 gig will run you a little over $80.)

      --Speaking as a friend of a friend, do you have $link / good source for buying these SCSI drives? I'm looking to rebuild a low-end server that has a bunch of 4GB LVD's in the front. TIA

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    55. Re:Any reason to switch? by fialar · · Score: 1

      Actually OpenBSD's ath(4) driver (Atheros chipset) is a bit lacking. It only does 802.11b on my D-Link DWL-G650. FreeBSD and NetBSD both support 802.11g on it. (I have no idea about the turbo, or double-G support.)

    56. Re:Any reason to switch? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      And we're just saying it was most likely your own fault, and not that of FreeBSD. FreeBSD is a very advanced operating system. It doesn't hold your hand. It assumes you know what you're doing. That, however, doesn't mean it's incapable of performing as well or better than the analogous linux solution.

      In other words, you shouldn't advocate a tool based on your ability to use it, you should advocate a tool based on it's ability to get the job done. Think of a jack hammer. I'm assuming you're fairly weak phsyically, so i'm going to assume you don't have the physique needed to use a jack hammer in the proper way. Now, imagine your friend comes to you for some advice on tearing up his driveway. He aks, "Hey man, i gotta tear up my driveway. What should I use, a 5 pound sledge or a jack hammer?" You reply, "Well, I tried to use a jackhammer once, but i ended up not being able to control it and it stabbed my mom in the stomach...so i'd say go with the 5 pound sledge." Your friend, however, is perfectly capable physically to handle the jackhammer, and would end up being more efficient with it in the end. You just gave him bad advice!

      Your FreeBSD vs Gentoo is the same. Simply because you weren't mentally capable of harnessing the awesome power of FreeBSD, but were able to get Gentoo to work for you, doesn't mean that the job might not have been better completed by FreeBSD. It speaks more to your own lack of ability than anything else. Especially as others have shown FreeBSD to be able to excell at the very same job you say it has failed at.

    57. Re:Any reason to switch? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that you are ignoring the actual sources of information that could have made your attempt go much more smoothly and more than likely work successfully. Simply saying "It didn't work for me, even thought i don't know much about the OS, so I will tell EVERYONE I KNOW AND DON'T KNOW that FREEBSD IS A HORRIBLE SOLUTION FOR SATA SOFTWARE RAID! PERIOD!" is just as insecure and arrogant (even though your example uses an onboard hardware solution that probably has hardare RAID-5 that FreeBSD would see as a disk array and create a device called ar0 that looks, to you, like a single disk device).

      Not only is it arrogant and insecure, but it's irresponsible and inacurrate. I mean, did you research Vinnum or GEOM? In this case, you'd want to go with vinum.

      And, again, your X problem is ridiculous. I have never seen a modern computer out there that was unable to get an X session up and running in FreeBSD, but WAS able to get one running in Linux. X IS THE SAME PROGRAM, WITH THE SAME HARDWARE SUPPORT IN BOTH OPERATING SYSTEMS! THERE IS NO EFFECTIVE DIFFERENCE! That point there makes me call bullshit on this story.

    58. Re:Any reason to switch? by eihab · · Score: 1
      This was just my experience. YMMV

      That person just said that it was their own experience. A little criticism never hurts anybody.

      Your analogy with the jack hammer isn't right on money here because we "know" what a jack hammer can do. With operating systems it's different. I would say it's more like customer service at a restaurant, everyone can tell you how good a restaurant is, but once you go there and get served by a waitress who just dumped her boyfriend and got kicked out of her apartment.. you'll think different.

      I personally don't care what OS anyone is running. I'm typing this on my FreeBSD laptop, that's sitting right next to my windows workstation. Behind me are a couple of Macs and in the server room (5 feet away) there are a dozen or so Sunfires (and a FreeBSD server too). They all crunch away and work.. you know..

      --
      If you can't mod them join them.
    59. Re:Any reason to switch? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      "Is it just me or does the insecurity of the FreeBSD community shine through here in blinding fashion?"

      No, it's not just you. All minority software communities tend to exibit this behavior. Us FreeBSD users like our little OS, and those of us who have learned this in's and out's of it know how to make it sing. When we see people that have run into problems that would probably have been trivial for us to solve, it's a natural tendency to get defensive. After using a system for awhile, you tend to learn little things that are not obvious to the begginers, and you tend to forget that the knowledge you've accumulated didn't exactly come overnight.

      You're bound to get the same sort of reactions in other communities - for example, when some new linux user starts bitching about linux because [insert distro here]'s n00balicious GUI installer didn't detect his monitor's resolution correctly.*

      *I use that example, because I see it all the time in linux forums.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    60. Re:Any reason to switch? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      "Your FreeBSD vs Gentoo is the same. Simply because you weren't mentally capable of harnessing the awesome power of FreeBSD, but were able to get Gentoo to work for you, doesn't mean that the job might not have been better completed by FreeBSD. It speaks more to your own lack of ability than anything else. Especially as others have shown FreeBSD to be able to excell at the very same job you say it has failed at."

      Oh come on dude, that's harsh!!

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    61. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I remember why I rarely read the *BSD posts on this message board... It's full of arrogant asswipes like yourself who just can't possibly fathom the fact that their precious little OS-of-choice has shortcomings, and that someone who posts something even slightly negative of it JUST MIGHT BE CORRECT!

    62. Re:Any reason to switch? by Rei · · Score: 1

      Pricewatch.com is your friend. :) I turn to them for all my hardware needs. That's where my quotes are for.

      It's a very good investment. Fast SCSI drives not only have great seek times, they also have longer lifespans, which is important for a root partition ;)

    63. Re:Any reason to switch? by ffflala · · Score: 2, Informative
      I write this as a FreeBSD user who just about went crazy trying to configure X the first time (ah, the XFree86 menu...) The documentation CAN be improved, as often you won't know precisely what you need to look up to solve your problems. Not to insult you further with accusations of not following instructions, but did you also try this:
      # xorgcfg -textmode
      You didn't mention using this line:
      # Xorg -config xorg.conf.new
      To test your X configuration after you configured X using this line.
      # Xorg -configure
      After this I find I have to add the whichever of the following lines are missing in 'Section "Screen"' to the xorg.conf.new file:
      Section "Screen"
      Identifier "Screen0"
      Device "Card0"
      Monitor "Monitor0"
      DefaultDepth 24
      SubSection "Display"
      Viewport 0 0
      Depth 24
      Modes "1024x768"
      EndSubSection
      EndSection
      The
      xorgcfg -textmode
      option above lets you do so interactively instead of manually editing xorg.conf.new. Anyway all of those examples were in the FreeBSD handbook section on X-11 Configuration (Chapter 5.4). http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/h andbook/x-config.html While the documentation (particularly the indexing) can be much improved, I've found that particularly in terms of initial setup I initially read right over the solutions the first time through. In my experience, getting FreeBSD up and running has far outweighed the initial investment of a bit of patience required for the learning process.
    64. Re:Any reason to switch? by gbobeck · · Score: 1
      you're point #2 is now void


      Yes, I know. I'm happy that Java is available again for FreeBSD.
      --
      Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
    65. Re:Any reason to switch? by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 3, Informative

      Interesting. I switched *to* freebsd a couple of weekends ago - 6.1RC1 and was stunned when it picked up my raid controller in the installation process. It's a piece of shit promise controller that the manufacturers claimed supported linux when I bought it but of course only supported 2.4 for people running long-obsolete versions redhat or suse. Yet freebsd just picked it up and everything has worked as expected. I can remove a disk and it complains, put it back and it syncs (RAID1).

      I had some troubles getting X working properly as well but did in the end. It's a bit stupid the hoops you have to jump through to set up X in 2006 but there ya go. I did a quick writeup here: http://stable.cowoh.org/2006/05/05/linux-users-adj usting-to-in-freebsd-or-solaris/ If you think of any more commands I should mention in my list let me know.

      --


      Believe with me, my saplings.
    66. Re:Any reason to switch? by synthespian · · Score: 1

      IMHO, when you choose a free software project you must also evaluate how the project is set up. Any moderately important open source project is bound to be a big project. As such, it'll involve software engineering practices, team management, documentation, and other stuff like security policy, release management, buid processes, server farms, etc, all stuff that will reflect on quality of the code base. You must ask yourself: is this a project that will last? Will it scale? Will it be able to produce quality, reliable software in a predictable manner?

      Some projects are better engineered as a project than others. Some do stuff better than others. Some work in a "democratic" fashion, others in an "autocratic" fashion. But how the project works as a whole is very important. This may determine, amongst other things whether a project will scale or not.

      Let me give you some concrete examples. Autocratic projects are things such as the Linux kernel and the most famous theocracy, Theo's OpenBSD. Such projects may scale or not. These two, apparently do, but you may see problems in the way they're managed, because of the "dictator" aspect. For instance, they may get something wrong. You can't be right all of the time.

      Other projects are a complete mess in terms of human resource management. The showcase example is Debian, which doesn't seem to be an organization that scales up very well and seem to be in a pattern of falling short everytime. This, I believe, has to do with a mix of technologies chosen (apt- being just a layer of complexity added to what Makefiles already do - as any BSD port collection proves), and the design of their organization (you know, how all their so-called "developers" get to scream at the mailing lists over trivia all the time). Another example of a project that possibly will not scale is OpenBSD. Already they had financial problems, they're not set up as a Foundation, so they won't be able to do things that an organization like FreeBSD Foundation, Debian or the FSF can achieve in terms of negotiations and legal actions (for instance, OpenBSD will probably never have a Sun certified Java, because Sun can't negotiate with an OpenBSD legal entity). The FreeBSD project, because of the Foundation is able to strike deals with software firms such as Coverity (for source code analysis), which already has produced results in terms of bug-hunting. Other projects will most likely never be able to provide the best tools for their developers.

      An yet other projects may have great ideas, but have no clear cut roles and aren't really clear on how they go about their ideas. One that comes to mind is GoboLinux, which sort of threw away the Unix File System hierarchy and borrowed some (innovative) ideas from projects such as NeXT. It's not clear what the roadmap or the security policy is for this project. In fact, I don't think they have a security policy. So that leaves you with a great idea, and a lot of questions. And this from competent hackers. Many free software projects don't even get there. Again, this is just an example. Another example that comes to mind is NexentaOS, which aims to be a GNU/OpenSolaris project. Sounds great, but do they have a plan (besides being able to compile the software)?

      And finally, on technical merits alone, I think all BSDs stand to the test. However, when you factor in all those things I mentioned, I believe FreeBSD is set up to be the great project that it is, and will continue to be in the future. So, for me, it's:

      techical merits + organizational skills = great open source project

      PS: I don't mean to bash projects. I seriously hope they come around their shortcomings.

      --
      Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
    67. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I eventually hit the eject on FreeBSD as I couldn't even get X up and running.

      You must be pretty inept.

    68. Re:Any reason to switch? by Arkaein · · Score: 1

      The problem is that, while oft quoted, this is really a bad argument when you get down to it (at least without situational context). There are an infinite number of things out there, and we need to prioritize according to what is most meaningful to us.

      I run Linux, I'm a computer guy, so why haven't I tried *BSD? Because there are other things out there that mean more to me, like going back and learning Lisp, learning Ruby, checking out open source game and graphics engines, etc. I've installed a few Linux distros, honestly the process isn't all that educational after the first few. I'm guessing that a BSD would be pretty similar, so in my case I need a better reason that "it's there". I probably wouldn't have felt like I conquered anything by installing it, and any operating system that feels like a triumph just to install probably wouldn't interest me anyways. There are far more interesting things (to me) to work on.

    69. Re:Any reason to switch? by kfg · · Score: 1

      The problem is that, while oft quoted, this is really a bad argument when you get down to it

      That's why I said it as a joke. I can't help how it got moderated.

      Next week I'll likely say something really deep and important and get moderated troll/overrated.

      KFG

    70. Re:Any reason to switch? by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 1

      FreeBSD was a great deal easier for me to install than Gentoo...at least Gentoo through a command line stage3 install. I'd rank it up there with Slackware in terms of easienss to install, not the easiest, but nowhere near as frustrating as some people make it out to be.

      --
      I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
    71. Re:Any reason to switch? by Azoth's+Revenge · · Score: 1

      Arkaein,
      You are quite correct and if the operating system that you currently use is adequate for your needs (which most are) then there is little reason to try FreeBSD. Personally, I believe there are only two really good reasons to try a new operating system. 1) You have to because of work, school or some other obligation or 2) You have a friend or colleague that you respect mentions that they impressed with another operating system for reasons that both make sense to you and would reduce the amount of time you spend solving inane problems relating to an OS (installing software, library problems, maintainance, and security).

      Having a friend or colleague around to show you the 'way' of an OS is the only way to truely accept a system.

    72. Re:Any reason to switch? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      I don't think your analogy is apt, since your experience at a restaurant varries depending on who's serving you. There's nothing you can do about their experience. With a new OS, however, (especially FreeBSD) there is documentation you can look through to see if your particular hardware is supported, as well as documentation to tell you HOW to do something to smooth your transition from one OS to another. From the parents posts, it's fairly obvious he failed to look at either resource. He, however, blames it on the OS instead of himself. That was my point. He has all the resources to "know" how the OS would react to his hardware configuration. He simply failed to use them.

      And i'm no OS zealot either. I typed my last message on my windows workstation. My computer right now is running OpenBSD, but has Ubuntu and Windows XP installed on it. I'm planning on installing FreeBSD on it as well (50 extra gigs), and my server in the other room runs FreeBSD. All my OS's work just fine for what i want them to do.

      In short, his mileage varried needlessly.

    73. Re:Any reason to switch? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      The two big things I like about FreeBSD are the integration and the documentation. Instead of being just a kernel with dozens of other projects smooshed around it to make a base system, it's all one project. It has a much different feel to it than a distro. Of course, it does use other project's software, like bind, gcc, etc., but overall it has a feel of integration that many Linux distro just do not have.

      Second, the documentation is complete. Unlike GNU, which officially despises them, FreeBSD has a man page for every driver and command in the base system. Plus a great handbook and faq. You have all the documentation you need at hand without having to google for it.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    74. Re:Any reason to switch? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      There's nothing wrong with it, per se, but there is also nothing amazing either.

      That's a damned good endorsement, when you think about it.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    75. Re:Any reason to switch? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      He as talking about GNU+Linux, not GNU by itself, and expecially not individual software projects under GNU. The hypersensitivity of some of you people continues to amaze me.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    76. Re:Any reason to switch? by inca34 · · Score: 1

      You got lucky with your hardware and by getting to start with a later version of fbsd. My NIC card needed an obscurely named driver for fbsd, but was done more simply with a generic driver in Gentoo. Also, I managed to get sysinstall to skip steps and hang while downloading/unpacking the system files and ports many times. Thus warranting more reinstalls than I ever had to do with Gentoo. To each his own. =)

    77. Re:Any reason to switch? by gbobeck · · Score: 1
      Also, I managed to get sysinstall to skip steps and hang while downloading/unpacking the system files and ports many times.


      Been there, done that :-). I've had more than a few installs hosed because of issues like that. The one that I willn't forget is the failed FreeBSD install that almost made my friend's laptop unbootable.

      Thus warranting more reinstalls than I ever had to do with Gentoo.


      I know about that... at least FreeBSD installs much quicker than Gentoo*. *(Stage 3, fetched from web on a dual t3 internet 2 connection, not using the installer)

      Although, it was a true pain to get Zope / Plone installed and stable on FreeBSD. I'd much rather have fun with drivers than getting Zope stable on FreeBSD 5.1. As a side note, I have had my share with driver issues, as I have a Thinkpad T22.
      --
      Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
    78. Re:Any reason to switch? by MechaStreisand · · Score: 1

      But a 15,000 rpm SCSI drive is probably a bit of a screamer as well. What does it sound like with something like that in your computer? Is it tolerable?

      What I was thinking of doing was getting two SATA drives and putting them in a RAID-1 array, as I understand that that improves latency a fair bit, and is definitely good for redundancy. Maybe having a high speed SCSI drive for the OS AND the SATA RAID-1 array for everything else would be worth trying...

      --
      Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
    79. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You complain about breaking your system by unmasking packages, perhaps they were masked for a reason, hmm?

    80. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I usually do not correct spell mistakes but, this one...

      it is "your" not you're, you're is a contraction of "you are". I mean, my native tongue is not English (es Español) and even I realized that error =oS.

      xtracto

    81. Re:Any reason to switch? by Shanep · · Score: 1

      Actually OpenBSD's ath(4) driver (Atheros chipset) is a bit lacking. It only does 802.11b on my D-Link DWL-G650. FreeBSD and NetBSD both support 802.11g on it. (I have no idea about the turbo, or double-G support.)

      OpenBSD typically has fantastic wireless support. There are odd cases where a NIC is better supported elsewhere, but those specific cases don't take away from the overall OpenBSD+WiFi goodness. There are also bound to be some issues due to closed vendor stances conflicting with OpenBSD ideals. But since apps and OS are the glue between the user and the computer, I prefer to choose my OS and apps as the top criteria and then hardware to go with them.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    82. Re:Any reason to switch? by Shanep · · Score: 1

      Pricewatch.com is your friend. :) I turn to them for all my hardware needs. That's where my quotes are for.

      Be careful searching for the cheapest drives you can find from sites like that. I tried to purchase some 18GB SCSI drives for the OpenBSD project a few years ago, so that they could keep some older gear going (like VAX's). I found good prices for some Seagate drives and went through with the purchase, including payment with my credit card. *AFTER* I had ordered and payed, it became apparent only in the confirmation email that the drive I ordered was a FACTORY REFURBISHED UNIT. Nowhere prior or during my order was there any statement that these drives were refurb units. Not at the price searching site, not at the linked to item page at the online store and not at any stage during the order. Only AFTER I ordered could the word "refurbished" be found hidden in a tome of text in the finalized order confirmation email.

      Not wanting to lump the OpenBSD project with such a drive, I canceled and complained.

      So take care with cheap disks!

      It's a very good investment. Fast SCSI drives not only have great seek times, they also have longer lifespans, which is important for a root partition ;)

      Yeah, I have a Fujitsu 15k 36GB U360 drive. Gets up to 95Mbytes/sec sustained and I think it never gets lower than 75 at it's slowest point at the end. Plus really fast random access, low latency and elevator sorting with TCQ deeper than SATA. Still though, for desktop use, SATA is great.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    83. Re:Any reason to switch? by Shanep · · Score: 1

      But a 15,000 rpm SCSI drive is probably a bit of a screamer as well. What does it sound like with something like that in your computer? Is it tolerable?

      My Fujitsu 15k rpm 36GB U360 drive is actually very quiet and runs pretty cool. When I first bought it, I wondered how noisy it was going to be. When I first switched it on, I thought that I had to wait a little while for it to get the start command or something, because I actually did not hear it wind up. I thought it was going to sound like a little muffled jet turbine, but in fact, I have to have the case open and put my head near the drive to hear it wind up. Same deal for random accessing when I do a "find /. > /dev/null" shortly after booting. Pretty quiet.

      Although Fujitsu provide a 5 year warrantee on my drive, they show life expectancy amongst other things in a readme piece of paper which came with the drive. Ranging from 5 to 1 years with increasing temperature. A pretty clear warning to keep your drives cool.

      10k and 15k rpm drives usually have much smaller disks and thus smaller head arm assemblies. So I guess in addition to this easing faster rotation and allowing smaller and faster head movement, it also allows for quieter operation. Have you seen how large the arm servo is, compared with the arms themselves in these drives? They are huge. I guess they're moving those small light arms, shorter distances with a much greater force.

      Take a look at Seagate 15k, Maxtor 15k and Fujitsu 15k.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    84. Re:Any reason to switch? by Shanep · · Score: 1

      I firmly believe my anecdotal experience qualifies me to offer non-sequitors with hyperbole but without embarassment.

      Who are the crack addicted retards who moderated this as Troll and Flamebait? This is a rational and apt response to the OP, who has posted yet more useless crap here at /.. Sure, there's sarcasm a'plenty, but it is well deserved and I really quite enjoyed it.

      When a post like this gets moderated down, it's a sign of crap /. has become. This post is Funny and Insightful.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    85. Re:Any reason to switch? by Shanep · · Score: 1

      Let me be clear, I am just putting out my experience and my opinion.

      Your experience in this matter is way too small to be forming an opinion worthy of anything beyond that which you could waste your own time with.

      BTW, I'm typing this from Windows XP Home, which is going through an OpenBSD firewall. If I replied to you hours earlier, I might have been writting from OSX. On any other day it could have been OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Solaris or shock horror, even Linux! My point is, that I'm not a zealot, although I do have a preference for spending time with OpenBSD. Regardless of my bias, however great or little, your story is hardly worth forming an opinion over and then telling the World.

      --
      War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
    86. Re:Any reason to switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I remember why I rarely read the *BSD posts on this message board... It's full of arrogant asswipes like yourself who just can't possibly fathom the fact that their precious little OS-of-choice has shortcomings, and that someone who posts something even slightly negative of it JUST MIGHT BE CORRECT!

      The problem is that someone who does not know a system, formed an opinion of it over the fact that he had trouble with some specific device and because he could not get X going. And then felt that the World needs to know about it as if that sample size of ONE test, conducted by someone new to that test subject, is somehow meaningful.

      Hey why don't I go out and purchase some random, new hardware, then try out installing various operating systems which are new to me, until I have some success and then proclaim that the OS which worked is great and each of the prior OS' are "NOT my choice for some GENERIC TASK", like my small amount of experience matters.

      Opinions based on a single baddly planned and researched incident, from someone not qualified to judge, are hardly worthy of public notice.

      The IT World seems to have people who adhere to one of these at some stage:

      1/ Buy random hardware -> try various software -> search for a problem to solve with them.

      2/ Align self with software like it is religion -> buy random hardware -> make them fight -> search for a problem to solve with them.

      3/ Have problem -> decide on best software to solve -> buy hardware to suit both.

      There are of course variations:

      Hardware -> Software -> Problem (The early "just bought a PC!" years).
      Software -> Hardware -> Problem (The OS and app zealotry starts, still searching for problems).
      Software -> Problem -> Hardware (Still flying a flag, at least the problem comes before the hardware).
      Hardware -> Problem -> Software (The wasteful "fastest hardware is best" years).
      Problem -> Hardware -> Software (Making do with what hardware you have, choosing software to suit).

      Problem -> Software -> Hardware (Real problem, software well considered, hardware to suit both, test, refine).

      The guy who works with the last method is considered to be a stupid old fool by the new young gun hotshots in the IT department. Of course those new hotshots are the same who use "killall" on ONE or some of their own processes on the corporate Solaris Oracle server during business hours and management hopefully realises their mistake in allowing this seemingly top notch candidate to have the root password because he ran Oracle on Linux (at home) and used all the correct jargon.

    87. Re:Any reason to switch? by Badanov · · Score: 1
      I do, however, feel duty bound to point out that the man famous for saying that ended up dead shortly thereafter

      No, the last man who died saying something was the guy who said: Hey ya'll: watch this...

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    88. Re:Any reason to switch? by synthespian · · Score: 1

      You can also google for Theo de Raddt's last interview in which he comments how he doesn't like gcc but uses it for the lack of better free alternative.

      --
      Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
    89. Re:Any reason to switch? by MechaStreisand · · Score: 1

      That is awesome, thanks a lot. Now I think I want one. Wonder how much a SCSI card is these days...

      --
      Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
    90. Re:Any reason to switch? by sparcdr · · Score: 1

      Hi there. Yeah, Gentoo is probably the most flexiable and comprehensive distro of them all. Portage is like ports, but with caching and indexing in a database instead of using flat files layed out in a tree like pkgsrc and ports. If you are married to commercial/proprietary applications, you're stuck for now. Java is now native, and I've ran Acrobat Reader 7 and Realplayer 10 fine under FreeBSD with it's Linux compatibility layer. Most things will run, of course VMware and Flash are the most notible products that do not support *BSD. My reasons for atleast giving it a try each few releases is: Stability, it is very reliable based on production ready code dating back to AT&T's original UNIX operating system. It is a complete operating system, everything, including the SSL libraries, kernel sources, and userland applications are audited and modified by the BSD core team, who have strict rules on what gets in. It is secure, the code is not as chaotic, and many of the committers work for big companies, are responsible, and knowledgable. BSD is chiefly used in science and high-performance computing environments, so it is scalable, and is portable on a handful of architectures. I have used FreeBSD on i386, AMD64, PowerPC, and SPARC64. The main thing I like is consistancy, you don't have to relearn stuff twice generally. The installation routines indicated by my Walnuat Creek FreeBSD 4.1 for the most part still work, even after all of those releases. There are other reasons, but a big one is the ports system. There are about 10,000 ports available. Essentially all open-source software written in a POSIX/ANSI compatible manner will work on *BSD. There are also a lot of commercial titles in the ports system, which can be installed by passing options to the make command. You could compare this to unmasking if you liked. I've used FreeBSD, NetBSD, and Gentoo myself, as well as many other systems, distros, etcetera. I really like how the FreeBSD releases are solid and work with the majority of my daily problems by being able to handle the demands of my business. As I said on BSDtalk #43 when I was interviewed by Will Backman, BSD to me is just better, but I really need Flash, no matter how little such a thing may be. Hopefully if people actually get up, download a copy, install it, read some documentation from the site and from some of the great O'Reilly books, and understand it, then we'll have more BSD users. I really don't like the rivally between the systems, and I really emphisize that writing cross-compatible code is important. I can use GNOME, KDE, Fluxbox, WindowMaker, Firefox with Java (Native now, thanks to the FreeBSD Foundation), and thousands of other common titles if I like, just by using packages available from 20 or so FTP mirrors, or via ports if I want to build extra features like Gentoo USE flags. Gentoo is currently having problems with chaotic release structuring and proposal acceptance, I heard. Maybe they can borrow another idea, not just ports from the BSD projects, that being the control over releases to assure quality and consistancy.

    91. Re:Any reason to switch? by bigox · · Score: 1

      I have always been under the impression that the NFS server, especially v3, on FreeBSD was much better than the Linux version. I don't know if this is still the case with the 2.6 kernel.

    92. Re:Any reason to switch? by welsh+git · · Score: 1

      > In the end, I'm happy with Gentoo. Regardless of the path I took to get there.
      > FreeBSD didn't work out. Maybe with another wasted week I could be more versed
      > in why FreeBSD was a bad choice.

      And you accuse people of being 'over sensative' to what you say.

      Maybe - just maybe - with another week, you could have sorted out your issues, and realised FreeBSD was the best choice ever. However, you didn't perservere, so you don't know. So comments such as that quoted above, in a BSD section of Slashdot are nothing more than trolling.

      MOD THAT MAN A TROLL!

      --
      Sig out of date
  5. But does it run... by phase_9 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, but does it run solitaire?

    1. Re:But does it run... by bl00d6789 · · Score: 1
    2. Re:But does it run... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Pick one of a hundred different solitaire packages. My preference is KPatience.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  6. NCQ? by ruiner13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't see it listed in the release notes, but does it finally support SATA NCQ?

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

    1. Re:NCQ? by SpinJaunt · · Score: 1
      Check this out:
      % atacontrol cap ad4
       
      Protocol Serial ATA v1.0
      device model Maxtor 6L250S0
      serial number L5919BTG
      firmware revision BANC1G10
      cylinders 16383
      heads 16
      sectors/track 63
      lba supported 268435455 sectors
      lba48 supported 490234752 sectors
      dma supported
      overlap not supported
       
      Feature Support Enable Value Vendor
      write cache yes yes
      read ahead yes yes
      Native Command Queuing (NCQ) yes - 31/0x1F
      Tagged Command Queuing (TCQ) no no 31/0x1F
      SMART yes yes
      microcode download yes yes
      security yes no
      power management yes yes
      advanced power management yes no 0/0x00
      automatic acoustic management yes yes 254/0xFE 192/0xC0
      http://pastebin.com/707437 - better formatting, without the lame-o-filter.

      Obviously my intel ICH5 southbridge doesn't support NCQ, otherwise it would "Just Work(TM)", it is just a matter of the right hardware.
      --
      /. is good for you.
    2. Re:NCQ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats a function of the hardware not the software. If your chipset and hard disk support NCQ, then yes FreeBSD will support it.

    3. Re:NCQ? by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      Just because the driver can detect NCQ capabilities in the hardware doesn't mean it actually makes use of it, just that it can read a few registers. I'm pretty sure ata(4) doesn't, in fact, make use of NCQ.

      While we're on the subject, ata(4) also has problems with 4G+ of memory and >2 disks. A hardware RAID card like the amr(4) powered LSI MegaRAID might be more suitable in such an environment for the time being.

    4. Re:NCQ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I am sorry but you are wrong, go read the SATA spec regarding NCQ and you will realise that an OS dosen't have to "support" NCQ through it's drivers, much like UDMA.

      It's just a convenience to be able to change the settings without having to reboot the PC/Workstation/Server.

      If you still not entirely sure, got get some NCQ capable hardware then install Pre-NCQ Operating Systems; whether that be FreeBSD-4.*, Linux 2.2, DOS or Windows 9*.

      confer

  7. Number one choice for SATA RAID? by LordKazan · · Score: 1, Insightful

    According to whom?

    --
    If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!
    1. Re:Number one choice for SATA RAID? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Informative

      According to nobody. The summary said:

      possibly making FreeBSD the number one choice for SATA RAID implementations

      That's "possibly". As in, it hasn't been proven yet but the developers feel that it's ahead of the rest of the market. Therefore it may "possibly" be the number one choice.

    2. Re:Number one choice for SATA RAID? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be very happy if you could point me to the docs about that SATA thing. I mean, how is it possibly better than the rest?

  8. Oh, great! by gstoddart · · Score: 2

    I'm still running 4.8. :-P

    Now I'm gonna have to download and burn yet another version I won't get around to updating to. =)

    Oh well, it aint broken, I'll update it some day.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Oh, great! by Ingolfke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes! I've been saying the same thing about CP/M and DOS 6.1 for years now.

    2. Re:Oh, great! by Churla · · Score: 1

      I'm in exactly the same boat.

      I have a colo'd server tucked away running 5.3 which simply has no reason for me to every consider updating it off that. There's a certain beauty to it being a "start up and forget about it" box.

      --
      I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
    3. Re:Oh, great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't touch that DOS stuff with a 10-foot pole. CP/M has always been the superior Operating System, and those ID10T's at Itty-Bitty-Mind just couldn't see through all of BG's BS. Didn't they know (or care) that he didn't really have an OS of his own? Nope. No M$ stuff here, ever. I don't even want to use LIM-EMS compatible memory, just because Microsoft was consulted for compatibility! I really don't see a need for more than 640k of memory anyway!!

  9. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Although this was probably intended as a trollish comment, yes, it does run Linux.

  10. Desktop worthy... by shrapnull · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FreeBSD has always been great with RAID in my experience. I frequently load it up on servers and don't need additional drivers for my RAID cards (which is more then I can say for W2K3 on the same boxes). Since switching to FreeBSD on my desktop I haven't swapped OS's out (something I tend to do at least once every couple of months). It's been roughly a year now, so I think it's safe to call it "home." If you're into linux and want to try a BSD, now's the time. At least now that VMWare Server Beta is free you can install an instance of this and dust the file with no harm if you don't like it. Although a lot of my linux peeps are quick to criticize, not one of them has complained after actually trying BSD of some sort, and while they're not all converts they grow to understand why someone would choose BSD over linux. Yes there are differences, and no you probably won't notice them in a desktop environment.

    --
    If you're half as beautiful naked, you'd be 4 times as beautiful with twice as many clothes on.
    1. Re:Desktop worthy... by Deagol · · Score: 1
      While I agree with you, being a 1-year Linux-->FreeBSD convert, I think that's a somewhat unfair jab at Win2003. FreeBSD 6.0 didn't support 3Ware's latest SATA-2 raid cards out of the box, either. Don't know if 6.1 now does, but I think comparing an OS that's 2-to-3 years newer than Win2003 is a bit disingenuous.

      Not that's I'd ever use Win2003, mind you. :)

    2. Re:Desktop worthy... by shrapnull · · Score: 1

      I should have clarified the majority of my RAID usage on FreeBSD is SCSI-based hardware RAID systems. It has, however, been working since prior to W2K3's release and yet no server offering from Microsoft has successfully detected my Intel hardware RAID cards during installation (gotta use ye olde floppy disk drivers), while BSD has. I've had better luck then that with Adaptec stuff with MS though. And don't get me wrong, Microsoft has it's place and we're an Active Directory environment. I use FreeBSD to compliment network management, run my desktop, and sustain a wholly-independent web presence outside of our directory services more then anything else.

      The fact that they've improved SATA-RAID support in this release is good news to many I'm sure.

      --
      If you're half as beautiful naked, you'd be 4 times as beautiful with twice as many clothes on.
    3. Re:Desktop worthy... by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

      Desktop worthy ... yes it really is, EXCEPT that I can't wait for FreeBSD "main" to adopt a graphical installer from one of its "distributions", that is DesktopBSD, PC-BSD, and others (in no particular order).

      Going from a freshly installed system (sans GUI interface) to a KDE login prompt is still the single most debilitating task that new users are faced with.

      The graphical distributions all make an excellent job setting up the basic GUI, but have other shortcomings (no dvorak support, or only few video drivers) that FreeBSD "main" meets.

  11. Yes ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To see if you like it. Ports, the system's layout, etc. Won't know until you try for yourself.

  12. Debian FreeBSD port by Douglas+Simmons · · Score: 4, Informative

    What is very much alive is the Debian GNU/kFreeBSD project. Get the best of both worlds baby.

    1. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      Ha ha. That's funny... everyone knows the best of both worlds is here.

    2. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Abommination! Seriously though, why would someone want a Linux userland with a FreeBSD kernel? The userland and hier of FreeBSD is one of its greater strenghts. I can see a FreeBSD userland with a Linux kernel however.

    3. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by rivaldufus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some of us are happy with FreeBSD's userland, thank you. The last thing most FreeBSD users would want would be the entire GNU userland and libc.

    4. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that would be a Brazilian transexual?

    5. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no such thing as "Linux userland". Some of the reasons for porting the FreeBSD kernel to the Debian GNU system are listed on the wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD (for that question specifically check the FAQ).

    6. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There's no such thing as "Linux userland".

      He says, taking a short break from blowing RMS.

    7. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by synthespian · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, what's so great about GNU userland and Debian's ever-so-late release schedules?
      Besides, you want GNU userland stuff (Bash, etc.) you just install them.
      Such a thing would be for masochists.

      --
      Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
    8. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Especially their libc. Ick.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    9. Re:Debian FreeBSD port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glibc has the complex.h stuff in, at least.

      Isn't there a way to hook into glibc from freebsd? I'd love to know it.

  13. FreeBSD 6 + pf by afternoon_nap · · Score: 5, Informative

    I use FreeBSD 6 because of the overload table option available when using pf:
    ## for SSHD from other hosts
    pass in log on $ext_if inet proto tcp from any to $ext_if:network \
                  port 22 flags S/SA keep state \
                  (max 5, source-track rule, max-src-nodes 5, \
                    max-src-states 10, tcp.established 60, tcp.closing 5, \
                    max-src-conn-rate 3/30, overload flush global) \
                  label "SSHD_IN_$if"

    If some sshd scanner hits my host more than three times in 30 seconds his packets go to an overload table and his states flushed. Any address or net listed in the badhosts table is blocked outright. It works as advertised and I couldn't be happier.

    pf+altq really does give me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

    1. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, yes, the port of PF from OpenBSD...

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    2. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that. =)

      With portsentry setting pf to block all other port scans I can do this without having to move sshd ports(like I've currently had to do).

    3. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Deagol · · Score: 1
      Is that the smugness of an OpenBSD user I hear in your tone? It's hard to tell, as your post had no real point.

      I don't see anything wrong with the cross-pollination of technologies amongst the BSDs. I prefer PF over native IPF myself on my own server, and I, too, like the overloading feature. In fact, it's one of the things I love about FreeBSD (code sharing, I mean), to the point where I jumped from the Linux camp to the FreeBSD camp.

      FreeBSD's a damn fine product (as is Linux). I'll be cvsup'ing my machines today. :)

    4. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Skuto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >Is that the smugness of an OpenBSD user I hear in your tone? It's hard to
      >tell, as your post had no real point.

      He's probably pointing out that if "pf" is what you want, then you might as well use the original version in OpenBSD.

    5. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Is there some reason that you're using FreeBSD with pf instead of using OpenBSD with pf?

      (for those of you who don't know, pf is developed by the OpenBSD team and was ported
      to FreeBSD by some FBSD developers).

      It just seems to me that if pf is the reason you're using FreeBSD, then you would probably
      be even happier using OpenBSD.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    6. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by afternoon_nap · · Score: 1

      I use FreeBSD simply because I'm used to it. I've used OpenBSD a few times and I really liked it. But because all my stuff was on FreeBSD I stuck with FreeBSD.

      I don't do any development, I'm a very happy BSD user. I don't code, write java, or design web pages. Heaven forbid I'm ever employed as a professional programmer since my education is far from CS.

      Read a previous post and you'll have some of my history with the BSDs. When I read that OpenBSD has ipsecctl for creating VPNs I was thrilled. I can only hope it is ported to FreeBSD. I'm always interested in OpenSSH developments, so I keep an ear bent to the OpenBSD group.

    7. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by jjeffries · · Score: 1

      Everybody talks about BSDs as being fabulous firewalls, which I don't deny, but what can they do that linux + iptables & tc can't?

      Here's a similar rate-limiting deal: http://www.linux-noob.com/forums/lofiversion/index .php/t1829.html

      And Linux has all kinds of QOS capabilities:
      http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-HOWTO/Adv-Routing-H OWTO.html

      This is not a troll, it's an honest question. Why BSD for firewalls?

    8. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by WushuJim · · Score: 1
      Is there some reason that you're using FreeBSD with pf instead of using OpenBSD with pf?

      I would guess it is the same reason people use OpenSSH on different distros of Linux and *BSD. Someone might just prefer using that operating system.

      (for those of you who don't know, pf is developed by the OpenBSD team and was ported to FreeBSD by some FBSD developers).

      Same is true with OpenSSH.

    9. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by LurkerXXX · · Score: 3, Interesting
      For one thing, pf is a lot easier on the eyes than iptables. Look through some iptables config files you find on the net. Then go look at some pf.conf files. I think you'll see it's much easier to look at the pf files and instantly see what's going on.

      For another, please point me to the linux equivalent of CARP ( an incredibly easy to set up redundant firewall ). If you are in charge of running a firewall for a company, redundant hardware at the firewall is nice.

    10. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      The developers/community/forums aren't full of elitest assholes?

    11. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the equivalent that we were looking at would be a 3rd party package:

      http://www.ultramonkey.org/

      we decided to use freebsd CARP because:

      1) it is built in, has very simple/minimal config and then "just works"
      2) i really like freebsd and already run it on other boxes due to preference
      3) pf is a really nice firewall to work with since it is very simple with clean readable syntax and great features (not that i'm any expert on the latter)

      on the other hand, ultramonkey has a different architecture and is capable of more than CARP. there are probably setups where CARP wouldn't be an option, but ultramonkey might do the job.

    12. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by discogravy · · Score: 1

      There are various programs/scripts that deal with ssh scanning, but that's a really nice angle to it. I've been using DenyHosts on my production servers (it's in ports, I'm running 6.0-RELEASE on sparc and x86) and it's been working a treat. To name a few other ways to handle it, there's fwscan.sh, DenyHosts, fail2ban, blockhosts, bruteforceblocker (uses pf) and i'm sure i'm missing a bunch of others.

    13. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by CFrankBernard · · Score: 1

      tb-sshdfilter tries to improve upon DenyHOSTS such as using stdout instead of syslog.

    14. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Nimrangul · · Score: 1

      ipsecctl is part of OpenBSD's home grown ipsec, FreeBSD uses KAME's racoon, so they are likely incompatible.

      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams - I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later.
    15. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not a troll, it's an honest question.

      People always say this just after they point out that theirs is eight inches too...

    16. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by tantalic · · Score: 1

      Then how do you explain his use of slashdot?

    17. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

      slashdot has a good mix of people. Zealots and sane alike, definitely nothing like the obsd culture...

    18. Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf by zyche · · Score: 1

      In this case, may I also recommend Expiretable for removing old entries from the table?

  14. Two Keyboards. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Addition of a keyboard multiplexer. This allows USB and PS/2 keyboards to coexist without any special options at boot.

    Yes! Its about time, been waiting for ages for this one. Signed,

    Doctor Octavius

    1. Re:Two Keyboards. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      In all seriousness, Good God, that problem was a PITA. You used to have to configure your machine to use one type of keyboard or the other (which required kernel edits last time I did so). Although you could put a command to switch between them in your startup sequence, you'd be stuck if you rebooted into single-user mode and your machine was configured for the one you didn't have at that moment.

      Typical scenario: you install a server at your office using a PS2 keyboard. Then, you move it to a colo with a USB KVM switch. Guaran-frickin'-tee that if you ever had to work on it in person, you'd 1) have forgotten to reconfigure it, and 2) forgotten to bring along a PS2 keyboard.

      Thank you, thank you, thank you for fixing this! That wasn't a problem most people had to deal with often, but it always came up when you had the least amount of time and patience to deal with it.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  15. PC-BSD by Aethedor · · Score: 1

    If you wanna try BSD, try PC-BSD. It's based on FreeBSD 6.0. It has an easy installation and gives you a GUI (KDE). It's easier to explore BSD when you have an interface you are familiar with then a blinking cursor which only says "Command not found"

    --
    It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
    1. Re:PC-BSD by Bootvis · · Score: 1

      Or try DesktopBSD. Stable and the installation is the easiest I've seen (I've seen Windows, Suse, Red Hat and Ubuntu) You can download it here: DesktopBSD

      --
      Read, refresh, repeat.
    2. Re:PC-BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PC-BSD and DesktopBSD but no LaptopBSD? sorry, there's just not enough BSD's.

    3. Re:PC-BSD by Secrity · · Score: 1

      I am not familiar with PC-BSD, I am familiar with FreeBSD. I find FreeBSD's installation to be easy and a FreeBSD installation can include KDE or Gnome (PC-BSD only includes KDE).

      It looks to me like PC-BSD is to FreeBSD as Kubuntu is to Debian. It also looks like this would make a good FreeBSD Live CD.

      This feature looks odd: "Online Update Manager - Manually or automatically downloads and installs updates for your operating system, without touching your installed programs." Does this mean that it only updates the OS (base system?) and that it doesn't update the installed programs? If it does update installed programs how does it upgrade them without touching them?

  16. Oblivion, you say, Mr. Ballmer? by guitaristx · · Score: 1

    Well if you use Gentoo already then you're a prime candidate for using BSD, because like BSD, Gentoo is following BSD down the path to oblivion.

    Oblivion, you say? Your opinion comes from a trustworthy source, I'm sure....

    --
    I pity the foo that isn't metasyntactic
    1. Re:Oblivion, you say, Mr. Ballmer? by Ingolfke · · Score: 0, Troll

      I don't have a problem w/ Open Source. It will thrive. I run Fedora on my desktop and Smoothwall on my firewall at home. Both products are great and will continue to grow.

      Gentoo, a single Linux distribution, is absolutely following BSD down the path to oblivion. Why else would Daniel Robbins leave a project he started? You should never allow good money or time to follow bad. Daniel cut his loses and left. He was smart. I have no idea when the rest of the Gentoo user community is going to realize that Gentoo, like BSD, and DOS 6.0, and CP/M, is walking down the wide road to hobbiest oblivion. Say hi to the Amiga guys for me.

    2. Re:Oblivion, you say, Mr. Ballmer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is official. Netcraft has now confirmed: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

      FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

      Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

      OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

      Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

  17. Jackass! by pandrijeczko · · Score: 3, Interesting
    But if my experience with Gentoo and Portage is any guide, then you've probably also been bitten by Portage -- Masked ebuilds, ~arch, whatever: the build you want is masked, and unmasking and building creates an amazing cascade of broken packages, right?

    No, I wasn't being rude to you either.

    The Jackass Project http://jackass.homelinux.org/ on Gentoo fixes a lot of the ebuild and portage problems.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  18. Something similar with iptables by Rescate · · Score: 4, Informative

    ## throttles SSH connnection requests to 3/minute from same IP
    ## $RED_DEV is Internet-connected interface, CUSTOMFORWARD is the chain being processed

    iptables -A CUSTOMFORWARD -i $RED_DEV -p tcp --destination-port 22 \
             -m state --state NEW -m recent --set

    iptables -A CUSTOMFORWARD -i $RED_DEV -p tcp --destination-port 22 \
             -m state --state NEW -m recent --update --seconds 60 --hitcount 4 -j DROP

    1. Re:Something similar with iptables by afternoon_nap · · Score: 1

      Pure gibberish when compared to pf or ipfilter syntax (IMO). YMMV.

    2. Re:Something similar with iptables by Rescate · · Score: 1

      You've got a point there. It took me a while to figure out how to write that "gibberish", since the syntax isn't exactly straightforward (as you noted). Thought maybe someone who doesn't have pf might find it useful, so they don't have to start from scratch like I did.

    3. Re:Something similar with iptables by afternoon_nap · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to denigrate any particular version of linux, but I stopped using linux back when FreeBSD 4.1 was released. I was still tinkering around with all kinds of distributions at the time and had a lot of fun. I toyed with ipfwadmin and ipchains back in the day.

      Then I went to comdex in Atlanta around that time. FreeBSD 4.1.1 CDs were handed out there and I talked to several FreeBSD reps there. With a little eye candy and some good facts I was determined to try it.

      Since then I've been an avid user of FreeBSD. I've used ipfw and wrote a script for ipfw and queing a few years ago (see bsdvault.net). I've used ipfilter a good bit.

      PF did come from the OpenBSD group (to which we owe many thanks) as a replacement to ipfilter in a license dispute. I toyed with an OpenBSD bridge at the time at work and found pf was very workable. Since then I've waited for pf to get ported into FreeBSD.

      Then that day arrived. When pf hit the -STABLE branch I was hooked. With altq I was able to take advantage of tcp ack-pri and prioritize my voip services. Piece of cake.

      I'm very satisfied with FreeBSD as a server, firewall, and desktop. There's enough in FreeBSD to keep everyone busy trying out all kinds of stuff. That's why I've used it since 4.1.1.

      I'd really like to see OpenBSD's ipsecctl ported to FreeBSD soon, too.

    4. Re:Something similar with iptables by nuzak · · Score: 1

      > Pure gibberish when compared to pf or ipfilter syntax (IMO). YMMV.

      Actually, I need to configure a couple public-facing BSD boxen to limit the brute force attacks (we have password auth turned off, but the woodpecker behavior is annoying). What would the pf equivalent syntax be?

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    5. Re:Something similar with iptables by afternoon_nap · · Score: 1
      I already posted it. See this to get started: PF: Getting started

      And the man page: pf.conf(5)

      Check out the examples. Bridging with OpenBSD is a piece of cake. It takes only a few minutes to set it up. OpenBSD has the info you need.

    6. Re:Something similar with iptables by afternoon_nap · · Score: 1
      See this.

      It's kind of messy, with stuff commented in and out.... but it works for me. It's got tables, lists, altq (crude, but effective), and labels, but no anchors. The labels look great when checking rule matching with pftop.

    7. Re:Something similar with iptables by CFrankBernard · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the 4.1.1

    8. Re:Something similar with iptables by lactose99 · · Score: 1

      You can use rate-limiting to achieve this, its what I do on my own firewall:

      block in quick on $external_interface from <badguys> to any
      pass in log quick on $external_interface proto tcp from any to $external_interface port 22 flags S/SA keep state (max-src-conn-rate 5/60, overload <badguys> flush global)

      In this case, if any single IP tries to make more than 5 connections to port 22 on my firewall in 60 seconds, they are added to the <badguys> table, which is blocked. Works like a charm for brute-force ssh attacks.

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    9. Re:Something similar with iptables by Spit · · Score: 1

      Ugh! :P

      --
      POKE 36879,8
  19. Anything coming from Apple? by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    As an OS X user I wonder if the new SATA options etc are coming from Apple or there were Apple coders involved in creating new code.

    1. Re:Anything coming from Apple? by rivaldufus · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt it. While Apple has contributed a lot of code, more code contributions are going the other direction.

    2. Re:Anything coming from Apple? by nub!s · · Score: 2, Insightful

      of course, and the sources were sent to the bsd team using the standard "apple OSS contrubuting" procedure. A 12MB tarball to a gmail account. ;)

      ----nubis :)

    3. Re:Anything coming from Apple? by jerkyjunkmail · · Score: 1

      Mac OS X and FreeBSD use different kernels and thus different drivers. Mac OS X uses a framework called IOKit for drivers. I'm not sure how hard it is to port them from one to the other, but I would guess it's not exactly a straight path. Whether it comes from Apple I doubt it. I think their goal is to not support every pc hardware device. They tend to keep it simple and focused to the hardware that they produce like the SATA on their own boxes. I would also thing if Apple pushed something downstream from their XNU kernel they would have to BSD license it. Most of their stuff is APSL.

      --

      --
      What is pirate software? Software for inventory of stolen treasure?
    4. Re:Anything coming from Apple? by setantae · · Score: 1

      Some stuff was brought back. I can remember some msdosfs fixes. I can't remember much else for 6.1, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

      For 7-CURRENT, we have OpenBSM, which Apple have (at least partly) funded.

  20. Journaling Filesystem by AlasdairCake · · Score: 1, Interesting

    FreeBSD may be an excellent operating system, but it's lack of a good journaling file system is a major barrier to adoption. I don't think they can claim to be an excellent choice for SATA RAID arrays until this is addressed.

    Although UFS2's background FSCK is a welcome improvement, it's not a solution.

    It's good to see that there are projects to bring XFS and JFS support into FreeBSD, I suspect it will be a long time before they're production ready and you'll be able to boot FreeBSD on them.

    1. Re:Journaling Filesystem by BasharTeg · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is a troll. "Background FSCK" isn't BSD's answer to journaling. Soft updates is Dr. McKusick's implementation to maintain filesystem integrity in the event of a system failure. BSD doesn't need journaling, it has soft udpates. You need to read:

      http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceed ings/usenix2000/general/seltzer.html

      http://www.mckusick.com/softdep/

    2. Re:Journaling Filesystem by ThePhilips · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > FreeBSD may be an excellent operating system,
      > but it's lack of a good journaling file system
      > is a major barrier to adoption.

      I'm not sure about journaling file systems. I was helping people in data centres and they have described me way they use FreeBSD there.

      First of all, they have specially customized distro packed into single file for network boot. Then, every time something happen they just (re)plug new/replacement board, BSD is loaded with net boot over network, unpacked and booted. OS formats harddrive and run special software to attach local hard drive to networked RAID array. That software does mirroring/etc/whatever is configured.

      In other words (and that's pretty logical) you do not need journaling with RAID. You need journaling when you do not have UPS. But if you have money to throw at RAID - then you definitely need an UPS - to protect your investments in RAID.

      What journaling does for single hard drive operation is replaced by mirroring in RAID configurations. But that's my limited knowledge of how it works. Had RAID only once - but it was way too noisy. So I replaced RAID config with simple daily backup to the second hard drive.

      Thou additional security provided by journaling can definitely help ;-)
      Probably people with experience of Linux in data centres can elaborate on the details. From all what I have seen it is precisely advantage of journaled file systems that you can get quite short recovery time w/o more expensive RAID.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    3. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confusing 2 technologies. RAID does not replace the need for journaling, nor does a UPS. RAID is for hardware integrity, performance, and high availability. Journaling is for software (filesystem) integrity and recovery speed.

      Some things to consider:

      1) You can't replace a faulty hard drive on a non-RAID system while the system is 100% operational, you can with RAID.

      2) Non-journaled filesystems can be troublesome after a power outage due to the time it takes for an integrity check.

      3) High end hardware RAID solutions also have proprietary backup / snapshot technology that you cannot get with a single hard drive solution.

    4. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Journaling is not a replacement for RAID, but rather the two complement each other. Even if you have RAID you could still end up with an inconsistent file system, either due to a bug in the file system implementation, crashing or losing power in the middle of a write to disk. In other words, even if the RAID parity information is correct, it does not guarantee that the file system structures you've placed on top of it are correct.

      This is where journaling comes in. In the case where you find a problem in your file system you can start back at the begining of your journal and replay the log. If you had no journaling, but RAID, you still might be looking at a long and painful downtime while you fsck your file system.

    5. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Skuto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >This is a troll. "Background FSCK" isn't BSD's answer to journaling. Soft
      >updates is Dr. McKusick's implementation to maintain filesystem integrity in
      >the event of a system failure. BSD doesn't need journaling, it has soft
      >udpates.

      Uhm, no. softupdates is a nice (and performant) way to get quick restarts when something crashes, but it isn't close to journalling at all. You still have to run fsck, and yes, it can run in the background, but it *still has to run*.

      If you're looking at Terabytes of data, this is very painful and takes ages, whereas a journalling filesystem has no need to do this.

      There are certainly important applications where journalling is a must. Just because most home users or small servers don't need it, doesn't mean that softupdates removes the need for it entirely.

      I'm actually pretty sure FreeBSD will switch to journalling eventually.

    6. Re:Journaling Filesystem by SpinJaunt · · Score: 1
      Ermm, Scott Long is working on UFS Journalling:
      I'm going to be restarting the UFSJ work in a week or two as part of my
      daytime job. I hope to have something available for public testing
      within a few weeks of that.

      Scott
      that was on 21 Mar 2006.

      There is also something called GEOM Journal.
      --
      /. is good for you.
    7. Re:Journaling Filesystem by nbritton · · Score: 5, Informative

      FreeBSD has journaling ufs2 in the works:
      http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current /2005-December/059079.html

      Scott Long also touches on the subject in a interview he did for the bsdtalk podcast show:
      http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/2006/02/bsdtalk017-int erview-with-freebsd.html

    8. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Vyvyan+Basterd · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Aside from your ignorance about softdeps, filesystems like XFS are only suitable for high-quality hardware like SGIs. It's not a good fit for crappy PC-class hardware (yes fanboys, that includes Apple hardware) which is what the vast majority of FreeBSD installations runs on. If you so desperately want a journaling fs, port ext3 instead.

    9. Re:Journaling Filesystem by setantae · · Score: 1

      Actually, we do need journalling. There is an implementation that I was told was nearly ready for commit.

    10. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You still have to run fsck, and yes, it can run in the background, but it *still has to run*.

      Actually it doesn't need to run. The file system is consistent and you can start using it right away at boot. The only issue an background fsck would clear up is that there may be some freed space (via rm(1) or rmdir(1)) that is still marked as allocated, so it isn't available.

    11. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      ...it isn't close to journalling at all.

      No it's not. It is an alternative to journaling. Most people who want journaling just want protection for their data. If softupdates can supply that, then they don't need the journaling.

      You still have to run fsck, and yes, it can run in the background, but it *still has to run*.

      So what? The use of background fsck makes this a non-issue. Unless you're in the habit, that is, of pulling the plug instead of doing a proper shutdown. If you are, stop.

      Sure, sometimes you'll need to do a full fsck. But those times are exceedingly rare. They're so rare it's silly to make it an issue when choosing an OS.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    12. Re:Journaling Filesystem by drmerope · · Score: 1

      "eventually"

      No, this is going to happen extremely soon. One of the flaws of the softupdates approach was always in the code complexity. There is a definite feeling within the developer community that softupdates will be jettisoned soon, to catch the signs of this google for bad_dir panics or see http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=93942 or http://people.freebsd.org/~pho/baddir.html

      You may also notice in the release engineering notes for 6.1 several references to UFS deadlocks. All of these were long latent softupdate bugs, mistakes in the dependency tracking, etc, etc. It was quite the rollcoaster as those fixes when in, often followed by several other "no still not right" commits.

      Softupdate's days are numbered. The one clear advantage that UFS has these days is being extremely robust in the presence of disk errors. The same cannot be said of ReiserFS or XFS wherein the on-disk data-structures are so optimized the filesystem is prone to fall-over rapidly when on a degrading disk. Ultimately though this sliver of a benefit from UFS cannot warrant staying with something far outmoded by proven better methods (journaling) and large disks.

      Incidentially, it is historically wrong to call "softupdates" a response to journaling. Softupdates predates wide-spread acceptance of journaling filesystems and in its heyday enjoyed better performance (no longer).

    13. Re:Journaling Filesystem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the flaws of the softupdates approach was always in the code complexity. There is a definite feeling within the developer community that softupdates will be jettisoned soon, to catch the signs of this google for bad_dir panics or see http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=93942 or http://people.freebsd.org/~pho/baddir.html

      You may also notice in the release engineering notes for 6.1 several references to UFS deadlocks. All of these were long latent softupdate bugs, mistakes in the dependency tracking, etc, etc. It was quite the rollcoaster as those fixes when in, often followed by several other "no still not right" commits.


      You are pointing to specific examples of flawed implementation, in a system which is coming to the end of some huge fundamental changes (FreeBSD) and then proclaiming that the flaws are in softupdates. I don't think that is the case.

      Ultimately though this sliver of a benefit from UFS cannot warrant staying with something far outmoded by proven better methods (journaling) and large disks.

      In the last 7 years, I've lost data from Ext2, Ext3 and Reiser, yet never lost data from UFS+softdep. Journaling and softupdates do not prevent data from being lost, they prevent filesystems from falling into an inconsistent state. Can you show us this proof that journaling is better?

      Incidentially, it is historically wrong to call "softupdates" a response to journaling. Softupdates predates wide-spread acceptance of journaling filesystems and in its heyday enjoyed better performance (no longer).

      Yes they are both a response to the same problem.

    14. Re:Journaling Filesystem by eten · · Score: 1

      Softupdate will lose data in last minutes. I am a developer on FreeBSD, i know when my machine crashed, all last minutes data will be lost forever, softupdate will gameover if journaling comes in. if I have 1OT disk at my home FreeBSD machine, and it crashed, and I never keep the machine running for 10 hours long, you know, the fscking will never be finished, in fact, most home machines will never keep running for 10 hours long every day.

  21. Forgive me for feeding the troll by guitaristx · · Score: 1

    I will concede that FreeBSD, in terms of implementing the latest bells and whistles, is behind Linux. Often, it's far behind linux. However, the strength of FreeBSD (and most of the BSDs) is not in how many of the latest features get crammed into the next release, it's the stability and correctness of how the operating system works. Furthermore, the FreeBSD developers and maintainers have worked very hard to create a sane way of getting things done. I love the fact that any operator-installed packages are never going to clash with the base system install. /usr/local/* is the appropriate place for non-base-system stuff to go, no matter what. I love the fact that threads are truly lightweight processes. I love the fact that the kernel, boot process, and base system install are all, together, what makes FreeBSD. You get no such guarantees from Linux. As so many people around here are in the habit of pointing out, Linux is just a kernel. Keeping the kernel tied with the appropriate binaries and scripts is what helps keep FreeBSD stable.

    I wanted to migrate from Windows on my desktop to Linux, and I found linux, especially with the built-in package management features of a few distros, to be almost impossible to administer and still remain current. It took me days, DAYS, to get a linux distro up-and-running to be sufficiently ready to use as a desktop. It took me < 2 hours for FreeBSD. FreeBSD has remained stable, secure, and easy-to-use ever since. Heck, I can even run software built for Linux on my FreeBSD system through its robust Linux compatibility layer. Look at Netcraft's longest-uptime charts, and see how many of the top entries are BSD systems. You say FreeBSD is dying -- I say FreeBSD is growing.

    Now, go on, eat up. The above is 100% Purina Troll Chow. Keep on trolling if you're still hungry.

    --
    I pity the foo that isn't metasyntactic
    1. Re:Forgive me for feeding the troll by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      You are forgiven.

  22. BSD is great...but by seventhc · · Score: 0

    I use FreeBSD 4.11 on my laptop, and I really wish I could run 6.1. My problem is this, I had to unplug the touchpad on my laptop b/c it is broken, once i unplug it..6.0 can't boot, so install never takes place. For some odd reason 4.11 is'nt effected by this. Once i replace my touchpad or find a work around, I will surely give BSD 6.1 a try. :) (BTW if i plug it in, nothing can be installed at all, not even 4.11)

    --
    'sig' deleted due to the stupidity of it's 'nature'
  23. Working Great! by Ramjet350 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was out on Freebsd.org last night looking at documentation and noticed that 6.1 was listed as the current release. I grabbed it and installed right away (probably not the best idea) but it works great so far. Very stable and all my hardware is detected and working perfectly.

    If you haven't tried it, get an old box and give it a shot. More experience with Unix never hurt anyone!

    1. Re:Working Great! by pklinken · · Score: 0

      the CURRENT release or the current RELEASE ? ;)

    2. Re:Working Great! by Ekarderif · · Score: 1

      Now I gotta figure out how to make my 386/33 bootstrap 6.1-REL within the next decade.

  24. Well trolled. by Homestar+Breadmaker · · Score: 1

    Obviously you need journalling filesystems to use an OS right? Its not like softupdates are a superior solution to the same problem or anything.

    1. Re:Well trolled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Its not like softupdates are a superior solution to the same problem or anything.

      More here: http://www.mckusick.com/softdep/and here: http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceed ings/usenix2000/general/full_papers/seltzer/seltze r_html/index.html#32506

      Neither Softupdates or Journalling are "superior solution"s to the problem.
    2. Re:Well trolled. by Homestar+Breadmaker · · Score: 1

      Yes, softupdates are superior. Journalling creates extra writes by logging all metadata operations, and does not give the same guarentee that softupdates do for consistancy.

  25. DRAC by setantae · · Score: 1

    Actually, this used to be an issue with the DRAC on Dell servers, which is essentially a USB keyboard.

  26. Rebuilding world by nubbie · · Score: 2, Informative

    Besure to check out http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/h andbook/makeworld.html on how to rebuild world. No need to reinstall when you can rebuild the OS yourself.

    --
    'Go for the eyes, Boo, go for the eyes, aaarrrrrrrr!' -- Minsc
  27. One of the best choices for sata raid? by j.a.mcguire · · Score: 1

    Sure, if you can afford a top of the line raid card. For the rest of us, I upgraded to 6.1-RC2 last week, and it has somewhat improved SATA performance, but I still get write errors on my SI3112 card, whereas in 5.4 I had none. Hard drives being one of the central parts of a PC, you'd have thought FreeBSD would have embraced SATA controllers, instead it appears to be taking them years to catch up.

    1. Re:One of the best choices for sata raid? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      I got an Areca 1210 PCIE SATAII RAID controller with my new system. It works like a champ with FreeBSD 5.x and 6.x. It's a tad pricey at $350, but it rocks, and it even works with Windows.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  28. Netcraft confirms it by thealsir · · Score: 0, Troll

    FreeBSD 6.1 is slashdotted

    --
    Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
  29. Re:But... by wolf369T · · Score: 1

    Actually, it doesn't run Linux, as in 'the Linux kernel'. You can run Linux binaries on FreeBSD, but this doesn't means that 'it runs Linux'.

  30. Yikes by devphaeton · · Score: 1

    How'd this slip by me?

    The buglist no longer mentions the sysinstall/ide bug i've experienced since 5.1, perhaps it's fixed.

    No more INVALID REALLOC OF SIZE 0: PRESS ANY KEY TO REBOOT in the middle of downloading base.

    Haven't looked at the glib-20 thing yet tho. :(

    Congrats for the Freebsd Team!

    --


    do() || do_not(); // try();