×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FreeBSD 7.1 Released

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the for-the-1337-amongst-us dept.

Operating Systems 324

Sol-Invictus writes "The FreeBSD Release Engineering Team is pleased to announce the availability of FreeBSD 7.1-RELEASE. This is the second release from the 7-STABLE branch which improves on the functionality of FreeBSD 7.0 and introduces some new features. Some of the highlights: The ULE scheduler is now the default in GENERIC kernels for amd64 and i386 architectures. The ULE scheduler significantly improves performance on multicore systems for many workloads. Support for using DTrace inside the kernel has been imported from OpenSolaris. DTrace is a comprehensive dynamic tracing framework. A new and much-improved NFS Lock Manager (NLM) client. Boot loader changes allow, among other things, booting from USB devices and booting from GPT-labeled devices. KDE updated to 3.5.10, GNOME updated to 2.22.3. DVD-sized media for the amd64 and i386 architectures."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

324 comments

Netcraft confirms it: (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342813)

frosty post

FRANKEN WINS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342863)

SUCK IT REPUGS

captcha: francs

Re:Netcraft confirms it: (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342903)

tag it : reportsofmydemisehavebeengreatlyexaggerated

Hmmm... (-1, Flamebait)

jornak (1377831) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342827)

A significant improvement on a crappy OS is still a crappy OS. No flame intended, but really... who uses FreeBSD anymore?

Re:Hmmm... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342859)

The conservatives.

Re:Hmmm... (0, Flamebait)

not already in use (972294) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342893)

Don't fool yourself. Just because Linux is what the "cool" kids use doesn't mean FreeBSD is in anyway inferior. The linux community sure holds itself in high regard, but who has ZFS and Dtrace support? Not linux... Of course, thats because once some cool new technology comes out the ego-brained linux folk set out to make their own half-assed implementation that will never get finished. That's Linux for ya though. Runs half-assed on everything, well on nothing.

Re:Hmmm... (-1, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343127)

FreeBSD fanboyz shouldn't go mouthing off about "half-assed" considering the way since 5.x it's crappy smp and threadlocking would seize up tighter than a great-grandma on a straight brick cheese diet with lock-mgr panics. Problem persisted in 7.0, who knows if 7.1 will finally put the issues to rest?

Re:Hmmm... (4, Informative)

halber_mensch (851834) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343845)

FreeBSD fanboyz shouldn't go mouthing off about "half-assed" considering the way since 5.x it's crappy smp and threadlocking would seize up tighter than a great-grandma on a straight brick cheese diet with lock-mgr panics. Problem persisted in 7.0, who knows if 7.1 will finally put the issues to rest?

Are you talking about this SMP [slashdot.org]?

5.0 was released in January 2003, I think 6 years of passage should have allowed you enough grumping time that you can let it go now. I think you could also take a look in your wayback machine and remember that Linux was not exactly perfect at the time either. FreeBSD 5 did have its teething problems with all of the new technologies introduced, especially KSE and the ULE scheduler, but progress has continued to be made and your unsubstantiated claim otherwise is just the pathetic grumblings of a troglodyte.

Dont forget documentation (4, Interesting)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343129)

All the BSD's win for man pages that actually contain more information then "man pages are obsolete, please use the info documentation". In FreeBSD the entire core system has documentation. All of it written in the format god intended--roff.

Did you mention all the man pages are online [freebsd.org] and can be searched by version? Comes in handy when you are still using FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE.

And did you mention the fact that BSD's aren't like Linux distros? FreeBSD isn't just a pooling of libraries and code from random people, the core of FreeBSD (shell and userland tools) are all done by the same large team. FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD are *cohesive systems*, not collections.

Want my year 2009 prediction? This will be the year of the BSD's in the data-center. There is a lot going for BSD based systems, and quite frankly the only reason I can see to go back to a random collection of tools and kernel code (i.e. a Linux distrubtion) is for running code that requires vendor support (Oracle, Dell, etc...). In 2009, I predict (hope) more of these big-name vendors officially support FreeBSD and friends.

Re:Dont forget documentation (4, Insightful)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343303)

*And* FreeBSD easily beats linux in the networking speeds and firewalling departments. Of course they're lagging behind in hardware support.

Linux is becoming the new windows

Hardware suport for desktop users, yeah (4, Interesting)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343337)

But honestly, FreeBSD is a server OS. And for servers, it has pretty much any driver you need. Granted not all of it is vendor supported binaries (yet, but hopefully someday), but still, if you have a server from *big-co*, odds are good everything will work.

Re:Dont forget documentation (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343719)

Ummm... no it doesn't. In fact, Linux beats every BSD hands down these days in a) security b) speed (certainly networking, threading and multiprocessor support) c) number of ports to other systems

So that puts the nail in OpenBSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD respectively. The truth is that the BSD snobs used to look down their noses at Linux - and they had some facts on their side as Linux was quite immature. These days... as Linux kicks them all around in the benchmarks... it's just pathetic snobbery.

Hmmm (5, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343873)

There are more important things in the world then how well an operating system does in some assholes random benchmark. If you are standardizing your servers around an operating system based solely on "speed", I question your abilities as a server dude.

I'll just name one thing, out of many, that are vastly more important than "speed". Stability. No, not "never blue-screens". I'm "does the maintainers of the system make major changes in every single release and then stop supporting older releases". Under this definition of stable, FreeBSD wins over linux hands down. Especially after the "we can't be bothered to maintain a stable branch of the linux kernel, so we will add new shit in with the old all the time". You might get a dozen exciting new bugs and security fixes when you "upgrade" between 2.6.1114492 and 2.6.1114493. In fact, this was one of the major reasons for me dumping linux in the first place. The 2.4.x kernels are the last stable linux kernels out there.

That is just one example of something more important than "passes 4*10^30 fps in WoW" benchmark.

As for security? Which is easier to audit and verify? A random pool of code and libraries distributed across hundreds of websites and maintainers, or a cohesive operating system whos entire codebase is in exactly one place [freebsd.org]?

Re:Dont forget documentation (1)

MikeBabcock (65886) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344323)

I'm a huge Linux supporter and always have been, but no Linux distribution I've ever seen has the security record of OpenBSD.

Re:Dont forget documentation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26344131)

Care to put evidence where your mouth is? Post a link to any benchmark that shows that.

Re:Dont forget documentation (1)

despisethesun (880261) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343343)

I'd like to see those big (and smaller, too) name vendors support the BSDs a bit better, too. I've always preferred to work with FreeBSD vs. Linux, but I've been settling on Linux for the better 3rd party software/driver support. I've got some projects planned for this year that I would prefer to use a BSD for rather than Linux, but I don't see it happening.

Re:Dont forget documentation (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343397)

This will be the year of the BSD's in the data-center.

Without support from one or a few big vendors, a la Red Hat for Linux, it'll never happen.

True (4, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343735)

So I'll revise my statement and say this will be the year that more big-name vendors officially support FreeBSD. By "vendor" I mean hardware guys like Dell, IBM or HP, not just software vendors.

I think while it isn't discussed much, GPLv3 made a lot of vendors think twice about Linux. My gut tells me that you'll quietly see more and more vendors back BSD based systems. There won't be much fanfare about it (the BSD world is pretty chill), but it will just slowly inch forward until most servers wind up running FreeBSD or OpenBSD instead of $RANDOM_COLLECTION_OF_CODE.

Just a hunch. Times are changing, and I could be wrong...

Re:Dont forget documentation (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343413)

FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD are *cohesive systems*, not collections.

Amusingly, I misread that as:

FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD are *cohesive systems*, not collisions.

The worst part was that it made perfect sense when I read it. (!)

Man pages are not a quality control technique! (3, Insightful)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343927)

As someone who both enjoyed discovering GNU Info (as it was about the only part of the GNU platform I could run on a 2MB Amiga 1200), and also enjoyed discovering the quality of FreeBSD's man pages, let me give another perspective:

There's absolutely no reason not to use HTML for documentation these days. There are plenty of lightweight text-mode browsers that would suffice in emergencies or during ssh sessions, but also nice desktop apps that would let new users browse them and feel at home. More importantly, it supports modern features, like links to the actual organisations online who support a particular app, or where bugs can be reported, links to email, diagrams, unicode for multilingual support, screenreader support, etc.

Yes, manpages can be nice, and coherent, quality documentation is important. GNU's horrible info browser is certainly not up to it. BUT... let's get with the times. There's no point advocating man pages in the modern world. If you want good docs, argue for good docs in modern formats, not old formats that happen to sometimes have instances of good docs.

Re:Dont forget documentation (1)

MonoSynth (323007) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343965)

In the end, management decides what software will be used. And you know how long it took before they took Linux seriously...

Re:Dont forget documentation (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344133)

That's a huge advantage for *BSD. All the command-line stuff feels like it belongs together. And if you need to check the source, it's in one place, easy to track down, and browseable online. Linux may be open source, but good luck trying to track down the source code for a random library or utility.

Speaking of command-line stuff (4, Interesting)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344277)

(and boy I'm posting in this thread ;-)

For those who've never used a BSD system but have used Linux, be prepared for the command line to work a little different. BSD utilities are often way more picky about the ordering of arguments.

With the GNU tools, "chmod 775 * -R" will recurse down a tree and set everything to 775. "chmod -R 775 *" will do the same thing.

In FreeBSD, only "chmod -R 775 *" will work right.

In BSD userland, the patten is almost always command [arguments] [strings of goo]. In GNU land, you can usually interchange [arguments] and [string of goo] and get the same result. Some will argue that only the BSD way is proper and the GNU way is sloppy. Whatever your feelings are, if you've gotten used to being sloppy about ordering, it will take some adjustment to get used to BSD tools.

The good news is the "proper" way will work on either set of tools.

Re:Hmmm... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343299)

All that code, for nothing BSD suckers. Way to go...

FAILTASTIC!

Re:Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343891)

Well, I would take an OS running half-assed on everything than not having it run at all. Not that I'm saying that Linux runs poorly on most hardware (in fact there's been very little hardware I've had issues with), but FreeBSD has a _lot_ of hardware issues. On my primary desktop, it can't seem to see my hard disks at all... there's nothing crazy about my set up, just standard SATA2... on my spare system which is about 6 years old, all it does is start to boot, then reboots my system... the only hardware I was able to get it installed on was a 10+ year old PII... At least when a Linux distro has problems I seem to get a decent response from the community; with FreeBSD, I've never gotten any useful responses, if any responses at all to questions about installation and configuration.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342929)

Yeah mean, other than Yahoo, and HotMail before MS took them over and they got super crappy, and a whole bunch of other people? I dunno... no one I guess.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342943)

A significant improvement on a crappy OS is still a crappy OS.

I respectfully disagree. At its first release Linux was probably a crappy OS but each subsequent release grew better and better until it wasn't crappy. Who knows, maybe even Windows 7 will live up to the price they ask for it?

No flame intended, but really... who uses FreeBSD anymore?

I certainly don't. But I like the idea of another free operating system for me out there. What would have happened if the courts had screwed Linux and SCO had won and successfully shut down anyone using the Linux kernel? Well, I'd tell you what I would have done: switched all my machines to FreeBSD and recompiled the packages on all the software I used for it. Luckily (and rightfully), I don't have to do this.

You don't mean to flame but what other reason is there for you to ask who uses FreeBSD? Leave the community alone, there are very few fanboys and annoyances about it ... if they want to continue with their operating system, I say let them! Who knows what it could become one day? I wish the FreeBSD team the best of luck and am certain I have inadvertently gained from them in some way and therefore appreciate all their hard work and efforts.

Re:Hmmm... (2, Interesting)

samkass (174571) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343187)

Isn't FreeBSD a good chunk of the core of the BSD layer in Apple's XNU (Darwin) kernel and some of the user-space utilities? I'm not sure if it's still true, but my understanding was that a substantial amount of code went in both directions between MacOS X and FreeBSD.

Re:Hmmm... (2, Interesting)

despisethesun (880261) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343365)

I think these days the code only goes one way (to Apple) but if some Apple fanboy wants to point me to their recent BSD contributions, I'd be interested in seeing them.

At the risk of sounding like a freebsd fanboi (5, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343489)

Nobody in BSD land gives a shit who does what with code. That is one of the nicest features found in BSD systems--the ecosystem is pretty much free of open-source politics.

Nobody give a shit if you wrote your patch on a windows system and mailed it to the ports maintainers using outlook. Nobody cares if Apple, Tivo, or Cisco "locks up the code". In fact, better they do. The BSD licence makes it easy for those companies to contribute because they can use FreeBSD and contribute only the parts that aren't special-sauce. Companies *want* to merge their changes in with the mainline, it is expensive to apply patches to every version of FreeBSD. The BSD licence lets paid employees of these companies send in bug-fixes and patches without ensnaring the companies IP in a legal mess. Other licences have a tendancy to be all-or-nothing--either you hold on to your bug-fixes and merge them in for every version or you release your entire codebase to the world. BSD lets you pick and choose what bits can go into the world. Very flexible.

Bottom line... if Apple wants to use BSD code, who cares. Code is code. It isn't like it has feelings.

Re:At the risk of sounding like a freebsd fanboi (4, Insightful)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344017)

Nobody in BSD land gives a shit who does what with code. That is one of the nicest features found in BSD systems--the ecosystem is pretty much free of open-source politics.

Nobody give a shit if you wrote your patch on a windows system and mailed it to the ports maintainers using outlook. Nobody cares if Apple, Tivo, or Cisco "locks up the code".

Oh yes, what a charming little statement. Absolutely nobody from BSD land cares if companies like Cisco run away with BSD's code and never give anything back in return. Not a single grudge at all. Well, except from people like Theo de Raadt. From a Theo de Raadt interview from 2006: [linux.com]

NF: Lots of hardware vendors use OpenSSH. Have you got anything back from them?

TdR: If I add up everything we have ever gotten in exchange for our efforts with OpenSSH, it might amount to $1,000. This all came from individuals. For our work on OpenSSH, companies using OpenSSH have never given us a cent. What about companies that incorporate OpenSSH directly into their products, saving themselves millions of dollars? Companies such as Cisco, Sun, SGI, HP, IBM, Siemens, a raft of medium-sized firewall companies -- we have not received a cent. Or from Linux vendors? Not a cent.

Of course we did not set out to create OpenSSH for the money -- we purposely made it completely free so that the "telnet infrastructure" of the 1980s would die. But it sure is sad that none of these companies return even a fraction of value in kind.

If you want to judge any entity particularly harshly, judge Sun. Yearly they hold interoperability events, for NFS and other protocols, and they include SSH implementation tests as well. Twice we asked them to cover the travel and accommodation costs for a developer to come to their event, and they refused. Considering that their SunSSH is directly based on our code, that is just flat out insulting. Shame on you Sun, shame, shame, shame.

That does sound like somebody in the BSD camp does give a shit. In fact, it sounds like the BSD camp does get right out pissed off from the lack of contributions. So, care to retract your statement?

No (4, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344173)

There is a difference between "You guys aren't playing fair..." and "our operating system is your religion, either embrace it or go away".

If somebody like $VENDOR_X takes and takes but never contributes even minor shit like bug-fixes to kernel code, they should be called out. But unlike other, more political organizations, you will never see an Anti-$VENDOR_X clause added to a BSD license. That is the important bit.

BTW, one big peeve in BSD land is when the GPL guys will take BSD code like drivers. The GPL license will "infect" any modifications and prevent those changes from being send back to the original BSD code. Kind of a tease, don't you think?

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26344339)

Oh I see. So "nobody in BSD land gives a shit who does what with code" except, well... when someone does in fact something with the code. You really don't think things through, do you?

Re:Hmmm... (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344003)

I think these days the code only goes one way (to Apple) but if some Apple fanboy wants to point me to their recent BSD contributions, I'd be interested in seeing them.

Since all the code is downloadable from http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/ [apple.com], the FreeBSD team is free to take whatever they like.

I'm not sure what official contribution Apple makes these days in 7.x, but I think the entire FreeBSD 5.x release was mostly centered around what Apple brought back to FreeBSD after the first few MacOS X releases, including quite a bit of SMP work. According to Trollaxor [trollaxor.com], though, there continues to be significant bi-directional work on file system journaling, gcc modifications, and DTrace.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343393)

That is true. Unfortunately there will always be the fanboys who proclaim that OSX is BSD, which is like saying that Michael Jackson is a black man.

Re:Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343771)

MJ is black. Wrong metaphor.

Re:Hmmm... (0, Troll)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343863)

No, right metaphor, because Michael Jackson is only a black man in the loosest sense of the word.

Speaking of loose, here's a better one: It's like when your mom brags about sucking black dicks while she actually fellates mulattos exclusively.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343897)

I'm not sure whether you're referring to BSD "fanboys" or Apple ones. But MacOS X isn't pure BSD it *is* UNIX. It passed official UNIX certification, as did most of the BSDs. Linux, of course, isn't UNIX. So UNIX fanboys as opposed to BSD ones are happy :).

Re:Hmmm... (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342957)

People who like reliable, low maintenance computer systems.

By what regards is it a crappy OS anyway?

Re:Hmmm... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343029)

Longest uptime in the world, son. Take your tinkertoys and go play with the other kids downstairs, the grownups are talking here.

Re:Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343065)

pics or it dident huppin, lulz

Re:Hmmm... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343331)

Not reliable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343455)

Most of the serious service runners are blocking queries from such service as Netcraft. Getting on the top means that some kid will start probably DDOSing you for it. It's better to just remove you from that list.

Re:Hmmm... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343833)

Netcraft is not reliable anymore. From the site:

Why do you not report uptimes for Linux 2.6 or FreeBSD 6 ?

We only report uptimes for systems where the operating system's timer runs at 100Hz or less. Because the TCP code only uses the low 32 bits of the timer, if the timer runs at say 1000Hz, the value wraps around every 49.7 days (whereas at 100Hz it wraps after 497 days). As there are large numbers of systems which have a higher uptime than this, it is not possible to report accurate uptimes for these systems.

The Linux kernel switched to a higher internal timer rate at kernel version 2.5.26. Linux 2.4 used a rate of 100Hz. Linux 2.6 used a timer at 1000Hz (some architectures were using 1000Hz before this), until the default was changed back to 250Hz in May 2006. (An explanation of the HZ setting in Linux.)

FreeBSD versions 4 and 5 used a 100Hz timer, but FreeBSD 6 has moved to a customisable timer with a default setting of 1000Hz.

So unfortunately this means that we cannot give reliable uptime figures for many Linux and FreeBSD servers.

Persian Kitty FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343399)

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

Not only are these the stats from perennial doomsayer Netcraft, but it's a double win since the top system is for Adult links. Enjoy your pics ...

Re:Hmmm... flame linux, get modded down? U Betcha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343741)

Thanks for the link of uptimes. It does my soul good to see nary a linux box in that list. I do have to wonder though is it because it is a bad operating system, or are their admins of a new generation that do not take pride in their work? Or is it because they lack the skill? Sorry, I can't work it out. If somebody has insight, please pass it on.
 
The biggest strength for linux is also its biggest weakness and that is there are a lot of developers. As a result, it lacks the polish of a commercial nix. And just so you linux zealots ask me to back it up, here it is. Take a look at rusty coat hanger abortion of files that is the network configuration files. It is not inutitive nor straightforward. It looks like some coders lost their shit on shroom trip and made it up as they descended into the abyss.
 
Here is a clue, use a file for your network configuration, maybe 3 or 4 tops, like Solaris.
 
The best slashdot sig around is
 
Linux is for people who hate windows, FreeBSD is for people who love Nix.

Re:Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343703)

A significant improvement on a crappy OS is still a crappy OS. No flame intended, but really... who uses FreeBSD anymore?

Hmmm, Apple for one

NinnleBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342829)

The next release of NinnleBSD is imminent. This will blow FreeBSD out of the water.

Re:NinnleBSD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343641)

That's because BSD stands for BLACK SMELLY DICK. I'm sure you'll blow it out of the water you nigger-loving faggot.

Benchmarks? (1)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342865)

Is there some sort of benchmark comparing FreeBSD 7.1 with other operating systems and distributions? I would be more than happy to run it on a couple of systems that I have hanging around but the user experience needs to be at least comparable to what I'm already running (kubuntu 8.10)

Re:Benchmarks? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342917)

If you're on Kubuntu (me too), you want to try PCBSD. It's FreeBSD, built into a Kubuntu-like system. It will take them a little bit to get updated to FreeBSD release 7.1 (they were on the pre-release, so not too long). Get it here - http://pcbsd.org/

Vanilla FreeBSD is a lot like vanilla Slackware. You might not enjoy the initial learning curve.

Re:Benchmarks? (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342981)

yeah, but once you get past the learning curve, it becomes very easy and very reliable.

Actually, I found the documentation well organized (at least for what I used), along with the mailing lists, it ended up having a lower learning curve for me, than for most Linux distros.

Re:Benchmarks? (1)

jammindice (786569) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343083)

I agree, out of every os that i've ever used that wasn't some windows version FreeBSD has the single best documentation.

The FreeBSD handbook is a superior resource than any distro's wiki anyday. And i'm not a BSD fanboy, i run linux at home (fedora, ubuntu, and centos) but i have a personal colo server and that runs BSD and i've never had to touch it once in 5 years, runs solid no problems at all

And that is the best niche for FreeBSD (4, Insightful)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343193)

As a lover of FreeBSD, I hope the guys in charge never try to "win the desktop". They'd never win and they'd stop paying attention to the stuff that makes it so good for servers. FreeBSD, and the other BSD's for that matter, belong in the data center. I'd argue the same for Linux, but that might get me slaughtered in these parts...

Re:And that is the best niche for FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343329)

I agree and hope they continue to focus on improvements to the core operating system over desktop performance and glitter. I do however use FreeBSD as my desktop. Linux has more drivers and a prettier installer, but once FreeBSD is installed it seems to do everything I need and the ports system is great.

Re:And that is the best niche for FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343571)

I do however use FreeBSD as my desktop.

If they would fix/implement more mature USB-support, FreeBSD would definitely be a decent Desktop OS.

Re:And that is the best niche for FreeBSD (1)

halber_mensch (851834) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343915)

As a lover of FreeBSD, I hope the guys in charge never try to "win the desktop". They'd never win and they'd stop paying attention to the stuff that makes it so good for servers. FreeBSD, and the other BSD's for that matter, belong in the data center. I'd argue the same for Linux, but that might get me slaughtered in these parts...

Let's not forget the embedded market. FreeBSD seems very popular in that world, I'd assume because of the permissive licensing.

Re:And that is the best niche for FreeBSD (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344255)

As a lover of FreeBSD, I hope the guys in charge never try to "win the desktop".

That's what PC-BSD is for. I played with it, and it was very polished, and a few reviews I've read put it above Ubuntu for out-of-the-box usability. Being able to bundle nVidia drivers on the CD without violating the kernel's license helped there I suppose.

FreeBSD isn't a great desktop out of the box, but it's a good component for building a great desktop. Things like in-kernel sound mixing just work, so you can have multiple sound sources all using your speakers at once (music, a game, and a machine that goes 'bing' for example). 3D support is pretty good too.

Re:Benchmarks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343109)

> once you get past the learning curve, it becomes very easy

yes, but it isn't inherently easy. you could say the same statement for anything challenging. I'd be shocked if your def'n of "easy" is anywhere near the skill to install/use Dumbuntu.

Re:Benchmarks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343773)

Hahahah, yeah!! I mean -- they don't even have to adjust the parameters in /etc/fstab to get their NTFS drives writable! Are they stupid or what?? Ubuntu, more like DUMBUNTU!! Amirite guys??

Re:Benchmarks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343139)

Posting as Anon-A-Hole again: I think FreeBSD is laid out quite well, and the documentation is great. I ended up doing a lot of work with FreeBSD for my degree. I wouldn't ever imply that FreeBSD isn't well organized - just that it's not much more friendly to a new user than Slackware. A command line is a command line, no matter how well documented the system is. It's easier for a lot of people to start out using a desktop environment like KDE.

Also, a tiny nit - you're never off the learning curve, you move along beyond the initial stages to a flatter long-term slope.

Re:Benchmarks? (1)

Yuioup (452151) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343147)

I'm sure Phoronix [phoronix.com] will come up with one, otherwise you can download the benchmark and try it our for yourself.

Benchmarks?!??!!!!11one!!? (5, Insightful)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344029)

Benchmarks between competing free software projects? Don't be silly! Next thing, you'll be advocating some sort of sane system, like choosing the best of breed technology based stats like benchmarks, and uniting behind it! Think what kind of chaos Free Software would be in, if everyone decided that OpenGL was THE low-level graphics layer, that gstreamer was THE codec API, that Vala was THE high-level language, that Git was THE modern version control system, or that FUSE was THE place to develop filesystem stuff. Why, you'd have a straightforward stack, with very little bloat, and tons of people honing a single implementation.

Pandemonium, I tell you.

*Finally* DVD media (4, Informative)

jaredmauch (633928) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342905)

This is one of the better parts of this release. The lack of speed/clue on putting out both CD sized and DVD iso images has been highly frustrating, telling the users to basically "roll-their-own". I've already upgraded a few systems and things appear to be going well.

Re:*Finally* DVD media (0, Offtopic)

gatkinso (15975) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343099)

Now if Fedora would only still provide CD ISO's for their older versions the world would be perfect...

At this point... (0, Offtopic)

XPeter (1429763) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342925)

AMD is going to need all the help they can get to compete with Intel. I'm happy to see articles like this floating around, because it at least means AMD is getting some publicity.

Look at it this way. If Intel wins, then the consumer loses. Why? Because if AMD goes under that would leave only Intel left in the desktop/server market which means they won't need to invest more money to make better processors since they have no competitor to force them to and this obviously results in slower chips.

AMD better do good with there new Phenom II chips, or else I don't see them along for much longer. ATI alone won't keep them going for long.

Re:At this point... (1)

billsnow (1334685) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343861)

I don't see how relevant this is to a FreeBSD (which supports a wide range of non-x86 archetectures) release.
If FreeBSD has anything to do with it, in fact there is more to desktop/server platforms than CISCs. IBM (Power architecture) and SUN (SPARC) come to mind. You can say whatever you want about current market share, but this business changes with technology, and technology can change.

I'm not concerned about an Intel monopoly on an architecture they invented. I am, however, concerned about AMD continuing to rest on its laurels and make little progress in their processors. At least IBM continues to develop novel ideas (the Cell).

ULE by default (1)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 5 years ago | (#26342941)

Kind of took them long enough...

FreeBSD kind of lost me with the 5 and 6 releases. I haven't tried 7, but maybe it's worth a shot again.

They would be wise to port WAPBL; it looks better than gjournal, seems to perform comparably to Softupdates (which are a data gamble), and doesn't have huge system requirements like ZFS.

Re:ULE by default (1)

fedcb22 (1215744) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343351)

I thought sotftupdates only had issues on NetBSD.

Re:ULE by default (1)

urbanriot (924981) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343643)

Been using softupdates on various versions of FreeBSD for years on production web caching servers hosting hundreds of users - I'm also not sure what he means by 'data gamble.'

Description of some changes, links to benchmarks (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26342961)

Here [sharanet.org] are some descriptions of new features and links to benchmarks.

Did they fix the atheros driver? (1)

moderators_are_w*nke (571920) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343019)

Or does it STILL kill the box every time it receives a fragmented packet?

Re:Did they fix the atheros driver? (1, Insightful)

gatkinso (15975) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343073)

Check for yourself and see....

If not, then feel free to have at it. Sounds like a nice contribution that you could make.

Contributions (4, Interesting)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343317)

And don't be nervous about making contributions either. My first ports looked like shit, but the port guys were patient and over time I've gotten the hang of the system.

FreeBSD (and probably the other BSD's) are much easier to work on then the other guys. For starters, since you are using a *system* and not a collection of libraries, all your patches and bug-reports go to the same place [freebsd.org]. In other words, you aren't talking to "the website and the people who maintain the 'tar' utility", you are talking to "the freebsd guys". Your patch for "tar" goes to the same repository as the code for "libc".

Plus since it is licensed as BSD, you can actually contribute modifications and not worry about the nasty side effects found in other licenses. I've never contributed to a GPL project, but I've contributed tons to BSD projects.

Bottom line, FreeBSD is a great place to get your feet wet contributing to open source stuff. Good times.

Re:Contributions (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343431)

Care to tell us why you like the BSD license better than GPL, or should we just take your word for it?

Re:Contributions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343593)

Uh, I think he just did. The BSD license is a 'freer' license, especially as your code travels upstream.

Booting USB? (1)

Improv (2467) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343203)

I've been using a USB-based FreeBSD5 image for a project for some time now. I wonder what they're talking about with USB boot support.

Re:Booting USB? (1)

fedcb22 (1215744) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343437)

I think it has something to do with the way different BIOSes handle USB booting. A laptop of mine couldn't boot any earlier version via USB, whereas my normal PC could.

Undead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343417)

BSD ain't even pining for the fjords yet either.

SMP + Stability = Win! (4, Interesting)

urbanriot (924981) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343439)

I've been sticking with the 6.x branch (6.4 most recently) as it's given me extremely reliable uptime with my Squid proxy servers. FreeBSD 7.0 excited me with their SMP updates and ULE scheduler aiding in performance, however I wasn't convinced that the long standing FreeBSD stability was there after reading a number of newsgroup discussions, and due to its immaturity. Now that 7.1 has been released, I'm going to start taking it more seriously for production use.

That being said, regarding some of the comments here, FreeBSD (in my opinion) is more suited to uptime, stability, and reliability in servers than it is to offering a performance oriented desktop experience. Want a good starter project? Try to make a FreeBSD stateful firewall with transparent proxy server (pf / squid) for your home using some spare parts you have kicking around.

Re:SMP + Stability = Win! (1)

phantomcircuit (938963) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343669)

I have FreeBSD running on a laptop with gnome.

This is the only configuration under which it is even reasonably responsive (well it's more responsive with XFCE but I don't like it).

The hdd is only 20 GB, and install of XPSP3 with all the updates is not roughly 16 GB.

FreeBSD install with gnome/firefox3/openoffice.org-3? 5GB. And I still need to clean out the ports tree (I forgot to do it while installing the ports :|)

are you building by hand? (1)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344067)

As in going into a port and "make -> make install"?

If you are go grab "portupgrade" (/usr/ports/port-utils/portupgrade, I think). Portupgrade will do the "make" crap for you and has the side-effect of doing a "make clean" when it is done. It has some other nice parts like letting you set all the config variables in one file as well has helping you do crazy gentoo-like dependency swaps.

PPS: "make portsnap" while you are at it and then put it on a cronjob. cvsup is for people who are gonna fuck with the ports tree.

Re:SMP + Stability = Win! (1)

Rowenas Dad (726276) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343711)

6.x? Far too new-fangled! I have been running Squid on 5.3 for about 4 years. Having said that, when I have a new server application to develop/prototype my first reaction is to use the latest stable release. So I have a MySQL database running happily on 7.0. And most of my FreeBSD installations are on ageing Intel hardware that would collapse if a Windows setup program tried to run on them. (If I want to build a desktop I use Ubuntu, doesn't everyone?)

Re:SMP + Stability = Win! (1)

urbanriot (924981) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343923)

Same here. My last squid proxy server was for a local small business, about 50 users, on one of their old dual P3 1u servers w/1GB RAM they were going to throw out. Uptime 6 months now and humming along nicely.

Using FreeBSD 6.3, Squid 2.6 for caching, a nice script called LightSquid for user web usage reporting, Apache 1.3.3.7 for displaying the web logs, OpenLdap to log Windows usernames and a few other things here and there, for a perfectly transparent web proxy. None of the users have any idea they're being logged and the internet usage has dropped dramatically since it's being cached.

Re:SMP + Stability = Win! (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#26344315)

6.x? Far too new-fangled! I have been running Squid on 5.3 for about 4 years

Considering that 5.x was never declared -STABLE, 6 is a lot less of a gamble. There's a reason a lot of us went from 4.x to 6.x with our systems...

Java on FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343497)

Does anyone know of the status on Java for FreeBSD. We mainly run Java enterprise applications on our servers, and although I like FreeBSD, we have been reluctant to using it due to "official" releases not existing of Java. There are "patchsets" for 1.6 and frankly, that word scares me a lot. We are currently going with CentOS for everything.

Hmmm (1)

coryking (104614) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343657)

The closest you'd get to an official java release (which I assume you mean is a binary compiled by Sun) is a binary package compiled by the FreeBSD guys. The only thing about FreeBSD packages is they usually lag behind the ports tree by several weeks.

Vendor support like what you are asking is one of the things FreeBSD and friends lack. My gut tells me that it won't be long before you'll see FreeBSD get enough mind share that companies like Sun start offering support.

Re:Java on FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26344073)

cd /usr/ports/java/linux-sun-jdk14
make install clean

I would love to win the lottery and... (2, Funny)

gatkinso (15975) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343583)

...devote my life to Open Source. FreeBSD in particular.

No real reason why FBSD. I just remember really liking Lehey's 'FreeBSD.'

Oh well, it's back to Visual C++ for me...

Speaking of uptime (2, Interesting)

Rasperin (1034758) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343767)

My current NAS is running FreeBSD 5.3, in constant use, and has: 10:31AM up 2331 days, 28 mins Kinda nice if you ask me, I also use it as a desktop environment on my laptop because it just "works" for me.

Its ext support reliable yet? (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343829)

I used to dual boot a BSD 6.0 system with linux but after it chewed up my ext2 /home directory on a couple of occasions I just stopped using it. Not worth the hassle of restoring from backup just to use an OS that offered little over Linux aside from quicker bootup/shutdown times.

what about smb speed-ups? any?? (3, Interesting)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 5 years ago | (#26343877)

been a freebsd user since 4.x days.

I use bsd to run my mail, antispam, dns and other public web services.

I'd LIKE to also have it be a fast samba server but for some reason, samba on bsd really SUCKS. why is that??

my similar hardware linux box runs circles all over bsd on samba. that's the last hold-out, really, in wanting to go all-bsd at home.

is there EVER going to be equiv speed on freebsd as linux has, for smb?

RED BANNER AND IM NOT LOGGED IN (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26343881)

Woo! Finally got to see what everyone else has been talking about. Not signed in currently at all. I'm not a paid subscriber anyways.

And there's about 50 posts already.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...