Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD 9.2, FreeBSD 10.0 Alpha 4 Released

An anonymous reader writes "The FreeBSD Release Engineering Team has announced the release of FreeBSD 9.2. FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE has ZFS TRIM SSD support, ZFS LZ4 compression support, DTrace hooks and VirtIO drivers as part of the default kernel configuration, unmapped I/O support, and numerous other minor features. FreeBSD also announced FreeBSD 10.0 Alpha 4 on the same day, which is the next major feature release of the open-source BSD operating system."

19 of 133 comments (clear)

  1. Re:FreeBSD? by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Informative

    heh, well the userland part of FreeBSD has more desktop installs than Linux distros. and likely most slashdotters have devices in their home and workplace running either Free, Net or Open BSD and not even know it.

  2. Re:but Linux even more so by toejam13 · · Score: 2

    I agree with the smartphones. I disagree with cable and DSL modems, many of which use VxWorks or another commercial embedded OS.

  3. Firewire is being pulled from GENERIC by toejam13 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The interesting thing I noticed in the release notes was that the Firewire driver was pulled from the 9.2 GENERIC kernel. Meanwhile, Thunderbolt isn't expected until 10.x.

    I think the days of Firewire are nearly over.

    1. Re:Firewire is being pulled from GENERIC by smash · · Score: 2

      *shrug*. I just resurrected an EFI loader SNAFU on my mac mini with a firewire cable. Target disk mode rocks.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    2. Re:Firewire is being pulled from GENERIC by LoRdTAW · · Score: 2

      Firewire was dead from the beginning. Apple held onto the Firewire trademark and there was a per device charge of twenty five cents (!394 cards, cameras, cable boxes, PC's or motherboards etc.). USB was inferior in many ways but was royalty free, almost as fast and available on every motherboard. After USB 2.0 came out, it was over for 1394.

      I just hope Thunderbolt doesn't make the same mistake as it is a good replacement for 1394 and has plenty of bandwidth, even for video cards.

  4. Re:Phoronix being strangely useful by pathological+liar · · Score: 2

    They're not providing any value, they're summarizing a release announcement -- and the only things they left out are three bullet points that are just version number bumps for major apps/libraries in base.

  5. Relationship between Apple Darwin and FreeBSD by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Found this tidbit here: when developing OS X v10.3, the "BSD layer was synchronized with FreeBSD 5".

    Will new FreeBSD features eventually show up in Darwin/OS X, or have the two projects been sufficiently forked to prevent that from happening?

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
    1. Re:Relationship between Apple Darwin and FreeBSD by smash · · Score: 4, Informative

      The relevant bits of the FreeBSD userland are periodically (every major release) imported into OS X. The two systems are fairly different, so kernel changes in FreeBSD probably won't show up, but tweaks to command line tools and other stuff probably will.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    2. Re:Relationship between Apple Darwin and FreeBSD by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative

      The relevant bits of the FreeBSD userland are periodically (every major release) imported into OS X. The two systems are fairly different, so kernel changes in FreeBSD probably won't show up, but tweaks to command line tools and other stuff probably will.

      The best way to think about it is that Darwin is "the kinda sorta fifth BSD", separate from {Free,Net,Open,DragonFly}BSD, but willing to pick stuff up from the *BSDs, just as the *BSDs are willing to pick up stuff from other *BSDs to various degrees.

    3. Re:Relationship between Apple Darwin and FreeBSD by smash · · Score: 2

      True, however various bits of the BSD kernel have been ported to it. This is why I said "probably won't show up", because stuff like the firewalling code has been ported.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  6. Re:it's dead, Jim by smash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thanks. The less noobs like yourself that use it, the less of a target the OS will be. I've been happily running internet facing stuff on FreeBSD since 2001, and it's been a pleasant change from the chaos that is Linux development and distribution upgrade.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  7. Re:but Linux even more so by smash · · Score: 2

    And all netapps array, junipers, iphones, ipads, ipods and macs run a variety of FreeBSD components.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  8. Re:it's dead, Jim by smash · · Score: 2

    Don't put words in my mouth. I'm not relying entirely on security via obscurity. But if the OS is not the most common mainstream noob-used OS, then it is going to see less effort put towards hacking it. All my shit is still firewalled and doesn't even listen to any remote admin port via the internet.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  9. Re:Still comes with proprietary firmware? by smash · · Score: 3, Informative

    no. they enable use of proprietary blobs, but do not ship with proprietary blobs in the kernel.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  10. Re:but Linux even more so by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

    You might want to scan the Android stack for FreeBSD copyrights sometime. Most of the Android libc is a slimmed-down version of the FreeBSD one, and there are quite a few other bits of FreeBSD code in there too. In terms of lines of code, I think there is about as much FreeBSD code in Android as there is Linux code.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. Re:Thanks BSD, just installed 9.1 by kthreadd · · Score: 2

    You can upgrade quite easily with the freebsd-update utility.

  12. For those wanting a bit more MEAT by tomxor · · Score: 2

    I had a look through this timeline tracing from the origin at NeXTSTEP 0.8, and now my brain is slightly melted O_o... but I managed to find all of the inheritance from other systems (excluding integrations between derivatives of itself like Darwin, OS X Server, OS X and iOS etcetera):

    • 1988, NeXTSTEP 0.8, inherited from: 4.3 BSD, Mach 2.0
    • 1989, NeXTSTEP 1.0, inherited from: Mach 2.5
    • 1996 - 1997, OPENSTEP, inherited from: None
    • 1997, Rhapsody DR1, inherited from: 4.4 BSD lite 2
    • 1998, Rhapsody DR2, inherited from: NetBSD 1.3
    • 1999, Mac OS X DR1, inherited from: Mach 3, FreeBSD 3.1
    • 1999, Mac OS X DR2, inherited from: FreeBSD 3.2
    • 2002, Mac OS X 10.1.5, inherited from: FreeBSD 4.5
    • 2003, Mac OS X 10.3 beta, inherited from: FreeBSD 4.8, FreeBSD 5.1
    • 2004, Mac OS X 10.4 beta, inherited from: FreeBSD 5.2.1

    So it looks like mostly FreeBSD and a little of the old Mach, I think NetBSD was used as a means for porting between architectures more than a literal inheritance. interesting how the last bit of FreeBSD was way back in 2004 from FreeBSD 5 (The timeline goes all the way up to present with OS X Mavericks). of course there are probably newer bits of FreeBSD used that are only known internally to Apple.

    Not having looked this closely at the OS X part of this timeline before i found the transition between OPENSTEP and OS X quite confusing... according to the timeline Rhapsody (what OPENSTEP turned into after Apple started working on it) directly became Mac OS X Server and Darwin, but OS X was not derived from any of them itself and seems to be directly linked to Mach 3.

    Then the timeline proceeds with Mac OS X as what appears to be where all of the development is taking place (including inheriting from FreeBSD), with Darwin and OS X Server only ever taking from OS X like mirrors. Then suddenly in 2006 this model changes and the OS X 10.5 beta inherits from Darwin 9.0 beta, when OS X 10.5 and Darwin 9 mature the model goes Darwin -> Mac OS X -> Mac OS X Server... Then in 2007 during the OS X 10.7 beta the model changes again when the server branch is eradicated all together and gets integrated into OS X and OS X gets integrated into Darwin so the model goes OS X -> Darwin again but without the server.

    This suggests OS X didn't inherit from Rhapsody at all until the period between 2006 and 2007, not sure if this is true or not, but interesting none the less. Also makes you wonder how much of the original OPENSTEP was inherited, perhaps it's more that it was not publicly disclosed how much of the technologies became proprietary Apple technologies at the beginning of OS X rather than a lack of direct inheritance at the beginning.

  13. Re:it's dead, Jim by smash · · Score: 2

    comprehension fail. i'll take "well secured niche os" over "well secured high value target" any day of the week, thanks.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  14. Re:it's dead, Jim by siDDis · · Score: 2

    FreeBSD is very well documented (The manual is awesome) and it has a great community. There are a lot of good discussions on the mailing list, and it doesn't require you to be a kernel hacker to participate. I use both Linux and FreeBSD, they both have their strength and weaknesses. I slightly prefer FreeBSD, as I feel its easier to turn it inside out(for hacking).

    Btw. Poul-Henning Kamp tweeted this a few days ago.
    Between FreeBSD, Varnish and Ngnix, at least 2 out of 3 packets on the net are delivered by #BSD licensed open source software. #EatThatRMS

    So I would say, FreeBSD is a lot more interesting today, than 10 years ago.