Then how come they now sell freebsd in stores? And BSDi just got a nice check for 5billion from some isp in japan. NetBSD has a sponcer
Re:needs improvements.
on
Is BSD Dying?
·
· Score: 1
Easier kernel config?!? Its 100x easier than linux!
you dont have to edit lilo.conf , remember to run/sbin/lilo . And there isnt 10000 different things in the kernel that you have never heard of durring the config..
Whats the point in a standard desktop?
opensource is about freedom. =)
With a standard desktop you are takeing away freedom. And BSD is more about freedom than anybody.
see thats where you went wrong..
Ports are the 'most up to date' from either CVSup or CVS.
The ports.tar.gz file will always be out of date , it is not made everyday.
And you dont have to rewrite apps for BSD , Most will run just fine.
cept for some programs (ie. xmms, just needed some minor sound changes)
yeah , i must agree with you there.
Debian is a Great flavor. I used it for a long time. I stoped around when 2.2 went stable.
Allthough I will use debian again.
Yeah around 4000~ offical packages, then tons of unoffical.
I personaly dont mind compileing everything from source. And I know most other BSD users feel the same way , as you stated.
There is a better way (well not better just an alternative) there is a daily snapshot of freebsd on ftp://releng4.freebsd.org. people will use this instead of 'make world'. So there is tons of people who use 'binary only' freebsd or they wouldnt release an almost daily version of FreeBSD.
And for packages there is about 2800~ packages , they are a little out of date vs the ports tree. but so are alot of debian packages.
Also a PORT is alot easier to make (and faster) than a deb. you have to make a Makefile , and tell what the package is in a file , the md5. thats it. thats a big reason ports are pretty 'upto date' and why i use them.
> Because it runs on more platforms than Linux?
NetBSD
> Because it supports more hardware than Linux?
like what?
> Because it scales well?
FreeBSD/BSDi
> Because it is clusterable?
uhm what are you talking about you can cluster anything. *BSD...
> Because it has a journaling filesystem?
As i recall none of the journaling filesystems are 'stable' yet. EXT2 is your main choice. We have softupdates also which is proven faster than ext2
> Because the fs performance rules so much?
show me stats
> Because so many companies work on the kernel?
So? Does that make it any better. Microsoft just gave out code to 100's of companies. Its what you do with the code that counts
> Because there are THOUSANDS of applications?
Well lets think here. FreeBSD can run ANY linux binary and most bsdi,openbsd,netbsd,bsd4.2-xxx binarys, It will also run SCO,solaris,DOS binarys.
(also there is no proformance loss in linux emulation , look it up also on TCP/IP binarys freebsd runs them faster than linux, I am not sure about the rest) Also FreeBSD has 4500~ ports.
sysinstall is actually a great tool , packages are not quite as up to date as ports is. And yeah you can install say 'gaim' it would download gtk,gaim,etc etc. I pesonaly like to compile everything I use so i use ports. And no not 'all' ports are also packages , there is about 2800 packages and 4500 ports.
Do you live under a rock?
csh is latest version
bash-2.04$ gcc -v
Using builtin specs.
gcc version 2.95.2 19991024 (release)
And yes , BSD does use the BSD make , but there is also gmake in the ports dir. you are not 'stuck with old UNIX make' .
and the way most people upgrade freebsd is with CVSup. you have the entire source tree on your harddrive (which is about 300meg , not a whole lot) and then make world , this upgrades everything. THEN you compile your kernel. So you should never lose the ability to compile a kernel. Also they dont just 'change' a major feature like that in the middle of a branch. They would wait. Like perl 5.6 is not in 4.x branch because it is a major change that will change alot of things , thats why its sitting in the 5.0-CURRENT branch.
Also you can do a binary upgrade. With/stand/sysinstall.
let me ask you this, how do you plan on getting the source to sed on a debian,redhat,slack,etc system? Much easier on FreeBSD system.
outdated? what the hell are you talking about
90% of the port tree (found here) is more up to date than freshmeat is , there is more ports in the port tree than debian has packages. about 4500 ports.
I agree with that somewhat , but normaly when an exploit is found in *BSD it is typicaly fixed faster than in linux just because how they have 'there system of makeing the system' setup. They have a core team that can say 'yeah we need this' or 'no' and in linux its just linus. And I cant say anything about other o/s cuz its closed source and you dunno when its going to be fixed. And both have good and bad points to manage kernel/os.
one problem with this , with makeing a program to use finger from inetd finger stream tcp nowait nobody/usr/libexec/fingerd fingerd -s -l -p/usr/local/bin/nonetfinger
BSD inetd will allow you to write stuff in the hosts.allow file for example
fingerd : ALL \
: severity auth.info \
: twist/bin/echo "Go away and dont finger me bitch."
this is due to the fact that geeks dont use BSDi.
because of the heavfy price it cost to get it. Also BSDi is not a very good client, (in my personal opnion) there is no gnome , kde , etc for it. you can get the source your self. But it will be a chore to compile it, cuz there is not a port system in BSDi.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah but this way we can say we can run more software. linux can't say 'yeah we can run BSD binary'
Theo stated that there have been 7,000 cd's sold. I'm sure 9/10 people download it.
bash-2.04$ file kernel
kernel: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386,
version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses
shared libs), not stripped
It says its intel =P
http://world.altavista.com/
as the webpage and choose japanese to english.
put in
http://www.peanuts.gr.jp/pslinux/beginnings.html
Then how come they now sell freebsd in stores? And BSDi just got a nice check for 5billion from some isp in japan. NetBSD has a sponcer
Easier kernel config?!? Its 100x easier than linux! you dont have to edit lilo.conf , remember to run /sbin/lilo . And there isnt 10000 different things in the kernel that you have never heard of durring the config..
Whats the point in a standard desktop?
opensource is about freedom. =)
With a standard desktop you are takeing away freedom. And BSD is more about freedom than anybody.
Well linux is just a kernel..
yes it does
uhm , SMP IS IN -STABLE!!!
reiserFS is not stable yet
uhm
yeah.. thats a good reason , even though freebsd supports it also..
so what was your reason again??
you are very true , but one thing you missed..
FreeBSD USB was in in the middle stages of linux 2.2. it came out in 3.1
see thats where you went wrong.. Ports are the 'most up to date' from either CVSup or CVS.
The ports.tar.gz file will always be out of date , it is not made everyday.
And you dont have to rewrite apps for BSD , Most will run just fine. cept for some programs (ie. xmms, just needed some minor sound changes)
yeah , i must agree with you there.
Debian is a Great flavor. I used it for a long time. I stoped around when 2.2 went stable.
Allthough I will use debian again.
Also , this is the beauty of OpenSource.
FREEDOM!
you like one way , do it. you don't like it this way , don't do it.
Yeah around 4000~ offical packages, then tons of unoffical.
I personaly dont mind compileing everything from source. And I know most other BSD users feel the same way , as you stated.
There is a better way (well not better just an alternative) there is a daily snapshot of freebsd on ftp://releng4.freebsd.org. people will use this instead of 'make world'. So there is tons of people who use 'binary only' freebsd or they wouldnt release an almost daily version of FreeBSD.
And for packages there is about 2800~ packages , they are a little out of date vs the ports tree. but so are alot of debian packages.
Also a PORT is alot easier to make (and faster) than a deb. you have to make a Makefile , and tell what the package is in a file , the md5. thats it.
thats a big reason ports are pretty 'upto date' and why i use them.
NetBSD
> Because it supports more hardware than Linux?
like what?
> Because it scales well?
FreeBSD/BSDi
> Because it is clusterable?
uhm what are you talking about you can cluster anything. *BSD...
> Because it has a journaling filesystem?
As i recall none of the journaling filesystems are 'stable' yet. EXT2 is your main choice. We have softupdates also which is proven faster than ext2
> Because the fs performance rules so much?
show me stats
> Because so many companies work on the kernel?
So? Does that make it any better. Microsoft just gave out code to 100's of companies. Its what you do with the code that counts
> Because there are THOUSANDS of applications?
Well lets think here. FreeBSD can run ANY linux binary and most bsdi,openbsd,netbsd,bsd4.2-xxx binarys, It will also run SCO,solaris,DOS binarys. (also there is no proformance loss in linux emulation , look it up also on TCP/IP binarys freebsd runs them faster than linux, I am not sure about the rest) Also FreeBSD has 4500~ ports.
not offical packages.
unoffical packages are totaly different.
Yeah , your right. Debian was a bad example. =x
sysinstall is actually a great tool , packages are not quite as up to date as ports is. And yeah you can install say 'gaim' it would download gtk,gaim,etc etc. I pesonaly like to compile everything I use so i use ports. And no not 'all' ports are also packages , there is about 2800 packages and 4500 ports.
Do you live under a rock?
/stand/sysinstall.
csh is latest version
bash-2.04$ gcc -v Using builtin specs. gcc version 2.95.2 19991024 (release)
And yes , BSD does use the BSD make , but there is also gmake in the ports dir. you are not 'stuck with old UNIX make' .
and the way most people upgrade freebsd is with CVSup. you have the entire source tree on your harddrive (which is about 300meg , not a whole lot) and then make world , this upgrades everything. THEN you compile your kernel. So you should never lose the ability to compile a kernel. Also they dont just 'change' a major feature like that in the middle of a branch. They would wait. Like perl 5.6 is not in 4.x branch because it is a major change that will change alot of things , thats why its sitting in the 5.0-CURRENT branch.
Also you can do a binary upgrade. With
let me ask you this, how do you plan on getting the source to sed on a debian,redhat,slack,etc system? Much easier on FreeBSD system.
outdated? what the hell are you talking about 90% of the port tree (found here) is more up to date than freshmeat is , there is more ports in the port tree than debian has packages. about 4500 ports.
Theres alot of people or this wouldnt be on the front page.
i disagree. Maybe a year ago. But it is getting more and more ground again. esp with osx.
yes but the way i explained it, kernel vs os. You cant do linux vs. freebsd. Cuz freebsd is a os and linux is a kernel. I didnt mean any flame btw
I agree with that somewhat , but normaly when an exploit is found in *BSD it is typicaly fixed faster than in linux just because how they have 'there system of makeing the system' setup. They have a core team that can say 'yeah we need this' or 'no' and in linux its just linus. And I cant say anything about other o/s cuz its closed source and you dunno when its going to be fixed. And both have good and bad points to manage kernel/os.
one problem with this , with makeing a program to use finger from inetd /usr/libexec/fingerd fingerd -s -l -p /usr/local/bin/nonetfinger
/bin/echo "Go away and dont finger me bitch."
finger stream tcp nowait nobody
BSD inetd will allow you to write stuff in the hosts.allow file for example
fingerd : ALL \
: severity auth.info \
: twist
yeah i agree.. those New Jersey people.. =x
this is due to the fact that geeks dont use BSDi. because of the heavfy price it cost to get it. Also BSDi is not a very good client, (in my personal opnion) there is no gnome , kde , etc for it. you can get the source your self. But it will be a chore to compile it, cuz there is not a port system in BSDi.