Slashdot Mirror


PC-BSD 7.1 Released With Integrated Software Manager

Death Metal writes "PC-BSD 7.1 is built upon the FreeBSD 7.1-STABLE operating system. FreeBSD is a UNIX-based operating system that provides a high level of security and stability. The Galileo Edition of PC-BSD includes updated versions of KDE (4.2.2) and Xorg (7.4). The latest version of KDE includes new window effects, screen savers, and better 3D Acceleration. PC-BSD exclusively features the Push Button Installer, a software installation wizard with a wide range of applications. The latest version improves PBI self-containment to increase reliability. The Add / Remove Programs tool and the Update Manager have been consolidated into 'Software & Updates.'"

8 of 81 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory nitpicking. by kwabbles · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm pretty sure it's based on 7.2 PRE, not 7.1. The summary also makes it look like the software manager is a new feature, which it is not. The PBI system has been around for a while in PC-BSD.

    --
    Just disrupt the deflector shield with a tachyon burst.
    1. Re:Obligatory nitpicking. by FST777 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm pretty sure it's based on 7.2 PRE, not 7.1.

      That is correct.

      The official website states 7.2-PRERELEASE, but the press release says 7.1-STABLE. Depending on how you track and merge FreeBSD, both may be correct (tracking 7.1-STABLE and backporting functionality from 7.2 would do the trick).

      --
      Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
  2. Re:What about XFS? by jdong · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm quite sure you mean ZFS. XFS is SGI's popular journaling filesystem.

  3. Re:Xorg 7.4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    It appears that you're running Ubuntu, so to see your xorg version, try this:

    aptitude show xserver-xorg

  4. Re:Xorg 7.4? by value_added · · Score: 3, Informative

    How do I find out which version of Xorg I have?

    The same as for version numbers for all your other other ports -- pkg_info(7)

    pkg_info -Ex xorg

  5. Re:livecd? by Rynor · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nobody is keeping you from adding the settings in xorg.conf, it just uses some defaults if they aren't there.

  6. Re:Unix based? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    BSD can be traced back to MaBell and Unix.

    This video has a decent history of BSD in a nutshell:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7833143728685685343

    It's linux that advertised itself as being "Unix-like".

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  7. Re:10 gigs? by JonLatane · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, first off, dependencies are, much more often than just the "Library" directories, in their own "Framework" directories. Check /System/Library/Frameworks for the important core Mac OS X frameworks and /Library/Frameworks for your basic system frameworks. You've also probably got a ~/Library/Frameworks directory but there's probably nothing interesting in there unless you're a developer. The rest of the "Library" directories consists more of non-reusable stuff.

    However, plenty of applications do just bundle their own versions of dependencies. Just taking a glance around my system, 26.9 of Adium's 60.2MB consists of the "Frameworks" directory in Adium. 122.2MB of iWeb is Frameworks, many of which would probably be useful if they were universally available to developers (FTPKit?). Open source (and open-source-based) applications tend to be the worst about this since they have a habit of packaging large parts of the Linux ecosystem since minor incompatibilities OS X's BSD-grounded system make proper ports less convenient. Having both Crossover and Crossover Games take so much space with so many identical dependencies is just silly. Other notable applications on this front include Battle for Wesnoth and OOo.

    Across all applications, localizations are a bit more of a problem, as you said. An even bigger problem is that binaries are often larger simply because they're written in Obj-C; Obj-C supports some very, very cool runtime features not available in any other compiled language, but they add considerably to the binary size.

    In general, though, you're right - OS X is far better than Windows about sharing dependencies properly, but there's pretty much no way to get the tight dependency management Ubuntu/Fedora/openSUSE has without having a repository-based package manager, which is an entirely different software management philosophy. (Although the idealist in me likes to hope it's not the case, that model doesn't really foster the develop-something-good-and-make-money-quickly environment that I like about Mac OS X, since there's such a big barrier between you and users).