i've ran mine as a vt52 serial terminal, and i can tell you that it sucks to type on it. you do not want to run linux on it. the OS it has is just fine for doing what it does.
The thing that I don't get, is that the Linux people are always saying that BSD is a waste of time and that there's too many versions to make a difference.
This is coming from a community where there are approximately 12 different distributions of the same operating system. Not to mention, there is a new kernel patch released every other day, then Alan Cox makes his own patches of the same thing. Doesn't that sound a bit hypocritical?
As far as the different free BSD's go, they all have different goals for what they want their operating system to do, but they also cooperate with each other. The Linux kernel hackers have been known to borrow from the BSD's from time to time also.
So quit your quibbling over which is better. If you look in comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc and comp.os.linux.advocacy, almost all the threads are a BSD vs. Linux vs. Windows, or a GPL vs. BSD license argument. Both sides are trying to convince the other that they're better, while the other side isn't listening at all. It's like a catholic priest trying to convert a buddhist monk.
The moral of the story, kids, is use what you like, and don't worry about which is better.
"This is an ongoing project to build encrypting IP routers. The protocol used is as lightweight as possible. It is designed for passing encrypted packets between prearranged routers in the form of UDP packets. This is not as flexible as IPSEC but it is enough for the original intended purpose: securely connecting subnets over an insecure transit network. The implementations mentioned below are actually in use in such an application."
If you read the comments in the Linux kernel source for 2.0, a few of the SCSI drivers have been borrowed from FreeBSD, and for the longest time, the IP stack was from NetBSD.
I haven't dug thru Linux kernel code for a while, so I'm not sure if this is true anymore....
I found this article in one of the FreeBSD advocacy pages.. It explains how to setup NAT and get natd running. A bit of it is dated, so you might want to check out the second link too, which is an ipfw setup page for FreeBSD.
I was the same way. I tried many of the free OS's and even ran Linux for the longest time. Then I tried FreeBSD just for a change... I've never looked back. We run an all FreeBSD shop now.
But it all stems back to people asking "which OS should I use?"... Use the one you like.
Ummm... last time I checked, upgrading a Mac was as simple as pulling the daughter card and plugging a new one in. There's none of this "oh, my processor uses a different slot, so I have to get a new motherboard, and my new motherboard uses different sized RAM, so I have to get new ram, and my video card won't work anymore, so I have to get a new video card...etc." Have you even _seen_ the inside of a Mac?
They're releasing 3 versions of Quake3 because they designed the game around a virtual machine. The actual binary portion of the game emulates a RISC processor, so instead of having to run thru and change API calls and system calls, they just write a new virtual machine. Pretty cool, eh?
I would love to believe you. (really, I would)
on
FreeBSD 3.1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Some of the ipchaining and aliasing stuff has been supported in the FreeBSD kernel for a while. You can do NAT (ipmasqing), port forwarding, and standard firewall stuff.
As for the source, it's all distributed via CVSup, if you prefer to compile yourself, or daily snapshots are available on current.freebsd.org. Application packages are handled through the Ports Collection. You find the package you want, type 'make', it goes out, grabs the source, patches it, compiles it, then you type 'make install' and it installs it. If you don't like it, just type 'pkg_delete foo' and it's gone. Simple, painless. Beats the hell out of searching for that obscure library that some guy used for his app.
Load it with 3.0-RELEASE and then upgrade it to 3.0-stable. Since your application is exactly what the -stable branch was meant for, and there's some bugfixes from the 3.0-RELEASE sources.
As far as I know, there is no user limit for FreeBSD, since you can change it in the kernel whenever you like. But there is a point where demands for resources exceed the existing resources and you end up with an unhappy box. The suggested method is assign users to different shell servers to keep the load down.;
Slashdot Mirror
i've ran mine as a vt52 serial terminal, and i can tell you that it sucks to type on it. you do not want to run linux on it. the OS it has is just fine for doing what it does.
The thing that I don't get, is that the Linux people are always saying that BSD is a waste of time and that there's too many versions to make a difference.
This is coming from a community where there are approximately 12 different distributions of the same operating system. Not to mention, there is a new kernel patch released every other day, then Alan Cox makes his own patches of the same thing. Doesn't that sound a bit hypocritical?
As far as the different free BSD's go, they all have different goals for what they want their operating system to do, but they also cooperate with each other. The Linux kernel hackers have been known to borrow from the BSD's from time to time also.
So quit your quibbling over which is better. If you look in comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc and comp.os.linux.advocacy, almost all the threads are a BSD vs. Linux vs. Windows, or a GPL vs. BSD license argument. Both sides are trying to convince the other that they're better, while the other side isn't listening at all. It's like a catholic priest trying to convert a buddhist monk.
The moral of the story, kids, is use what you like, and don't worry about which is better.
CIPE - encrypted IP over UDP tunneling
"This is an ongoing project to build encrypting IP routers. The protocol used is as lightweight as possible. It is designed for passing encrypted packets between prearranged routers in the form of UDP packets. This is not as flexible as IPSEC but it is enough for the original intended purpose: securely connecting subnets over an insecure transit network. The implementations mentioned below are actually in use in such an application."
The newest version of CIPE is available on
http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cip e.html
or ftp://sites.inka.de/sites/bigred/devel/cipe.html
It also works well for getting around those pesky universtity firewalls.
This has been out for almost 2 months now. It was on HNN back in March. Funny how the mainstream just got a hold of this...
If you read the comments in the Linux kernel source for 2.0, a few of the SCSI drivers have been borrowed from FreeBSD, and for the longest time, the IP stack was from NetBSD.
I haven't dug thru Linux kernel code for a while, so I'm not sure if this is true anymore....
I found this article in one of the FreeBSD advocacy pages.. It explains how to setup NAT and get natd running. A bit of it is dated, so you might want to check out the second link too, which is an ipfw setup page for FreeBSD.
http://www.computerbits.com/ar chive/9708/lan9708.htm
http://www.metronet.com/~pgilley/fre ebsd/ipfw/
I was the same way. I tried many of the free OS's and even ran Linux for the longest time. Then I tried FreeBSD just for a change... I've never looked back. We run an all FreeBSD shop now.
... Use the one you like.
But it all stems back to people asking "which OS should I use?"
Ummm... last time I checked, upgrading a Mac was as simple as pulling the daughter card and plugging a new one in. There's none of this "oh, my processor uses a different slot, so I have to get a new motherboard, and my new motherboard uses different sized RAM, so I have to get new ram, and my video card won't work anymore, so I have to get a new video card...etc." Have you even _seen_ the inside of a Mac?
They're releasing 3 versions of Quake3 because they designed the game around a virtual machine. The actual binary portion of the game emulates a RISC processor, so instead of having to run thru and change API calls and system calls, they just write a new virtual machine. Pretty cool, eh?
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Bay/6986/ya hoobsd.htm
d vlin.html
and while you're looking at that:
http://www.futuresouth.com/~fullermd/freebsd/bs
Suprisingly, some ISP's looking for people won't look at your resume unless you've had experience in running a UNIX other than Linux.
Some of the ipchaining and aliasing stuff has been supported in the FreeBSD kernel for a while. You can do NAT (ipmasqing), port forwarding, and standard firewall stuff.
As for the source, it's all distributed via CVSup, if you prefer to compile yourself, or daily snapshots are available on current.freebsd.org. Application packages are handled through the Ports Collection. You find the package you want, type 'make', it goes out, grabs the source, patches it, compiles it, then you type 'make install' and it installs it. If you don't like it, just type 'pkg_delete foo' and it's gone. Simple, painless. Beats the hell out of searching for that obscure library that some guy used for his app.
Load it with 3.0-RELEASE and then upgrade it to 3.0-stable. Since your application is exactly what the -stable branch was meant for, and there's some bugfixes from the 3.0-RELEASE sources.
As far as I know, there is no user limit for FreeBSD, since you can change it in the kernel whenever you like. But there is a point where demands for resources exceed the existing resources and you end up with an unhappy box. The suggested method is assign users to different shell servers to keep the load down.;
Looks like we'll have to get rid of the archie, veronica, and jughead utils because they're a copyright violation too. Damn.