Beta
×

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 4.9 Released

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the new-toys dept.

Operating Systems 421

Digital Dharma writes "Excellent! FreeBSD 4.9 has been released, and if it's anything like the RC series, this will be a release to remember. You can obtain it from the usual sources, or if you're feeling generous and supportive, you can buy the cd set. Support your local Daemon!" As Jani Laaksonen writes, the new release includes "numerous security advisory fixes, kernel changes and support for the Physical Address Extensions (PAE) capability on Intel Pentium Pro and higher processors (see page(4)). This release also adds support for a few more hardware NIC cards, ipfw network protocol enhancements, userland changes, and more. Check FreeBSD 4.9 Release Notes for more information."

cancel ×

421 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Excitement (0, Informative)

ultrabot (200914) | more than 10 years ago | (#7336960)

The excitement over this new release hit the beleaguered BSD community like a bombshell.

Oh the Irony: FreeBSD is not Free! (-1, Troll)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337044)

FreeBSD is *not* free guys! It never was! At least not in the true sense of the word. It is rather an attempt by some programmers to whore themselves out so that their code can be as popular as possible and as widely used as possible, with only an afterthought given to the ideals of truly free software.

I love BSD. It's so easy for any Evil Corporation to take it, modify it, redistribute it under a draconian closed-source license, charge an arm-and-a-leg for it, and REAP THE REWARDS! Even if 99% of the code is untouched. Muahahaha!

Guys, wake up. BSD is not free software. It never was. Well it is free, but it's not designed to stay free due to its overly permissive license. Any true supporter of free software would shun it and stick with GNU/Linux these days.

BSD comes with a lot of GNU utils. They *owe* the GNU project, and would do well to switch their license to the FSF's GPL.

(Let me make a piece of software. Call it RedWM, the Red Window Manager, and within it offer only shades of burgundy and not any real Red. That's an analogy for how misnamed FreeBSD truly is!)

Troll? Care to explain your modding parent down? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337101)

Please explain why you modded this down. At least repy to the parent! I think there are some good points raised and just modding it down to 'troll' without any explanation is not fair!

Re:Troll? Care to explain your modding parent down (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337146)

None of the points raised by the post in question are worth wasting any time on. The poster's understanding of what "free" means is simply flawed. Flawed? Broken.

Free doesn't mean "do it my way." Free doesn't mean "do what I say." Free means free, period. Unburdened by restriction or prohibition. Free doesn't mean you get to tell other people what to do.

A lot of people don't like freedom. A lot of people think that other people should just do what they're told and not make their own decisions. The poster in question is evidently one of these people. He thinks that people shouldn't be free to do whatever they want with free software. He thinks that people should only be allowed to do certain things, under certain circumstances.

That doesn't sound right to me.

That's where the discussion begins and ends. The poster in question is wrong in his most basic assumption, so there's no point in getting any deeper into it than that.

Sorry, you are WRONG! (-1, Offtopic)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337227)

You have a naive understanding of how the world works my friend. Can you truly be free when there is no system in place to protect your rights? No! Would you consider yourself free if there were no laws?

Sure you would be, for a time, until that pack of hungry hoodlums comes by and denies you all of your freedoms. They beat you up and take away your property. They can do it because they are just as free as you. As soon as they do that you are no longer free. They can do it because you aren't protected by the law.

True freedom means the ability to be protected from losing your freedom. We in the United States like to say we live in a free country. Not because we can do whatever we like, but because we like to think that the system is all about protecting our freedoms as much as is possible in a civilized society (at least we used to think that before the USA Patriot Act.)

Your freedom is about as short-lived as the amount of time it takes some guy to come over and bully you into giving up your rights!

The thing about FreeBSD is that anyone can easily take away the freedom of the software! And many closed-source vendors do just that.

For software to truly be free, it must never ever ever risk losing its freedom, no matter what hands it falls into. Anything else is not free.

Re:Sorry, you are WRONG! (2, Insightful)

dinivin (444905) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337266)

You have a naive understanding of how the world works my friend. Can you truly be free when there is no system in place to protect your rights? No! Would you consider yourself free if there were no laws?

Uh, we're talking about software, not human rights and freedoms. Till you manage to get that through your head, there really isn't any point in continuing this discussion.

Dinivin

Re:Sorry, you are WRONG! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337341)

You have a naive understanding of how the world works my friend.

No kidding?

Can you truly be free when there is no system in place to protect your rights?

Yup. You may not be happy, or secure, or safe, or wealthy, but you're free. That's what "free" means.

If you want to talk about stuff other than freedom, be my guest. But don't try to roll a whole trunk-full of ideas up and call the whole package "freedom." It doesn't work that way.

They can do it because they are just as free as you.

Right. That's what "free" means.

True freedom means the ability to be protected from losing your freedom.

No, that's not what "freedom" means. Wilsonian liberalism aside, freedom cannot be satisfactorily expressed as a negative proposition. There is no such thing as "freedom from." That's just a figure of speech. Freedom is a positive proposition: "freedom to."

I agree that unrestricted freedom would be a lousy way to live. I think restrictions on behavior are important, even critical, to a civil society. I'm just not deluding myself and misleading others by engaging in "slavery is freedom" double-speak.

Freedom is the natural state, the state of grace. We voluntarily give up our freedom, to a degree, when we join a society. In doing so, we must never forget that what we are doing is a conscious act. We must never forget that we have voluntarily surrendered our freedom for a greater prosperity. To say that freedom can't be freedom without restrictions is a disservice to the essential nature of freedom itself.

The thing about FreeBSD is that anyone can easily take away the freedom of the software!

Actually, no. Nobody can take away the freedom of FreeBSD. FreeBSD is now and will always be free... as long as it doesn't get "infected" with stolen IP, as Linux recently has been.

What you can do is take FreeBSD and create something new from it, something that is for a limited time protected by copyright. This is called "progress."

But eventually, all things return to the public domain. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. So your high-minded, blowhard rhetoric about "taking away the freedom!" is just silly.

For software to truly be free, it must never ever ever risk losing its freedom, no matter what hands it falls into. Anything else is not free.

Please extract your head from your ass before continuing this discussion.

Re:Troll? Care to explain your modding parent down (0)

pebs (654334) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337197)

It is a troll, but if you really want a reply: The BSD license is free in a different way than GPL software. It is free in a way that actually allows more freedom than the GPL. One of the points of the license is to allow for others to use it in their closed source software. This is a good thing, as it helps business and helps stimulate the economy.

Would it be better if Microsoft wrote their own TCP/IP stack and it turned out very buggy? Would it be better if OS X didn't exist at all? BeOS?

I'm not going to argue which license is more appropriate. They both have their pros and cons. And either one may be appropriate depending on your goals.

YES! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337238)

If microsoft had a shittier TCP/IP stack would that be better?!

Hell yes it would! That would make getting people to use free software that much easier! You are basically saying you want to help microsoft make a better product! If you like that at least fucking get paid for it! You want to work for a company like microsoft...for free? That is really sad...

Would it be better if OS X didn't exist at all? Sure. Why do I care if more closed source proprietary software exists?

Re:Excitement (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337133)

For Halloween, I'm going as a socially inept loser. Anybody got a FreeBSD tshirt I can borrow?

Re:Excitement (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337184)

Once, I saw someone wearing a "Mathematica 4" t-shirt.

Panther/Darwin contributions? (2, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 10 years ago | (#7336961)

Interesting - seems very close to the Panther and Darwin releases. Has this accepted any code from Apple?

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337010)

those ass pony faggots only steal from open sores. they do not give in return. Maybe you are not familiar with the revered leader, Steve Jobs (peace be with him). The great master hand Jobs takes what he wishes, and owes nothing.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337033)

BSD developers like to be exploited by rich capitalists thats why they use a weak license like BSD in the first place.

"You know that new closed source thing on mac that really rocks? Well that's all my hard work with a few modifications! Don't I rock! Uhh, no I didn't get paid and no I don't have any rights to the code...but I'm such a good work horse for Apple Corporation! I'm cool!"

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Troll)

quigonn (80360) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337078)

But that's exactly the view of most BSD developers. They usually call this "real freedom". Yes, that kind of freedom where you're a kind of slave for one or more companies.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Troll)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337086)

Yes! That's the problem with the BSD license. I really hope people wake up and realize there is no Free in FreeBSD.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1)

quigonn (80360) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337122)

Well, one can make FreeBSD by forking the code and relicensing it under the GPL. Of course, copyright notices must be retained. Anyone interested in creating GNU/BSD? ;-)

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (2, Informative)

IEFBR14 (532579) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337160)

I think that there may be some [debian.org] interest [debian.org] in doing this.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (3, Informative)

quigonn (80360) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337182)

Debian NetBSD/FreeBSD isn't about forking and putting NetBSD/FreeBSD under a new license. It is about putting NetBSD and FreeBSD into the "Debian scheme", with Debian installer and Debian package management. And I have to know it, since I was involved in that work for some time.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1)

IEFBR14 (532579) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337327)

Since you were involved in working on this, can you shed some light on why the kernel wasn't put under the GPL? From the description of the project, it looks like the BSD userland was being replaced with everthing from GNU. What was stopping those involved with trying to change the license?

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1)

quigonn (80360) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337367)

AFAICR, only the FreeBSD port took all the GNU stuff. The guy who made it even ported the glibc to FreeBSD.

Anyway, at the point where I had to leave (lack of time), nobody really cared about licenses, as long as it's "free" (or what Debian considers to be free).

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1)

bloodpet (646437) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337403)

I don't think they're using a BSD kernel/OS which is probably what the previous poster is suggested.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Flamebait)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337172)

The problem is that unless your featureset supercedes that of the real FreeBSD project (hard to do if you're just one guy), companies can ignore your fork and stick with the original BSD license.

The only way to do it is to get everyone using your fork and somehow make its features better than those of FreeBSD. But it's a waste of resources, since the FreeBSD maintainers are still working against you, in a sense.

It comes down to this: every line of code the FreeBSD programmers write weakens free software, beacuse ultimately, that line of code can easily be used in non-free software. The FreeBSD developers, without realizing it, are working against software freedom by not GPL'ing their code.

Think about it! I am not just being flamebait here, it's true. And if you think this argument is too idealistic or too zealous or too much like something RMS would say, then you really don't respect GNU software. If you use GNU/Linux at all, you really should think about the ideals that made the whole system possible.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1)

bloodpet (646437) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337306)

Isn't ironic. GNU(GNU's Not UNIX)/BSD

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337177)

I think your problem is that there's too much free in FreeBSD. And it just drives you nuts, doesn't it? It just makes you crazy that people are free to do whatever they like, including things that you don't want them to do.

You're arguing that people should only be allowed to do certain things under certain circumstances. In this way, you're nothing more than a petty autocrat.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (3, Insightful)

Tarpan (114764) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337118)

You are not a slave, since you are not forced to work. You will not get paid and there is no demand that <evil corporation> gives their modifications back but they do not own you and make you work for free, if you do not want to continue then you can stop.

Don't confuse slavery with I-want-to-work-for-free-and-might-get-some-back

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337137)

Yes, I think that BSD peoples tend to mispell kindness when they write freedom.
You are obviously free to be kind, but that doens't make you free to be kind.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337195)

Get some back?

What has ever gone back into BSD?

Linux has recieved way more corporate code contributions than BSD ever has. So that whole if we give all our code to a big corporation for free maybe they'll be kind of take pity on us with some code, that theory has been discredited.

Mod Parent UP (1)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337380)

Yes! You are right. That's the crux of the problem. In fact vendors are DISCOURAGED from contributing to BSD, because they FEAR helping out the competition.

Now, with Linux, even vendors are freer to contribute, because their contributions are GUARANTEED to not be exploited by their competition and used against the vendor that contributed. Everybody wins. This is why GPL is more free than BSD.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (3, Insightful)

marcovje (205102) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337236)


Apple's contributions are most visible in gcc 3.x.y series powerpc support and optimization, not at kernel level in FreeBSD, since Darwin mainly uses FreeBSD's userland, not kernel.

So Apple is giving back to the community, just not directly to FreeBSD.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Troll)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337299)

Yeah and that's because userland is GPL'd! They _have_ to give back. You think if GCC was under a BSD license what would happen? Nope. They would simply take GCC, modify it to suit their needs, then keep the modifications secret.

It makes little business sense for a company to volunteer to give back to the community (after all they put money into the modifications, why help out the competition potentially?), unless code is protected by the GPL.

This is precisely the reason why FreeBSD is less free than Linux.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337390)

Where to begin here...

First, it is *certainly* in Apple's interest to have a quality free compiler that ships with their system (or can be d/led for free). Operating Systems generally could use an app or two.

Secondly, to say that a licnese is more free because it forces you to do things is the silliest expression of foolishness you can utter. By that logic, Microsoft's Shared Source license is *more free* than the GPL.

Public Domain is more free than BSD. BSD is more free than GPL. GPL is more free than closed source. Just as closed source licenses are gradually disappearing in favor of GPL, GPL will gradually disappear in favor of BSD. Those people who send nasty-grams to companies demanding source code for their routers guarentee that.

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337300)

Ya and you know why they give back to GCC and not FreeBSD itself?

BECAUSE GCC IS GPL!

That's why!

Are you so blind you can't understand what is happening?

*sigh*

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (-1, Flamebait)

cculianu (183926) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337321)

Yeah most people are blind. It's sad to me that people don't understand why FreeBSD is not as free as GPL'd alternatives.

*sigh*

All my posts on this topic got modded down as troll or flamebait. :(

Re:Panther/Darwin contributions? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337217)

BSD gave a lot to Apple to make a great OS. Isn't it just right that they get some in return?
I doubt it, tho

Is it Free ?? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336969)

FreeBSD Rocks!!! Linux Sucks :(

Re:Is it Free ?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337075)

Really? here [bulk.fefe.de] are some benchmarks with FreeBSD 4 now included. It appears that FreeBSD sucks :(

First Rams! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336971)

Ok, so it isn't the first pr0st33z. But...

GO RAMS!

Fuck you all.

I hate every one of you.

Love Always,
News For Turds

YOU FAIL IT! (-1)

YOU FAIL IT! (624257) | more than 10 years ago | (#7336981)

Netcraft confirms: You are a FAILURE!

YOU FAIL IT!

Performance... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336974)

But... How does it compare to Linux 2.6.0-test9 performance wise?

BSD developers together (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336975)

Q - What do you call a bunch of *BSD developers?
A - A funeral

Re:BSD developers together (-1, Flamebait)

borgdows (599861) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337011)

Q - What do you call a bunch of Linux developers?
A - A gay party!

Re:BSD developers together (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337110)

You don't seem to think its too far fetched that a bunch of homos can come up with an OS that fucks [bulk.fefe.de] FreeBSD in the anus... well, now that I put it like that, I don't think its too far fetched either!

Re:BSD developers together (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337199)

However, it is far felched!


rimshot!

BSD IS DEAD! LONG LIVE BSD! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336977)

Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, comment posting has temporarily been disabled. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in the timeout corner. If it's someone else, this is a chance to hunt them down. If you think this is unfair, please email moderation@slashdot.org with your MD5'd IPID and SubnetID.

RMS says don't use this (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336978)

It's not free as in pants. Only use GPL, and remember to send your $699 payment. Per processor.

Support your local Daemon (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336980)

There is a fairly significant amount of Christians in IT. Shouldn't open source be using something less offensive, like "services" instead of glorifying evil?

Re:Support your local Daemon (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337008)

It's because we all want the DEVIL to FEAST on the brains of your Christian babies! You UNBORN babies if it's at all possible!

Death to religion! Worship the devil!

Re:Support your local Daemon (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337288)

Smacktard. Go and look up "daemon" in any dictionary, although I would recommend the Concise Oxford. *Not* dictionary.com, though.

Before a troll says it (-1, Troll)

Pingular (670773) | more than 10 years ago | (#7336986)

*BSD is dying. It features no support for any applications I use, and can't run any games I play. Not even the famous BSD Babes [toadstool.se] can save it now.

Re:Before a troll says it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337073)

jesus, is that poor girl skinny enough for you?

WARNING!! LINK CONTAINS NO PR0N (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337185)

just a skinny girl in a devil bikini. she never takes it off tho.

Re:WARNING!! LINK CONTAINS NO PR0N (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337285)

I was seriously dissapointed she doesn't get her gear off. Damn she's hot!

SOMEONE PULL TEH FEEDING TUBE OUT OF BSD PLZ KTHX (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336989)

Face it man BSD is in a vegetative state, pull out the damn feeding tube and let it die a dignified death.

BSD has a nice history, why spoil it by keeping this thing on life support?

what (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337151)

But I agree with that assessment.

What I know about FreeBSD (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336993)

1. You can not play games on it.
2. It cannot be used by my grandma.
3. It lacks a GUI of any note.
4. There is no support available for it.
5. It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.
6. It cannot be run on the x86 platform.
7. You have to compile everything and know C.
8. Support for the latest hardware is always poor.
9. It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.
10.It is dying.

Re:What I know about FreeBSD (0)

fuckfuck101 (699067) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337034)

11. you have to not be a retard to use it.

Re:What I know about FreeBSD (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337072)

> 1. You can not play games on it.
Wrong. There are plenty of games, and what is not supported by a native version may be playable under linux emulation and/or wine with a negligible performance impact.

> 2. It cannot be used by my grandma.
Then your grandma is dumb.

> 3. It lacks a GUI of any note.
Wrong. you can use XFree86 and any window manager or desktop environment you choose.

> 4. There is no support available for it.
Wrong. There are plenty of IRC channels, email lists and even commercial support providers.

> 5. It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.
Wrong. Even if it were not wrong this does not compare to the staggering number of Linux distributions.

> 6. It cannot be run on the x86 platform.
Wrong. FreeBSD was initially crafted directly from the 386BSD patchset in the early 90's. It has supported i386 from the very beginning.

> 7. You have to compile everything and know C.
Wrong. You can install packages just like linux. You can certainly compile everything if you want to, but this does not require even minimal knowledge of C.

> 8. Support for the latest hardware is always poor.
Wrong. It isn't always poor. Sometimes support lags behind a little, many times IHV's have poor or no FreeBSD drivers, but new hardware is certainly not ignored.

> 9. It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.
Wrong. FreeBSD has an extensive Linux binary compatability system that allows most Linux binaries to run just fine. Word is, sometimes even faster.

> 10.It is dying.
And Wrong. FreeBSD has a large community of active developers and maintainers, along with a significant installed user base.

9 out of 10 ain't bad. Clearly a troll but I was feeling self important so I thought I'd whip it out.

Re:What I know about FreeBSD (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337229)

You can not play games on it.

That's true. FreeBSD is not for people who want to play games. These people need to use a PlayStation, GameCube, or Xbox.

It cannot be used by my grandma.

That's true. FreeBSD is not meant to be used in that sense at all. It's a server operating system, designed to run unattended.

It lacks a GUI of any note.

That's true. The only graphical user interfaces for FreeBSD are those based on X11--including the atrocities KDE and Gnome. These are nothing more than curiosities.

There is no support available for it.

That's true. FreeBSD is not for people who want to buy a support contract. These people need to use Solaris or AIX or IRIX or Mac OS X Server instead.

It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.

That's untrue. FreeBSD is just one operating system.

It cannot be run on the x86 platform.

That's untrue. The primary platform of FreeBSD is IA-32, which some silly people insist on calling "x86" for reasons that escape me.

You have to compile everything and know C.

That's half true. You do have to compile everything; that's what the "ports" system is. You do not have to know C, however; that's also part of the "ports" system.

Support for the latest hardware is always poor.

That's true. FreeBSD does not strive to be on the bleeding edge of anything.

It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.

That's both true and untrue. FreeBSD can interoperate with Linux. FreeBSD can also run much of the same software as Linux. But unfortunately Linux developers decided to make some decisions in their design that could best be described as dubious, so certain incompatibilities arose over time. These incompatibilities come from the Linux side of things, not the FreeBSD side. Complain to your local Linux developer.

It is dying.

That's untrue. There were more shipments of FreeBSD last year than any other UNIX operating system. That's because Mac OS X is, for all intents and purposes, FreeBSD.

Re:What I know about FreeBSD (2, Informative)

marcovje (205102) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337318)

>> You can not play games on it.

>That's true. FreeBSD is not for people who want to >play games. These people need to use a PlayStation, >GameCube, or Xbox.

Most loki games work fine, and installation using original linux CD is supported by ports tree. /me has Heroes of Might and Magic on an old laptop, to amuse myself when traveling by train.

yhbt yhl hand (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337385)

foad

did they fix the bug (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7336994)

did they fix the bug where freebsd sucks and linux 0wns it?

No, they're forking off a new version for that (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337013)

Since BSD developers are egomaniacs and immature flamers they have decided to just fork off a new version for that. Some developers felt that BSD has a legacy of sucking ass and they didn't want to remove support for it while other developers thought that BSD has supporting sucking ass way to long and should just lick balls instead. Since these egomaniacs can never agree on anything in typical BSD style they just mad a new incompatable fork.

I thought 5.x was the latest (2, Interesting)

jaaron (551839) | more than 10 years ago | (#7336996)

I thought FreeBSD was already on 5.x or something like that. Is that the development version? Does FreeBSD use a linux-like version numbering where odd numbers are development releases?

Re:I thought 5.x was the latest (5, Informative)

quantum bit (225091) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337054)

I thought FreeBSD was already on 5.x or something like that. Is that the development version? Does FreeBSD use a linux-like version numbering where odd numbers are development releases?

No, 4.9 is the latest release from the -stable branch. The 5.0 and 5.1 releases were made from the -current development branch (actually the main trunk in CVS). Eventually, probably around 5.2 or 5.3, 5.x will be branched off as 5-STABLE and development will begin on 6.x.

Re:I thought 5.x was the latest (2, Informative)

thehive (698558) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337056)

4.x series are production releases. 5.x is the new technology releases. There are two development branches to FreeBSD: FreeBSD-CURRENT and FreeBSD-STABLE. This seem confusing but keep this rule in mind if u want to use FreeBSD STABLE branch if you are going use it as a production server else use the current branch more information here [freebsd.org] .

Re:I thought 5.x was the latest (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337069)

No it does not use Linux-like versioning. You can read about this on FreeBSD.org.

4.x is -STABLE. The 5.x releases are "Early Adopter" releases, until the 5.x codebase proves stable enough to be tagged -STABLE, probably around 5.3 (I think was the last number I heard).

Re:I thought 5.x was the latest (2, Informative)

puzzled (12525) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337140)



4.X, with 4.9 being the latest is the -STABLE train - use this if you want to not mess with stuff.

5.X is the new stuff. Getting quite stable, but still closer to the bleeding edge than 4.9.

Earlier this week someone suggested I move a production box from 4.9-RC to 5.1 for a certain feature's support. 5.1 is *almost* cooked enough for me to put production stuff on it.

Just In Time For Halloween (4, Funny)

deadlinegrunt (520160) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337012)

To rise up yet once again from the dead!

Here's the release announcement for the click lazy (-1, Redundant)

scumbucket (680352) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337017)

I am happy to announce the availability of FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE, the latest release of the FreeBSD -STABLE development branch. Since FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE in April 2003, we have made conservative updates to a number of software programs in the base system, dealt with known security issues, and merged support for large memory i386 machines with Page Address Extensions (PAE) from 5.1.

For a complete list of new features and known problems, please see the release notes and errata list, available here:

http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/4.9R/relnotes.ht ml

http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/4.9R/errata.html

This release does not include all of the new technologies that were introduced with FreeBSD 5.1 in June. Most developer resources are focused on improving the FreeBSD 5.X branch, and this may very well be the last major release of FreeBSD 4.X. The security officer team will continue to actively support the 4.X branch according to the normal policy. Additional 4.9.X releases may be made available when necessitated by security vulnerabilities or high-impact bugfixes.

We encourage all our users to evaluate FreeBSD 5.1 and the upcoming 5.2. Because PAE support has only been a feature in 4.X for a few months, it has not received wide-spread testing, and our most conservative users may wish to stay with FreeBSD 4.8 until they choose to migrate to 5.X.

For more information about the distinctions between FreeBSD 4.X and 5.X, or for general information about the FreeBSD release engineering activities, please see :

http://www.FreeBSD.org/releng/
Availability

FreeBSD 4.9-RELEASE supports the i386 and alpha architectures and can be installed directly over the net using the boot floppies or copied to a local NFS/FTP server.

Please continue to support the FreeBSD Project by purchasing media from one of our supporting vendors. The following companies have contributed substantially to the development of FreeBSD:
FreeBSD Mall, Inc. http://www.freebsdmall.com/
Daemon News http://www.bsdmall.com/freebsd1.html

Each CD or DVD set contains the FreeBSD installation and application package bits for the i386 ("PC") architecture, as well as Cmdr Taco's pron collection. For a set of distfiles used to build ports in the ports collection, please see the FreeBSD Toolkit, a 6 CD set containing extra bits which no longer fit on the 4 CD set, or the DVD distribution.

If you can't afford FreeBSD on media, or just want to use it for evangelism purposes, then by all means download the ISO images. We can't promise that all the mirror sites will carry the larger ISO images, but they will at least be available from:

* ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/
* ftp://ftp3.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/
* ftp://ftp.tw.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/
* ftp://ftp6.tw.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/
* ftp://ftp{2,4,7}.de.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/
* ftp://ftp.au.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/

FreeBSD is also available via anonymous FTP from mirror sites in the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Lithuania, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, goatse.cx, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom.

Before trying the central FTP site, please check your regional mirror(s) first by going to:

ftp://ftp..FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD

Any additional mirror sites will be labeled ftp2, ftp3 and so on.

More information about FreeBSD mirror sites can be found at:

http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books /h andbook/mirrors-ftp.html

For instructions on installing FreeBSD, please see Chapter 2 of The FreeBSD Handbook. It provides a complete installation walk-through for users new to FreeBSD, and can be found online at:

http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books /h andbook/install.html
Acknowledgments

Many companies donated equipment, network access, or man-hours to finance the release engineering activities for FreeBSD 4.9 including The FreeBSD Mall, Compaq, Yahoo!, Sentex Communications, and NTT/Verio.

In addition to myself, the release engineering team for 4.9-RELEASE includes:
Scott Long Release Engineering
Bruce Mah Release Engineering, Documentation
Wilko Bulte Release Engineering, alpha builds
Robert Watson Release Engineering, Security
John Baldwin Release Engineering
Mike Silbersack PAE Testing
Luoqi Chen PAE Merge
Joe Marcus Clarke Packabe Building, GNOME
Kris Kennaway Package Building
Will Andrews Package Building, KDE

Please join me in thanking them for all the hard work which went into making this release. Many thanks are also due to the FreeBSD committers (committers@FreeBSD.org), without whom there would be nothing to release, and thousands of FreeBSD users world-wide who have contributed bug fixes, features, and suggestions.

Enjoy!

Murray Stokely
(For the FreeBSD Release Engineering Team)
MD5 (4.9-i386-disc1.iso) = 9195be15a4c8c54a6a6a23272ddacaae
MD5 (4.9-i386-disc2.iso) = 51d28c35308cc916b9a9bfcacb3146b8
MD5 (4.9-RELEASE-alpha-miniinst.iso) = 51e189a32a5f1bb058adc7627b673ae6
MD5 (4.9-RELEASE-alpha-disc2.iso) = ec316dcfb33ca76ba2a240e50d7c9fce

Re:Here's the release announcement for the click l (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337171)

Karma whore.

FreeBSD: Feeding Tube Re-inserted (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337021)

Oct. 23 -- BSD resumed receiving life-sustaining care yesterday in a Florida hospital room, but many experts said there is virtually no hope that it will ever recover, despite it fan boy's desperate hopes.

"IF IT'S over a year, BSD's not ever going to get up," said Fred Plum, a professor emeritus at Weill Cornell College in New York. "You'd just don't see it. It just doesn't happen."
BSD, 39, has been in a persistent vegetative state since its heart stopped for unknown reasons in 1990. A feeding tube in BSD's stomach was removed this past Wednesday after its husband, Theo De Ratt, who said his wife had told him she (BSD) would not want to be kept alive under such circumstances, won a long series of court battles to have life-sustaining nourishment withdrawn so she (BSD) could die.

Re:FreeBSD: Feeding Tube Re-inserted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337134)

That was actually really amusing. :D I'm legitimately laughing right now... Thanks for this one, AC, you made my morning. :)

This is what... (-1, Redundant)

dark-br (473115) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337035)



they should include on the new release: click me [toadstool.se]

Re:This is what... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337165)

>This is what... (Score:0, Redundant)
>by dark-br (473115) on Wednesday October 29, @09:00AM (#7337035)
>(http://www.canaljuizdefora.com.br/)
>they should include on the new release: click me

Was this modded "redundant" because it's the same girl on all the photos?

BSD is dying (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337036)

The worst fears of many are, sadly, now confirmed to be real. The
consensus opinion among industry analysts, software experts and end
users is that BSD has no future. Seems that everyone is talking about
*BSD's failure and imminent demise. Linux has received a boost in recent
weeks as disgruntled *BSD users investigate more viable options. Most
core developers have long since moved on to better things. At least one
project is reportedly investigating if there's anything in the *BSD code
base worth salvaging.

Not everybody is mourning, however. A few core BSD developers are
welcoming the opportunity to work on a project with some kind of future.
Many observers are confirming, privately, that BSD's funeral will be one
that's long overdue.

As we pore over the sad story of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal
mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what
mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.

We should, of course, give BSD credit for its early successes. In the
1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to
the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as
the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD
product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract. Problems with BSD's
codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design
approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The
Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are
inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development.
BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that
centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype -
BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any
achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license,
which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without
reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not
prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL. The early
triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that
would hamper BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley
Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly
violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad
intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley
Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD
distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the
founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution,
OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website.
Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with
Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD
distribution.

There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying. Let's keep to the
facts and look at the numbers. OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are
13000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see.
The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio
of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 13000/5 = 2600 NetBSD users. BSD/OS
posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore
there are about 1300 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at
about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (13000 + 2600 +
1300) / 0.2 = 84500 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of
FreeBSD Usenet posts. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time
FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to
underscore the point more clearly. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing
short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. As many of us
are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows
like a river of blood. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival
prospects are very dim.

Fact: *BSD is dying

*BSD is dying troll generator version Wed Oct 22 13:50:05 CEST 2003

Security Fixes (0, Troll)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337043)

"As Jani Laaksonen writes, the new release includes 'numerous security advisory fixes...'"

So does this mean that the FreeBST team isn't patching security issues as they are reported, and are instead fixing them over the period of (presumably) scheduled release iterations?

If this is the case, why isn't the /. community all over them like they are Microsoft?

Oops... (self-spelling-nazi) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337051)

Er, that would be "FreeBSD" of course :)

Re:Security Fixes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337080)

A quick look at FreeBSD.org would answer your question. Absolutely, FreeBSD releases patches and advisories for any security issues in a release. To do otherwise would be stupid.

Re:Security Fixes (2, Informative)

bozzaj (682845) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337081)

FreeBSD releases have -p updates that are typically for Security Fixes. If you look here [freebsd.org] you'll see all the same Security Advisories that were fixed in a -p update to 4.8. They put the same information in each new release notes just to cover the fact that they were fixed since the original previous release.

Re:Security Fixes (2, Informative)

starkistTuna (662206) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337100)

Security fixes for FreeBSD are released as part of the RELENG branch for a particular release version. 4.9 (presumably) includes all the security fixes which were released since the 4.8 release, which were announced on the 4.8 errata page. The 4.9 errata page is here [freebsd.org] . The security fixes are usually released concurrent with any vulnerability announcement, but it's still up to users to read the handbook and patch their own systems.

I wonder... (3, Insightful)

mitch0 (237776) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337050)

I wonder why those idiots with no more to say than "bsd is dying", "pull the plug", "bsd sux, linux rulez" are not simply filtering out BSD related posts and be done with it... they get moderated down to oblivion anyway...

I'm personally very happy with FreeBSD, thank you.
Hope SMP support (and pthreads support) will get better soon now. Can't wait for 5.x becoming -STABLE. :)

Re:I wonder... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337307)

its because idiots like you get frustrated that we post these facts about *BSD

Re:I wonder... (-1, Offtopic)

Monty67 (634947) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337369)

Why is this listed as a troll?

With all due respect to the moderators, please reconsider. Hopefully this will be caught by the META people.

SO this means.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337064)

BSD is where linux was 4 years ago?

Come on people... I understand stability. but this is rediculious.

Re:SO this means.... (1)

metallic (469828) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337281)

If you are talking about kernel features in FreeBSD to allow better support for USB peripherals and the like, then comparing Linux against FreeBSD is like comparing apples to oranges. If you want to talk about a server platform, FreeBSD has better kernel throughput than Linux 2.4 while from a desktop standpoint Linux offers better support. Pick the right tool for the job.

At least they didn't jump the gun this time (4, Funny)

quantum bit (225091) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337066)

Wow, Slashdot posting the story of a BSD release AFTER the official release announcement and the web page being updated? Must be a first.

Re:At least they didn't jump the gun this time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337239)

Actually, slashdot is usually as late as a pregnant welfare mom.

Wow, those guys sure are behind the times! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337105)

These FreeBSD guys need to play some catch up here!

I mean, Apple is already on version 10 of their operating system, which is also FreeBSD - and the FreeBSD people themselves are only on version 4.9?!

C'mon - wake up and smell the coffee, guys. You've got 5.1 versions to go just to catch up to Apple!

good for BSD (4, Insightful)

tetrahedrassface (675645) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337117)

This is good for BSD and good for all of us. For those you saying that BSD lost its vigor in 1990 (lawsuit) then i wonder how the current Linux fiasco is going to impact the penguin. We are all in this together really, a strong BSD means more security for all of us. Espescially with the SCO monster running around. Who know in 5 years maybe BSD will be growing at 17%/year and linux will be on life support. Remember fame is fickle.

fork (1)

thoolihan (611712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337121)

Anybody ever hear what happened to the fork. DragonFly or something?...
-t

Re:fork (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337324)

You mean http://www.dragonflybsd.org/ ?

the usual (-1, Flamebait)

porkface (562081) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337129)

BSD is so dead, I got wood at this announcement.

FrreBSD collector's box (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337167)

If you buy the complete CD Set from BSDMall, you get a collector's box. That's right, a mini-coffin to hold your *BSD CDs!

Scary troll ratio (4, Interesting)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337181)

The average all posts:non-0 rated post ratio on slashdot is around 1.3. On bsd.slashdot.org it's more like 3:1 to 5:1 (there's currently a story with 40:1). What is wrong with these people? Choice is good, mmm-kay.

Re:Scary troll ratio (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337293)

Slashdot is dieing.

phew (1)

tjensor (571163) | more than 10 years ago | (#7337242)

"numerous security advisory fixes"

At first I read that as "humerous". But of course this isnt Windows we are atalking about. eyethangyoo.

MP support?!?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337262)

When will FreeBSD support multiple processors?

go get em SCO (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337337)

Does BSD have unix flavour.....Go get em SCO. GO get em SCO . Go SCO go SCO go SCO ......yessssssssssss...

Network Interface Cards cards? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7337413)

NIC cards... redundant nonsense.

Hot water heater anyone?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>