This marks the first company, to my recollection that switches from a complete closed source model, to a Free/OpenSource software model. As to why this is not getting as much coverage as it deserves, Beats me.
While it is true that they will continue on with a closed source BSD/OS, their aim is to integrate all the code that is not under an NDA, to the FreeBSD code base, couting towards the release of FreeBSD 5.0. They will also bring their support expertise to play. Which has a great deal of value due to their Corporate support experience.
Hopefully, this will work out, and will show that taking such a bold venture, will pay off
This would give the BSD's more ground on large e-commerce websites, since hardware crypto is usually used when you need to reduce the load on a loaded ssl server. I say the BSD's because this is likely to be ported over to the rest too
Hate to be the devils advocate.... But the reason it has it's own section is because of all the linux related bugs that pop up on bugtraq. Before i get flamed, just subscribe to Bugtrag and you will see am not lying
Most Linux distributions, specially redhat, ship such a patch job of a distribution, it's quite Pathetic Why they choose not to follow the approach that has made the BSD's less bug prone, it's beyond me I still Eric think Raymond was wrong about a Bazzar versus cathedral dev model The cathedral model does not make software bug prone, closed source dev does
well, until so, i will continue to laugh at the gnu su man page... and will continue to Use FreeBSD
FreeBSD.... The Choice of those who know how to choose;)
Am i the only one that finds the following a bit disturbing? And then they wonder why i wouldn't trust any linux distribution in any critical enviroment
HEH Why GNU su does not support the wheel group (by Richard Stallman)
Sometimes a few of the users try to hold total power over all the rest. For example, in 1984, a few users at the MIT AI lab decided to seize power by changing the operator password on the Twenex system and keeping it secret from everyone else. (I was able to thwart this coup and give power back to the users by patching the kernel, but I wouldn't know how to do that in Unix.)
However, occasionally the rulers do tell someone. Under the usual su mechanism, once someone learns the root password who sympathizes with the ordinary users, he can tell the rest. The "wheel group" feature would make this impossible, and thus cement the power of the rulers.
I'm on the side of the masses, not that of the rulers. If you are used to supporting the bosses and sysadmins in whatever they do, you might find this idea strange at first.
IT truly does. While i hate generalizing, it realy shows the level of users that each movement attracts: while the *BSD comunity seems to attract more knowledgeable people with CS degrees, Engr degrees, Scientist. The Linux community for the last year or so has attracted a bunch of damn script kiddies and clueless people, in did not use to be like this. That try to defend with reasons that are not true and agains or for things they DONOT understand. Example, try looking at the posts up here, the are ridiculous, and they only show the clulessnes of these people. Just as a side note, I have been a FreeBSD and Linux user since 1996, attracted by the lure of a free PC Unix OS, and have used both since. And this is what i have found, while heading and colsuting various isp's. BSD has proven to be a more mature and stable server OS that linux hands down. The only thing that linux does a bit better is smb sharing (CIFS now ) since it has smbfs support in the kernel, an dthe reason BSD has not done it is because of the security stability issues this does bring. The BSD mentality of doign things is that you do things right adn never let any half as simplementaion get into the main branch, somthign that linux does all the time. SO while linus *supports* more hardware than FreeBSD, it does so half ass, not full support. everyrthign that FreeBSD supports it does it with FULL support and with stability and speed as a prime objective. As for applications, don't be idiots. Almost everythign that runs on linux can be recompiled to run on FreeBSD. ANd what doesn't can be run very much the same as it runs on linux. Thanks to FreeBSD's linux binary handling. and as for the poeple that say that FreeBSD shoudl stop using all GLPapps, firts, do realize that most of these apps where started BEFORE linux, and where not made FOR linux. Second, maybe the linux kernel dev's should give back linux's tcp/ip stack, which is strikingly similar to the *BSD's, maybe is because it's tottaly based on it?? hrmmm So, after the hype is gone for linux, you will see, that as a server and worksattion OS, FreeBSD is still a better choice. yahoo, apache, hotmail, ftp.cdrom.com, and over 55% of isp cannot be wrong;)
What the hell has happenned to slashdot, this used to be an INFORMED forum. These days is nothing more than a bunch of kiddies arguing how linux is superior over something they HAVE NEVER USED.
DISCLAMER
( sorry if this offends the people that do not fit in the description above, i know there's a great deal of very smart and knowledgeable people still left here in slashdot and i hope that number grows because we need you)
On the comparison of "LINUX" Vs " FreeBSD" you are all pretty wrong, FreeBSD is both a Distribution AND a kernel, not one like linux. if you want to compare distributions then go ahead, compare Redhat 5.2 versus fBSD 3.1-RELEASE.
The fact of the matter is that Linux distributions are for the most part ( with the exception of Debian all the way ) still bleeding edge and not the most stable systems without a GREAT deal of tweaking. As you can see from FBSD, this is way different as there are three current distributions aimed at different purposes. ( -RELEASE , -CURRENT, and --STABLE )
Say all you may, but my experience with both a customized redhat with the 2.2.x kernell versus a 3.1 -RELEASE has shown me that FreeBSD still handles networking load quite better than a normall linux distribution. How can i tell this... well, from about 25 hsoting servers that i administer. a great deal of them started as Linux boxes but, we only needed to test one freeBSD machine with the load of TWO linux boxes and we were converts.
as for the linux emulation in freeBSD.... first, is not "emulation " persay, is much more closer to what wine does, which is binary compability. To this day linux threads still perform better in FreeBSD. Of course some things are a bit slower, but , hey, this are things that were not originally aimed at freeBSD, is a god damn good show at the prowness of FreeBSD programmers.
I love linux, i use it a smy personal workstation at both home and work, but there's no question in my mind that in terms of squeezing that last drop of performance out of a x86 machine, fBSD does it much better than linux. Not only is the kernel more mature, but, even linux zealou shave to agree with this, linux distributions to date just plain suck ( for lack of a better word). I mean, when was the last time you used a system as clean as the ports collection... when was the last time you TOTTALY rebuilt all the programs in your system quite flawlessly with one command.
Linux has a lot of promise, but , FreeBSD still handles load better, because it is a kernel totally tuned for the x86 arch.
Slashdot Mirror
It was kinda vague... a bit interresting... but no enough "meat' hehe ;)
Just wanted to clear that.
This marks the first company, to my recollection that switches from a complete closed source model,
to a Free/OpenSource software model. As to why this is not getting as much coverage as it deserves,
Beats me.
While it is true that they will continue on with a closed source BSD/OS, their aim is to integrate
all the code that is not under an NDA, to the FreeBSD code base, couting towards the release of FreeBSD 5.0.
They will also bring their support expertise to play. Which has a great deal of value due to their
Corporate support experience.
Hopefully, this will work out, and will show that taking such a bold venture, will pay off
FreeBSD..... The Daemon made me do it .
This would give the BSD's more ground on large
e-commerce websites, since hardware crypto is usually used when you need to reduce the load
on a loaded ssl server. I say the BSD's because this is likely to be ported over to the rest too
Cool...
FreeBSD.... The Daemon Made me do it
Left in the dust to what.....
?
HEH
Yeah, that's why i log in , unlike you.
Suuure... go back to your cave boy
Hate to be the devils advocate....
;)
But the reason it has it's own section is because of all the linux related bugs that pop up on
bugtraq. Before i get flamed, just subscribe to Bugtrag and you will see am not lying
Most Linux distributions, specially redhat, ship such a patch job of a distribution, it's quite
Pathetic
Why they choose not to follow the approach that has made the BSD's less bug prone, it's beyond me
I still Eric think Raymond was wrong about a Bazzar versus cathedral dev model
The cathedral model does not make software bug prone, closed source dev does
well, until so, i will continue to laugh at the gnu su man page... and will continue to Use FreeBSD
FreeBSD.... The Choice of those who know how to choose
And then they wonder why i wouldn't trust any linux distribution in any critical enviroment
HEH
Why GNU su does not support the wheel group (by Richard Stallman)
However, occasionally the rulers do tell someone. Under the usual su mechanism, once someone learns the root password who sympathizes with the ordinary users, he can tell the rest. The "wheel group" feature would make this impossible, and thus cement the power of the rulers.
I'm on the side of the masses, not that of the rulers. If you are used to supporting the bosses and sysadmins in whatever they do, you might find this idea strange at first.
IT truly does. ;)
While i hate generalizing, it realy shows the level of users that each movement attracts: while the *BSD comunity seems to attract more knowledgeable people with CS degrees, Engr degrees, Scientist.
The Linux community for the last year or so has attracted a bunch of damn script kiddies and clueless people, in did not use to be like this.
That try to defend with reasons that are not true and agains or for things they DONOT understand. Example, try looking at the posts up here, the are ridiculous, and they only show the clulessnes of these people.
Just as a side note, I have been a FreeBSD and Linux user since 1996, attracted by the lure of a free PC Unix OS, and have used both since.
And this is what i have found, while heading and colsuting various isp's. BSD has proven to be a more mature and stable server OS that linux hands down. The only thing that linux does a bit better is smb sharing (CIFS now ) since it has smbfs support in the kernel, an dthe reason BSD has not done it is because of the security stability issues this does bring.
The BSD mentality of doign things is that you do things right adn never let any half as simplementaion get into the main branch, somthign that linux does all the time. SO while linus *supports* more hardware than FreeBSD, it does so half ass, not full support. everyrthign that FreeBSD supports it does it with FULL support and with stability and speed as a prime objective.
As for applications, don't be idiots. Almost everythign that runs on linux can be recompiled to run on FreeBSD. ANd what doesn't can be run very much the same as it runs on linux. Thanks to FreeBSD's linux binary handling.
and as for the poeple that say that FreeBSD shoudl stop using all GLPapps, firts, do realize that most of these apps where started BEFORE linux, and where not made FOR linux. Second, maybe the linux kernel dev's should give back linux's tcp/ip stack, which is strikingly similar to the *BSD's, maybe is because it's tottaly based on it?? hrmmm
So, after the hype is gone for linux, you will see, that as a server and worksattion OS, FreeBSD is still a better choice.
yahoo, apache, hotmail, ftp.cdrom.com, and over 55% of isp cannot be wrong
Sorry i meant 1/2 terrabyte
You won't be sorry ;) btw, if you want help trying to setup a firewall, router for a small network, try FreeBSD Diary and also try FreeBSD Zine
Just as future advice, for mission crital, and for ANY server that's inportant, you BUILD the machine for the OS, not the other way around.
FreeBSD's raid is quite mature, just does not support every damn card. As a radi example, look at the 12terrabyte raid setup over at ftp.cdrom.com
What the hell has happenned to slashdot, this used to be an INFORMED forum. These days is nothing more than a bunch of kiddies arguing how linux is superior over something they HAVE NEVER USED.
... when was the last time you TOTTALY rebuilt all the programs in your system quite flawlessly with one command.
DISCLAMER
( sorry if this offends the people that do not fit in the description above, i know there's a great deal of very smart and knowledgeable people still left here in slashdot and i hope that number grows
because we need you)
On the comparison of "LINUX" Vs " FreeBSD" you are all pretty wrong, FreeBSD is both a Distribution AND a kernel, not one like linux. if you want to compare distributions then go ahead, compare Redhat 5.2 versus fBSD 3.1-RELEASE.
The fact of the matter is that Linux distributions are for the most part ( with the exception of Debian all the way ) still bleeding edge and not the most stable systems without a GREAT deal of tweaking. As you can see from FBSD, this is way different as there are three current distributions
aimed at different purposes. ( -RELEASE , -CURRENT, and --STABLE )
Say all you may, but my experience with both a customized redhat with the 2.2.x kernell versus a 3.1 -RELEASE has shown me that FreeBSD still handles networking load quite better than a normall linux distribution. How can i tell this...
well, from about 25 hsoting servers that i administer. a great deal of them started as Linux boxes but, we only needed to test one freeBSD machine with the load of TWO linux boxes and we were converts.
as for the linux emulation in freeBSD....
first, is not "emulation " persay, is much more closer to what wine does, which is binary compability. To this day linux threads still perform better in FreeBSD. Of course some things are a bit slower, but , hey, this are things that were not originally aimed at freeBSD, is a god damn good show at the prowness of FreeBSD programmers.
I love linux, i use it a smy personal workstation at both home and work, but there's no question in my mind that in terms of squeezing that last drop of performance out of a x86 machine, fBSD does it much better than linux. Not only is the kernel more mature, but, even linux zealou shave to agree with this, linux distributions to date just plain suck ( for lack of a better word).
I mean, when was the last time you used a system as clean as the ports collection
Linux has a lot of promise, but , FreeBSD still handles load better, because it is a kernel totally tuned for the x86 arch.