FreeBSD 8.4 Released

kthreadd writes "The FreeBSD project has released version 8.4 of the free operating system with the same name. Highlights of this version include GNOME 2.32.1, KDE 4.10.1. In this release, focus has been put on improving stability and storage capability. The ZFS filesystem has been updated to support feature flags for ZFS pools, asynchronous destruction of ZFS datasets, LZ4 compression and ZIO NOP-write optimization. Also, support has been added for all shipping LSI storage controllers."

Comments

only recommended if you need to stay on 8.x

[Trepidity]

Most desktop users won't want to install this release. FreeBSD 9.1 was released in December 2012, and is the most recent stable release. This 8.4 release is a point release in the still-maintained 8.x series, intended for people currently running 8.3 who for one reason or another don't wish to upgrade to 9.x yet, but who do want an incremental upgrade.

Re:only recommended if you need to stay on 8.x

[feld]

Except 8.4 has:

Better hyperthreading support than 9.1
Newer ZFS features than 9.1
Better snd_uaudio and snd_hda audio drivers than 9.1

These things were MFC'd to 8-STABLE and 9-STABLE after 9.1-RELEASE, so 8.4 is really a better release an some aspects than 9.1 is.

Re:only recommended if you need to stay on 8.x

[BitingChaos]

9.1 also shipped with a busted MFI driver - it corrupts data on drives larger than 2TB. While you can download and compile a fixed kernel, they still haven't released an official update, since it is seen as a "bug fix", and not a "security fix". 8.4 may have been better for our new server. :(

Re:only recommended if you need to stay on 8.x

[ArchieBunker]

The difference between Linux and *BSD has never been wider. I love BSD because of how /etc is configured. Linux made a mess of things and with massive scripts and subdirectories. Things have changed so much since the 2.0 kernel days its almost an entirely new OS.

Legacy Release

[eecue]

It's probably worth pointing out that this is a legacy release and the current production branch is 9.X, currently at 9.1-p3

Re:Desktop environments

[Em Adespoton]

If memory serves OpenBSD 5.3 was released with GNOME 3 and KDE 3.5. Here we see FreeBSD 8.4 released with GNOME 2 and KDE 4. Can anyone shed some light on why one BSD operating system has a modern KDE and outdated GNOME desktop while the other has the reverse?

Because FreeBSD 8.4 is a historical maintenance release for the FreeBSD 8 series; FreeBSD Release is at 9.1-p3.

Re:tcsh

[X0563511]

Seems a stupid reason, because it takes all of 5 minutes to "fix."

Re:tcsh

[H0p313ss]

There's just nothing more frustrating then tcsh.

You have clearly never been forced to use Lotus Notes.

Should a *BSD newbie install this at home?

[Saija]

Should I, as a *BSD newbie install this at my home laptop wich it's used by my wife, which only checks facebook from time on time, reads email and play some solitaire and angrybirds?

Myself am a windows user with a basic++ linux knowledge: I know how to install and update a distro(I prefer debian based but right now am wanting to test Fedora 18), compile some packages from source, has poked some kernel compilin', made some kde translation on the past, reported some bugs on FOSS software, etc. Now I have my Dell laptop with Windows 7 and I'm planning to back it up and format it and I'm thinking to put it up Fedora 18, but the BSD world has intrigue me and I've made some test on virtual machines.

BTW I'm primarly a Java developer how some times made some tiny personal project on my laptop and who enjoys a good Quake 3 match(for remembering my old days on the College fragging like there were no tomorrow) but who actually prefer to enjoy the time with my wife and the kids.

Could a user like me install some BSD distro and used it regularly to this basic things I've listed? if so, which BSD do you suggest?, bonus points if lastest KDE's it's available

Thanks for your suggestions!

Re:Please if some FreeBSD dev sees this...

[bussdriver]

If you read about ASLR and I recommend the OpenBSD paper on the topic (I think they implemented it 1st) the technique only makes it more difficult, it doesn't SOLVE the problem. If you benefit from ASLR, then you have a security problem already. I'm not sure I like the idea of losing entropy and slowing down malloc for something that does little to stop attacks from rogue processes (which can be compromised by other methods.)

Sure, I might prefer you DoS some process by crashing it repeatedly instead of taking control over it... but I would prefer you not corrupt or crash it at all and I would want more effort put into better jails and damage control. Removing strcpy and other common trouble makers like OpenBSD does would be nice. ASLR adds to the level of complacency (except on OpenBSD where paranoia is expected.)

The goals should be what they always were. New buzzwords be dammed.

NOTE: I'm years behind on my BSD.
I'm not convinced we shouldn't be moving towards microkernel hybrids like Darwin and towards a full microkernel. We took a big speed loss going to protected memory management which was accelerated in hardware and new CPUs made the transition almost unnoticeable. Maybe we should be aiming for something similar? (just isolating most drivers would help; you could leave the FS and HD within the kernel.) I also hate to think of how cool it could have been in Multics was used in place of unix... every unix has been more bloated for decades and I would love to swap RAM, CPUs, etc without rebooting. I find netBSD's work on including an interpreter in the kernel to be interesting in a shocking kind of way. Anyhow, the point is that ASLR is just a niche band-aid and not the most important feature we "must have" to continue living... and we've survived for decades without it. Such complaints sound more like an IT person speaking.

Re:tcsh

[Nethead]

I'm fucked. I use tcsh on my *nix boxes and now my employer is moving to Lotus Notes and I have to move all the Exchange shit over to Domino and join it to the French company that bought us.