The Terminal Room (where I'm at now, least until they tear it down in 40 minutes) here is connected via a 1.5Mb wireless link (I'm at the workstation right next to the trans/reciever.) We're not sure why, but we lost connectivity for about 20 minutes. It was during this time that Nik was trying to post the story, and accidentally submitted it twice. The duplicate story didn't last more than 5 minutes, as he removed it once connectivity was restored. I swear, people will take advantage of any ole thing...
If there are no Linux related booths at FreeBSDCon, it would because none registered. I can't imagine any legitimate companies/organizations being turned away.
And what should Slashdot do to protect itself against bogus "news"? A recent thread on the FreeBSD advocacy list suggested flooding Slashdot with BSD press releases in the hopes that they would get on Roblimos nerves and force him to post them as "News" just to shut up the malcontents. Isn't that dishonest?
That HAPPENS to be Roblimo's suggestion. But you left that little tidbit out didn't you?
Before I go further let me assure you that my post was not meant to be hostile. I was bringing to attention the fact that the FreeBSDCon story was apparantly being rejected simply because it was BSD, and it seemed odd considering what's to come.
Slashdot was founded as a site for Geek news. Linux is predominant because that's what Rob uses, and it's his site. Still, BSD has it's place here. Slashdot apparantly thinks so too, or the soon to be announced new section wouldn't be forthcoming. Surely you saw reference to that while you were in the -Advocacy archive eh?
There was a FreeBSDCon story on Slashdot when it was first announced. It's NOT too much to ask to follow up on that when a full schedule of events is released.
When participants tried to register for the FreeBSD event, the hotel manager didn't know what the heck they were referring to.
Funny, I had no trouble whatsoever.
The behavior of WC CDROM is exemplary. They are the primary financial backer of the FreeBSD Project, and there's nothing shady about them booking the room. All such Conferences have Sponsers, and you see their names all over them. Why would this be any different, and why should they try to conceal their identity?
And no one who reads your comments will go read the archives for themselves. A Shame.
Have you ever worked for Microsoft? Maybe in Marketing?
We often see statements about how *BSD-positive comments are routinely moderated down, but it's funny, they usually are moderated UP, especially if they aren't just taunts.
It's clear to me that Slashdot covers BSD a great deal and for the most part this coverage is warmly greeted by the community here. The Open Source community continues to prove that it's very Open.
1999-10-01 18:28:20 FreeBSDCon '99 Program verview (articles,bsd) (rejected) 1999-10-04 15:45:09 FreeBSDCon '99 Schedule of events (articles,bsd) (rejected) 1999-10-06 21:20:58 FreeBSDCon '99 Schedule of Events (articles,bsd) (rejected)
And these are just mine. At least 5 other people have submitted this at least twice. (The FreeBSD-Advocacy mailing list archive is updated weekly.)
It's clear to me at least that some of the/. reviewers would just as soon ignore BSD stories if they aren't Linux related. Quite surprising in light of a certain future/. Section.
Here it is though, since it'll apparantly never make it on the main page:
The FreeBSDCon '99 (Oct 17th - 23rd) website now has a complete Schedule of Events. The two "FreeBSD Internals" tutorials by Kirk McKusick are sold out, but it looks like it's not too late to register for the conference itself.
The OpenBSD is not this easy, but the FreeBSD is pretty much identical. (Install the system, choose additional packages, X, etc.) Some time next year there will be an X install (as rumor has it) akin to EasyLinux/OpenLinux/Corel.
That's not to say that OpenBSD is difficult to install. It's not like you have to newfs and unpack stuff by hand. A shell script takes you through the install. If you can configure a Linux kernel with it's Q&A interface, you can install OpenBSD.
I've not gone through a NetBSD install, so I can't comment on that.
The other FAQ's of yours will have to be answered by the corresponding FAQ pages which I'm sure you can find without my assistance.:)
Yes, of course GNOME and KDE *COMPILE* on FreeBSD. Do you not realize what having source means?
Someone recently said in #FreeBSD/Undernet, "I thought they only made X Windows for Linux."
Linux isn't the end all and be all of Unix. I like Linux as much as the next guy, but your/average/ Linux user doesn't seem to realize this. The above quote is a perfect example (If a bit extreme).
If there's source, there's a way.
So, not only can you compile GNOME and KDE yourself, you can also use the Ports System:
$ make search key=kde | grep Port | wc -l 43
$ make search key=gnome | grep Port | wc -l 42
I know you meant nothing by it, but some potential BSD user out there will read your post and take your comment for truth. Please post responsibly.
Well, I'm saddened by the blatant troll postings by some of the BSD users. As always, it boils down to, "yay new release. Glad those Linux kiddies aren't awake to flame. They suck. Our daemon would kill that penguin. We rule. Slashdot is only Linux news."
Yes, SOME, of them. Not all of them, and certainly not the people behind it.
And as always, they're wrong. I like Linux, and I'm curious to try a BSD. I've even contemplated merging some parts of OpenBSD and Slackware. Yet the moment I think that since the OS isn't so bad, the people behind aren't -- they prove me wrong.
Are they? They weren't serious about "Slashdot is only Linux news." They were repeating what many Linux users have said here in the past. They are an exception. Everything has exceptions. Let it go already. " "We all know the daemon would kill the penguin."
Have you no sense of humor? Sure, just keep flaming away there, buddy. How is that flaming? It's damned funny if you ask me. Two stuffed plushies duking it out. Beastie shoots flame (maybe you meant that, who knows) out of his eyes, Tux counters with an ball of ice ala SubZero, etc. Lighten up will ya?
Sure, just keep flaming away there, buddy. I know you have a chip on your shoulder because the BSD daemon isn't being flashed around, and because there are not BSD word expoes going on.
You just "know" the inner workings of his mind eh? Actually, this sounds more like bragging than an accusation of jealousy.
CVS is wonderful in that it only downloads the necessary changes. Granted, 3.2 was released in May, but it probably won't take all night.
Re:How to succeed at bashing without really trying
on
FreeBSD 3.3 Released
·
· Score: 1
But then, when you've read what you've said, saying that Linux users have "a lack of regard for orderly filesystems and directory heirarchies" and saying that you've "had the Linux beat out" of you. Now, what is it that is normally beat out of someone? Are you saying, in your not-so-clever way that Linux is equivalent to that thing that normally fills in the sentence "I had the ____ beat out of me."?
As in, "Beat [habit|quality|secret|etc] out of me."
Must you look for negative comments where there aren't any?
> I find this whole debate silly. Why do some *bsd users feel that they > need to compare their OS to Linux? Because it's popular? Is it easier to > compare Freebsd to linux then to say Windows?
Yes because it's popular. The original article was posted in the Business Section. The Suites and Pointy Haired Bastards of Coporate America don't know the damnedest things about Operating Systems, but they've heard of Linux. It only makes sense to compare other similar OS's to it.
Also, the first thing Linux users who are interested in *BSD ask is how it compares to Linux.
It is also absolutely easier to compare FreeBSD to Linux than to Windows...Windows is not a Unix-like system.
The vitriol I've seen from just about every BSD user whenever GNU is mentioned is amazing. It in itself is enough to convince me that I'd rather avoid BSD. Unfortunately, this and the next objection seem to be the primary arguments of most "switch to BSD people".
So you've met every BSD user then? Impressive.
Being a BSD user, and frequenting Undernet's #FreeBSD channel, and, for a time, a subscriber to freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, I can say with every certainty that the License issue is *not* the primary argument (Nor does it ever come up much.)
The "Linux Sucks" argument is sometimes said in jest, but more often by those whose opinions don't matter much to begin with. There's just as many of these types using Linux as there using FreeBSD (and NT, etc.)
The three BSD operating systems are all descended from the BSD version of Unix developed at the University of California at Berkeley during the 1980s (''BSD'' stands for Berkeley Standard Distribution). They're also the descendants of Project GNU, started by Richard Stallman at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
This isn't *exactly* correct, but they did mention it. BSD is older than the FSF and the GNU Project. It is true that alot of GNU tools are part of the BSD systems, they would still be complete Operating Systems even without them (just not as good.)
The running of Linux binaries on FreeBSD is not accomplished by emulation, but by a process called "thunking" that converts Linux system calls to analogous BSD calls.
Calling it Linux Emulation is a misnomer, and "emulation" sometimes has negative connotations associated with it, as if it's a poor reproduction of the original. It couldn't be further from the truth as some people have demonstrated that Linux binaries run *better* on FreeBSD than they do natively.
You do *NOT* have to rebuild all your ports after remaking the world. (Where other people would yell "FUD", I'll just say "misinformed". "FUD" is overused.)
Fact: There is *NOTHING* like the FreeBSD ports system. There are better/package/ systems than FreeBSD's, but the ports are unique.
> I mean, even if 9999 is a common way to signal the end of input, who enters date data in that method?
That's just it. It wasn't meant to be a date at all. You would enter "9999" to signal the end of say, a list of names, or other scalar data. Dates have NOTHING to do with it!
This is how "9999" is used(in psuedocode): read data while data is not "9999" do something with data read data data "Bill,Fred,John,Larry,Bob,9999"
The string (not even a number) "9999" is used as a Sentinel Value.
What you and the media and all the other clueless morons think is akin to: read data while todays date is not "09/09/99" do something with data read data data "Bill,Fred,John,Larry,Bob,9999"
or read data while data is not "9999" do something with data read data data "Bill,Fred,John,$todaysdate,Larry,Bob,9999"
Slashdot Mirror
The Terminal Room (where I'm at now, least until they tear it down in 40 minutes) here is connected via a 1.5Mb wireless link (I'm at the workstation right next to the trans/reciever.) We're not sure why, but we lost connectivity for about 20 minutes. It was during this time that Nik was trying to post the story, and accidentally submitted it twice. The duplicate story didn't last more than 5 minutes, as he removed it once connectivity was restored. I swear, people will take advantage of any ole thing...
tide78.microsoft.com - - [21/Oct/1999:21:03:10 -0500] "GET /freebsdcon99/ HTTP/1.1" 200 718 "http://slashdot.org/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0)"
/~mosfet/ HTTP/1.0" 2
Now that I look closer at the logs, it looks like Microsoft was interested in the KDE Information we host too:
tide70.microsoft.com - - [09/Oct/1999:12:33:38 -0500] "GET
00 238 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows NT; MS Search 4.0 Robot)
Microsoft"
If there are no Linux related booths at FreeBSDCon, it would because none registered. I can't imagine any legitimate companies/organizations being turned away.
So let's not go there shall we?
His point was that the "some people" you mentioned happen to be .
And what should Slashdot do to protect itself against bogus "news"? A recent thread on the FreeBSD advocacy list suggested flooding Slashdot with BSD press releases in the hopes that they would get on Roblimos nerves and force him to post them as "News" just to shut up the malcontents. Isn't that dishonest?
That HAPPENS to be Roblimo's suggestion. But you left that little tidbit out didn't you?
Before I go further let me assure you that my post was not meant to be hostile. I was bringing to attention the fact that the FreeBSDCon story was apparantly being rejected simply because it was BSD, and it seemed odd considering what's to come.
Slashdot was founded as a site for Geek news. Linux is predominant because that's what Rob uses, and it's his site. Still, BSD has it's place here. Slashdot apparantly thinks so too, or the soon to be announced new section wouldn't be forthcoming. Surely you saw reference to that while you were in the -Advocacy archive eh?
I wouldn't expect to see Linux stories on BSD sites(Daemonnews, FreeBSDRocks, FreeBSDZine, FreeBSD Advocacy, etc) any more than I would see BSD stories on sites such as Linux.com.
There was a FreeBSDCon story on Slashdot when it was first announced. It's NOT too much to ask to follow up on that when a full schedule of events is released.
When participants tried to register for the FreeBSD event, the hotel manager didn't know what the heck they were referring to.
Funny, I had no trouble whatsoever.
The behavior of WC CDROM is exemplary. They are the primary financial backer of the FreeBSD Project, and there's nothing shady about them booking the room. All such Conferences have Sponsers, and you see their names all over them. Why would this be any different, and why should they try to conceal their identity?
And no one who reads your comments will go read the archives for themselves. A Shame.
Have you ever worked for Microsoft? Maybe in Marketing?
- Avid Linux User and BSD Advocate.
We often see statements about how *BSD-positive comments are routinely moderated down, but it's funny, they usually are moderated UP, especially if they aren't just taunts.
/. reviewers would just as soon ignore BSD stories if they aren't Linux related. Quite surprising in light of a certain future /. Section.
It's clear to me that Slashdot covers BSD a great deal and for the most part this coverage is warmly greeted by the community here. The Open Source community continues to prove that it's very Open.
1999-10-01 18:28:20 FreeBSDCon '99 Program verview (articles,bsd) (rejected)
1999-10-04 15:45:09 FreeBSDCon '99 Schedule of events (articles,bsd) (rejected)
1999-10-06 21:20:58 FreeBSDCon '99 Schedule of Events (articles,bsd) (rejected)
And these are just mine. At least 5 other people have submitted this at least twice. (The FreeBSD-Advocacy mailing list archive is updated weekly.)
It's clear to me at least that some of the
Here it is though, since it'll apparantly never make it on the main page:
The FreeBSDCon '99 (Oct 17th - 23rd) website now has a complete Schedule of Events. The two "FreeBSD Internals" tutorials by Kirk McKusick are sold out, but it looks like it's not too late to register for the conference itself.
Mistaken ye are indeed. :)
It split from NetBSD.
The OpenBSD is not this easy, but the FreeBSD is pretty much identical. (Install the system, choose additional packages, X, etc.) Some time next year there will be an X install (as rumor has it) akin to EasyLinux/OpenLinux/Corel.
:)
That's not to say that OpenBSD is difficult to install. It's not like you have to newfs and unpack stuff by hand. A shell script takes you through the install. If you can configure a Linux kernel with it's Q&A interface, you can install OpenBSD.
I've not gone through a NetBSD install, so I can't comment on that.
The other FAQ's of yours will have to be answered by the corresponding FAQ pages which I'm sure you can find without my assistance.
Yes, of course GNOME and KDE *COMPILE* on FreeBSD. Do you not realize what having source means?
/average/ Linux user doesn't seem to realize this. The above quote is a perfect example (If a bit extreme).
Someone recently said in #FreeBSD/Undernet, "I thought they only made X Windows for Linux."
Linux isn't the end all and be all of Unix. I like Linux as much as the next guy, but your
If there's source, there's a way.
So, not only can you compile GNOME and KDE yourself, you can also use the Ports System:
$ make search key=kde | grep Port | wc -l
43
$ make search key=gnome | grep Port | wc -l
42
I know you meant nothing by it, but some potential BSD user out there will read your post and take your comment for truth. Please post responsibly.
Waning? Hardly. FreeBSD anyway is nearing critical mass.
Any "geek" worth anything would choose their OS based on more than it's "coolness." Anyone else is a poser.
Are you a poser?
Well, I'm saddened by the blatant troll postings by some of the BSD users. As always, it boils down to,
"yay new release. Glad those Linux kiddies aren't awake to flame. They suck. Our daemon would kill that
penguin. We rule. Slashdot is only Linux news."
Yes, SOME, of them. Not all of them, and certainly not the people behind it.
And as always, they're wrong. I like Linux, and I'm curious to try a BSD. I've even contemplated merging
some parts of OpenBSD and Slackware. Yet the moment I think that since the OS isn't so bad, the people
behind aren't -- they prove me wrong.
Are they? They weren't serious about "Slashdot is only Linux news." They were repeating what many Linux users have said here in the past. They are an exception. Everything has exceptions. Let it go already.
"
"We all know the daemon would kill the penguin."
Have you no sense of humor? Sure, just keep flaming away there, buddy. How is that flaming? It's damned funny if you ask me. Two stuffed plushies duking it out. Beastie shoots flame (maybe you meant that, who knows) out of his eyes, Tux counters with an ball of ice ala SubZero, etc. Lighten up will ya?
Sure, just keep flaming away there, buddy. I know you have a chip on your shoulder because the BSD
daemon isn't being flashed around, and because there are not BSD word expoes going on.
You just "know" the inner workings of his mind eh? Actually, this sounds more like bragging than an accusation of jealousy.
By the way, don't forget to register for FreeBSDCon '99
But is it so hard
to just contribute something usefull to a discussion of the new release of FreeBSD?
Heh...now THAT'S funnyl.
It's been -STABLE and "stable" since January this year.
Prior to that, the 2.2.X branch was -STABLE and 3.X was -CURRENT.
The -CURRENT (ie, development) branch is 4.X.
CVS is wonderful in that it only downloads the necessary changes. Granted, 3.2 was released in May, but it probably won't take all night.
But then, when you've read what you've said, saying that Linux users have "a lack of regard for orderly
filesystems and directory heirarchies" and saying that you've "had the Linux beat out" of you. Now, what
is it that is normally beat out of someone? Are you saying, in your not-so-clever way that Linux is
equivalent to that thing that normally fills in the sentence "I had the ____ beat out of me."?
As in, "Beat [habit|quality|secret|etc] out of me."
Must you look for negative comments where there aren't any?
1. I saw mention of packet filtering changes in the release notes.
2. Are the ipfw/natd maintained?
You answered your own question.
> I find this whole debate silly. Why do some *bsd users feel that they
> need to compare their OS to Linux? Because it's popular? Is it easier to
> compare Freebsd to linux then to say Windows?
Yes because it's popular. The original article was posted in the Business
Section. The Suites and Pointy Haired Bastards of Coporate America don't
know the damnedest things about Operating Systems, but they've heard of
Linux. It only makes sense to compare other similar OS's to it.
Also, the first thing Linux users who are interested in *BSD ask is how it
compares to Linux.
It is also absolutely easier to compare FreeBSD to Linux than to
Windows...Windows is not a Unix-like system.
The vitriol I've seen from just about every BSD user whenever GNU is mentioned is amazing. It in itself is enough to convince me that I'd rather avoid BSD. Unfortunately, this and the next objection seem to be the primary arguments of most "switch to BSD people".
So you've met every BSD user then? Impressive.
Being a BSD user, and frequenting Undernet's #FreeBSD channel, and, for a time, a subscriber to freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, I can say with every certainty that the License issue is *not* the primary argument (Nor does it ever come up much.)
The "Linux Sucks" argument is sometimes said in jest, but more often by those whose opinions don't matter much to begin with. There's just as many of these types using Linux as there using FreeBSD (and NT, etc.)
In fact GNU was indeed mentioned:
The three BSD operating systems are all descended from the BSD version of Unix developed at the University of California at Berkeley during the 1980s (''BSD'' stands for Berkeley Standard Distribution). They're also the descendants of Project GNU, started by Richard Stallman at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
This isn't *exactly* correct, but they did mention it. BSD is older than the FSF and the GNU Project. It is true that alot of GNU tools are part of the BSD systems, they would still be complete Operating Systems even without them (just not as good.)
The running of Linux binaries on FreeBSD is not accomplished by emulation, but by a process called "thunking" that converts Linux system calls to analogous BSD calls.
Calling it Linux Emulation is a misnomer, and "emulation" sometimes has negative connotations associated with it, as if it's a poor reproduction of the original. It couldn't be further from the truth as some people have demonstrated that Linux binaries run *better* on FreeBSD than they do natively.
The Natives are Restless...
He lies not. FreeBSD 3.3 Release Candidate
You do *NOT* have to rebuild all your ports after remaking the world. (Where other people would yell "FUD", I'll just say "misinformed". "FUD" is overused.)
/package/ systems than FreeBSD's, but the ports are unique.
Fact: There is *NOTHING* like the FreeBSD ports system. There are better
Since when is GIMP only for Linux?
> I mean, even if 9999 is a common way to signal the end of input, who enters date data in that method?
That's just it. It wasn't meant to be a date at all. You would enter "9999" to signal the end of say, a list of names, or other scalar data. Dates have NOTHING to do with it!
"9/9/99" isn't a number.
This is how "9999" is used(in psuedocode):
read data
while data is not "9999"
do something with data
read data
data "Bill,Fred,John,Larry,Bob,9999"
The string (not even a number) "9999" is used as a Sentinel Value.
What you and the media and all the other clueless morons think is akin to:
read data
while todays date is not "09/09/99"
do something with data
read data
data "Bill,Fred,John,Larry,Bob,9999"
or
read data
while data is not "9999"
do something with data
read data
data "Bill,Fred,John,$todaysdate,Larry,Bob,9999"
Neither of which is EVER going to happen!
You create an empty password in the shadow password file. After reboot you login as root and you're not asked for a password.