FreeBSD 9.0 Released

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday January 12, 2012 @10:21AM from the get-it-while-it's-hot dept.

An anonymous reader writes "FreeBSD 9.0 has been released. A few highlights include: A new installer, bsdinstall(8) has been added and is the installer used by the ISO images provided as part of this release, The Fast Filesystem now supports softupdates journaling, and Kernel support for Capsicum Capability Mode, an experimental set of features for sandboxing support."

21 of 418 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by bonch · 2012-01-12 10:21 · Score: 5, Informative

As noted in the release notes, FreeBSD 9.0 includes Clang/LLVM, the goal is to be rid of all GPL dependencies by version 10.0. At the 2011 LLVM Developers' meeting, Brooks Davis covered the effort in bringing in LLVM for 9.0 and the work remaining for 10.0 to replace GCC. The move was originally intended for 9.0, but there wasn't enough time to get it all done, particularly due to the thousands of pieces of software in the ports tree that still require work. GPLv3 is cited as the catalyst for all this, for preventing cooperation between free and proprietary software sectors.
1. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by iggymanz · 2012-01-12 10:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  just a case of "different", not wrong. GPL can't be used in some cases where BSD licensed code can, for example one can distribute modified BSD code without providing the source code as long as its done the way the BSD copyright mandates.
2. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by MrHanky · 2012-01-12 10:53 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  SharkLaser is Microsoft shill. The GPL is against Microsoft's interests. bonch is an Apple shill.
3. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by tomhudson · 2012-01-12 11:05 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  How is it a troll to point out that the GPL has caused a lot of problems that would be obviated by using BSD-licensed code (as one example, just look at the deal LG signed with Microsoft for "linux protection").
  The GPL is an evolutionary dead end. It's one of those "it seemed like a good idea at the time - what could go wrong?" Now we know a few things that DID go wrong. There's a reason Apple used FreeBSD as their basis for OSX and not Linux.
4. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by bonch · 2012-01-12 11:29 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Also, why the fuck should FOSS users care about what Apple does for their own closed-source OS? Before you say Darwin, consider the fact that not a single soul uses Darwin as his main OS. Why? Because it's shit.
  Um...millions of OS X and iOS users are using Darwin as their main OS, as it is the foundation for those operating systems.
5. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by tomhudson · 2012-01-12 12:38 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Apple hired several of the FreeBSD devs, and lots of the code was, and continues to be, given back to the FreeBSD project. Also, in case you haven't noticed it, that Apple-sponsored code includes the rewrite to WebKit that all you Chrome users like so much. You might want to check out the other stuff here and here. Also, if you use CUPS to print anything, thank Apple - they bought the source code from the original developer. Use zeroconf for networking? Thank Apple for their open standard (as opposed to Microsoft's closed one, which wasn't adopted by the IETF).
6. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by causality · 2012-01-12 12:45 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  There are reasons not to use GPL not having to do with modifying code, but simply running the code. E.g. GPL'd libraries.
  Libraries are generally licensed under the LGPL. The LGPL is specifically designed to avoid the imaginary problems you bring up. From that link (emphasis mine):
  
  The LGPL places copyleft restrictions on the program governed under it but does not apply these restrictions to other software that merely link with the program.
  
  If you're going to be childish and call me names like "moron" and "zealot", you should least demonstrate a basic familiarity with the facts. If you feel a need to deal with things that way, it is a sure sign you are reacting emotionally and not proactively evaluating anything reasonably. Against anyone who remains reasonable, you are going to make yourself look foolish. Just for your future reference.
  
  --
  It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
7. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by jimi1x · 2012-01-12 15:13 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Now, I've yet to see aviation and medical mission-critical software run on Linux.
  I think you may want to revisit your statement. I used to work in a hospital. We had medical equipment that ran embedded Linux. I currently work for a bank. We have ATMs that run embedded Linux. Our CCTV system runs embeded Linux in the cameras. Did you know that a lot of banking mainframes run on Linux? I'd argue completely against your statement that no mission critical software runs on Linux.
8. Re:Clang/LLVM in FreeBSD by icebraining · 2012-01-12 15:22 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  TCP/IP was already a standard in many places before MS got around to implement their stack, and it had different but compatible implementations from the start (according to documents, Stanford, University College of London and BBN all had their own).
  It seems to me TCP/IP was a standard because DARPA pushed for it, not because of BSD.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
Dennis Ritchie by ShanghaiBill · 2012-01-12 10:33 · Score: 5, Informative

The FreeBSD Project dedicates the FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE to the memory of Dennis M. Ritchie, one of the founding fathers of the UNIX operating system. It is on the foundation laid by the work of visionaries like Dennis that software like the FreeBSD operating system came to be. The fact that his work of so many years ago continues to influence new design decisions to this very day speaks for the brilliant engineer that he was.
May he rest in peace.
1. Re:Dennis Ritchie by muon-catalyzed · 2012-01-12 10:47 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  more importantly, the creator of C language
EC2 AMIs available by cperciva · 2012-01-12 10:42 · Score: 5, Informative

FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE machine images for Amazon EC2 are available for m1.large and larger instance types: http://www.daemonology.net/freebsd-on-ec2/

--
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
Re:Memory Requirements by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 11:28 · Score: 2, Informative

Yep. FreeBSD is not actually getting that much more bloated. (None of the BSD's are really I suppose). 486 with 24MB ram
FreeBSD & ZFS by ThorGod · 2012-01-12 11:46 · Score: 5, Informative

What? A new FreeBSD release and no body talks about the ZFS features in the release? I don't memorize version numbers, but I know the ZFS system has updated significantly between 8.2 and 9.0. Deduplication is in there, now, for instance.
Granted, the new installer is one of the bigger changes. sysinstall...I'm happy to see you go!

--
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
1. Re:FreeBSD & ZFS by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 12:58 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Again: before ANYONE considers using dedup or compression on FreeBSD, please see this post of mine the last time this came up (a week ago), as it contains references to and admittance of the problems:
  http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2604202&cid=38589558
  Additionally, manual "memory tuning" (specifically arc size maximum) on FreeBSD is still required, and it becomes more important to tune some other kernel variables if you run a mixed environment (ZFS + MySQL + shell machine, for example).
  The Slashdot community can expect me to appear and comment every single time "ZFS on FreeBSD" is mentioned. Users need to be aware of the shortcomings so they can make an appropriate choices/decisions (staying with UFS, using another OS, etc.).
Re:Gnome version 2.32.1 by geek · 2012-01-12 11:47 · Score: 4, Informative

In the future Gnome3 will require SystemD which is Linux only.
Re:But, what can I do with it? by Galactic+Dominator · 2012-01-12 12:05 · Score: 3, Informative

Yes, yes, yes, and yes.
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x11-wm.html
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/desktop-browsers.html
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/virtualization-host.html

--
brandelf -t FreeBSD /brain
Re:ZFS v28 by bill_mcgonigle · 2012-01-12 12:13 · Score: 4, Informative

For many scenarios, ZFS v28 is the minimal 'usable' version number, which has previously limited FreeBSD's ZFS adoption. Now it's a real contender, and I congratulate the team.
Re: deduplication. Be sure you have enough RAM or you're going to be in for a heck of a surprise. 2GB of dedicated RAM per TB of disk usage is recommended as a rule of thumb. I found this out the hard way when it was new.

--
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
PC-BSD 9 by future+assassin · 2012-01-12 12:35 · Score: 4, Informative

http://www.pcbsd.org/ will be announced today hopefully. Looking forward to giving it a spin and hopefully might change my mind about Linux Mint and become my main OS. Didn't have hardware luck with it in the early days.

--
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Re:Memory Requirements by smash · 2012-01-12 15:43 · Score: 3, Informative

Thats not really bloat, It uses ram/cpu for checksums/de-dup/compression and cache. Its by design. If you don't require/want those features, dont enable them/live wth slower i/o or run ufs.

--
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Re:Memory Requirements by Anonymous Coward · 2012-01-12 17:29 · Score: 3, Informative

2GB RAM per TB HDD is only if you're running dedupe. I'm running 10TB with 4GB ram w/o dedup, but with compression on. No issues...fast and reliable.