×

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 5.2.1 RC Ready For Getting

Hemos posted more than 10 years ago | from the get-more-of-it dept.

Operating Systems 133

MobyTurbo writes "FreeBSD 5.2.1 RC is now available, and now can be downloaded from the FreeBSD site and mirrors, or if you are currently running FreeBSD 5.2 (or for that matter some earlier versions) you can simply cvsup to it. The upcoming 5.2.1 release should fix a number of outstanding bugs in the 5.2 release, and this is a chance to make sure those bugs get fixed!"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

133 comments

MSFT is bad for you! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157371)

Evil, I tell ya!

i smell death (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157374)

This confirms BSD is dead!

muslims (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157400)

just seen on the telly about 2 million musims on a mountain in mecca yesterday. shame someone didn't land a couple of 747s on top of the fuckers while they were such a good target. see how those raghead cunts like that!!!!!l at least 240 of the savages got crushed to death in a stamped which goes to prove how civilised they are. that is 240 less suicide bombers for the rest of the world to worry about.

Re:muslims (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157612)

hahaha you pwn that is so funny! we should have spread anthrax too for the ones not under the planes

Comparison chart (-1, Offtopic)

Space cowboy (13680) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157402)

Is there a comparison of this new version and Fedora/Redhat/Debian anywhere ? Given it's coming up to 'desert Redhat' time, this could be timely :-)

ATB,
Simon

Re:Comparison chart (0, Offtopic)

1010011010 (53039) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157456)

Try Fedora. Really. Core 1 is really "RedHat 10," and is faster and lighter on memory usage than RedHat 9, to boot. It supposedly runs software packaged for RedHat 9, as well. I was uncertain -- I even emailed (er, flamed) a friend working at RedHat about the whole Fedora/Enterprise thing. I needn't have. Fedora's fine.

It might have been easier to explain to the public if RedHat had chosen to keep calling it "RedHat Linux," rather than Fedora. They could have kept selling RHN access at $60/pop, too -- just shut off the demo accounts and announce a switch to " paid support only."

Anyhoo... give Fedora a shot.

Re:Comparison chart (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158165)

no

Re:Comparison chart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157998)

Try SuSE. Seriously, I've been using Redhat since the 5.x days, and SuSE 9 is the one that seriously made me switch my desktop from windows.

Its dead, Jim (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157408)

_d8b____________________d8b_______d8,
_?88____________________88P______`8P
__88b__________________d88
__888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b,
__88P_`?8b_?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b,
_d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b
d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P'

______d8b________________________d8b
______88P________________________88P
_____d88________________________d88
_d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888
d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__d8P'_?88
88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b
`?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b

Portage (4, Interesting)

Gunfighter (1944) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157413)

Given Gentoo's similarities to FreeBSD (i.e. provide the 'recipies' and compile from source), I've always wondered why the Gentoo project didn't use a BSD CVSup system (for the unwashed, the tree is updated using rsync). What are the technical advantages/disadvantages/differences between Portage and BSD's Ports?

Re:Portage (-1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157524)

I've always wondered why the Gentoo project didn't use a BSD CVSup system (for the unwashed, the tree is updated using rsync).

I think the unwashed are familiar with both Gentoo and BSD.

Re:Portage (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157985)

We owe you a great deal for taking time out of your busy, important life so you could respond with a most un-helpful post devoid of any answer.

Then again, you're not a *BSD user (usually they answer questions, and without sarcasm).

Me? I'm just a stoopid BSD n00b so I don't have anything to say either :-)

Re:Portage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158322)

Actually, I am a FreeBSD user. I use Linux as well. Even Gentoo on one of my computers. I was joking, but I thought I would be modded down as flamebait or troll, so I posted anonymously. That was obviously a good idea, even though I was modded "-1, funny" in the end.

Yeah, it was unneccesary, and a waste of time, but I think I made at least one person snigger. And that warms my heart.

Re:Portage (-1, Flamebait)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157617)

I've always wondered why the Gentoo project didn't use a BSD CVSup system

Because they're idiots.

More seriously, what makes you think they have any reason at all? Most things in OSS aren't planned or carefully considered -- they just happen.

CVS must die (-1, Flamebait)

axxackall (579006) | more than 10 years ago | (#8158013)

Because CVS is bad and must die, so everything that is based on CVS must die too.

rsync'ing in Portage is not hardcoded to use CVS - it can sync trees originated/exported from any other versioning system too.

Re:CVS must die (2, Interesting)

yanestra (526590) | more than 10 years ago | (#8158822)

Because CVS is bad and must die, so everything that is based on CVS must die too.

rsync'ing in Portage is not hardcoded to use CVS - it can sync trees originated/exported from any other versioning system too.

Yes, but the mechanism of rsync treats the data like a black box (i.e. doesn't assume anything), while cvsup knows the structure of cvs file and therefore is faster and more economic.

Errm, I have a read a lot of messages saying that CVS must die, more or less recently. I have the impression that most of them people writing so are non-programmers or have never used cvs themselves.

Personally, I see some deficiencies with it, but there is no good reason to abandon cvs. It works, and it works reliably, and that is indeed something you can't say about all existing versioning systems...

Re:Portage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158223)

gentoo is averse to software that's not GPL-ed. That's right, they'd rather use a buggy and obscure piece of software (say, a dhcp client) that is GPL, than anything else that isn't.

cvsup is BSD-licensed. O the horror.

Does it run Werd? No? What good is it? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157420)

Does it run Werd? No? What good is it?
Does it run Expel? No? What good is it?
Does it run Windows Media Prison? No? What good is it?

come on. (0, Redundant)

SinaSa (709393) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157424)

This is getting fairly rediculous. Slashdot is turning into web based version tracking software.

I understand how major releases of software is what is termed "news for nerds", but do we need to submit every single update to every single piece of software that is of slight interest? Can I remind everyone this isn't even a release, but a Release Candidate?

What significance does this have? People wanting bugfixes will absorp them via ports/pkg_add anyway, regardless of these useless posts.

Re:come on. (4, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157455)

I understand how major releases of software is what is termed "news for nerds", but do we need to submit every single update to every single piece of software that is of slight interest? Can I remind everyone this isn't even a release, but a Release Candidate?

It is News for Nerds : who else would care about a Release Candidates of FreeBSD?

Re:come on. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157470)

I am sorry that anyone was offended by the wardrobe malfunction during the halftime performance of the Super Bowl. It was not intentional and is regrettable.

J.T.

Re:come on. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157472)

ahaha retard

Re:come on. (0, Offtopic)

wwwrun (633859) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157475)

Strikes me this is a cheap way of countering accusations of linux bias. "Look!" the editors can say, "at how many bsd headlines we have!"

Re:come on. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158071)

Exactly. Lets be honest, it isn't as though there is any real news to report about BSD is there?

BSD is dying.

Re:come on. (5, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157510)

I have some sympathy with your point of view, however, let me offer another nonetheless.

The software nerd, as opposed to those who view software merely as a means to get their work done, is more inclined to be interested in software "in the rough" than as a finished product. Thus release candidates are of particular interest.

What's more, since most people are somewhat "embeded" in their favorite enviroment (Windows lock in anyone?) they aren't likely to personally keep track of the development of platforms outside their own, even those that they have some genuine interest in.

I haven't used FreeBSD, but the posting of stories such as this keeps my interest up in doing so someday in a way that other news venues don't, because I don't see them.

And I don't really see that posting a few of these in anyway takes away from other Slashdot stories. I don't know that this story was posted instead of some other story as opposed to as well as the other story.

As with all Slashdot stories I read those that interest me and skip those that don't, just as I ignore the social pages of my local newspaper. I don't write letters to the editor complaining that they exist.

KFG

Re:come on. (3, Insightful)

JanneM (7445) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157520)

Well, I sort of agree with you in general; we have better sites for software announcements.

That said, release candidates for really major pieces - like a new Linux kernel or this FreeBSD update - deserve a place on /. as much or more than the actual releases. This is _really_ a case of the widest possible testing being beneficial for everybody, and if /. can help to corral more tester it can only be good.

So yes, agree in general, but not in this particular case.

Re:come on. (2, Insightful)

R.Caley (126968) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157675)

People wanting bugfixes will absorp them via ports/pkg_add anyway,

Er, it's not an update to a port, it's a call for testers for a new release of the entire OS. Seems pretty significant `news for nerds' to me.

Certainly more interesting than `Intel is releasing yet another ugly processor no one needs care about'.

Re:come on. (0)

morelife (213920) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157678)

These notices on slashdot about minor bugfix releases /are/ important, especially since this news is not on the front page of Freebsd.org

SO SHUT YOUR GOB.

Not ever fix is in the ports (3, Insightful)

schnozzy (218978) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157725)

From the announcement e-mail on the -CURRENT mailing list.

[...]
- many improvements and fixes to the ATA driver
- new kdeadmin3 package to address the 'KUser' problem
- fixes to several network drivers, IPSec, NFSv4, and NNS.
- fix for the cd bootloader code to handle USB cdrom drives.
[...]

As you see, most of the above fixes do not apply to ports/packages as they are in the base system.

Yeah... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157433)

Yeah, but have they fixed this bug:
#
# HotSpot Virtual Machine Error, Internal Error
# Please report this error to
# freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org mailing list
#
# Java VM: Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (1.4.2-p6-root_26_jan_2004_14_22 mixed mode)
#
# Error ID: 4F533F4253440E4350500063
#

Heap at VM Abort:
Heap

BSD is ... (0, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157441)

FreeBSD 5.2.1 RC is now available

Necrophiles rejoice.

Re:BSD is ... (-1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157498)

Necrophiles rejoice.

It's not dead, it's dying. Sadists rejoice!

Re:BSD is ... (-1, Troll)

yanestra (526590) | more than 10 years ago | (#8158978)

FreeBSD 5.2.1 RC is now available

Necrophiles rejoice.

In this case, I have to agree. 5.2-RELEASE was born dead. They all knew it, and now they try to resurrect that pre-mature experimental release with some equally pre-mature kludges.

One colleague of mine has the theory, that every second FreeBSD release is usable, the rest you can forget.

Install Howto ($core:5, Informative) (-1, Troll)

anonymous coword (615639) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157462)

1) Go to Distro watch [distrowatch.com] and select the Linuxen of your choice
2) Burn to disc (that if BSD actualy supports cd burners. Since it dosent boot into windows from and burn the iso.
3) Boot your new shiny operating system
4) In the partitioning setup, replace your freebsd partitions with Linux ones
5) Bask in the light of the magic world of linux, complete with cd burner support and with powerful apps such as K3b [k3b.org]!

MOD UP! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157504)

Informative!

Re:Install Howto ($core:-5, Clueless) (3, Informative)

rob_macgregor (222660) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157517)

FreeBSD certainly does support CD writing and has for some time. Maybe you last used it before CD burners were produced :-P

Even your favourite K3b is available.

slashdot.org (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157463)

News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.

No no no. There's no profit in this angle. Version Control. That's it!!! Can we have an update everytime an MS product gets a service pack and Fedora gets a kernel update now? Why stop there. Let's make a note each time CNN updates their front page!

It's a frikkan 0.0.1 release losers.

why so far ahead of linux? (-1, Troll)

Barbarian (9467) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157467)

So why is BSD at version 5.2.1 already, and LINUX is still stuck at 2.6? BSD is 3 major versions ahead! It's even worse when you compare them with Microsoft's products, which are up to version 2003 already! When is the open source community going to get off their collective butts and catch up?

Re:why so far ahead of linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157514)

consider that windows is much older than bsd or linux...

if nt is ver 3.51 till 4.01,
and 2000 is 5.xx
then xp can be 6.xx
and 2003 is likely the 7.xx branch.

of course versions 1-3.11 can hardly be considered an os.

Re:why so far ahead of linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157536)

i think xp is 5.1, and 2003 is 5.2, they are up to speed with FreeBSD.

Re:why so far ahead of linux? (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157548)

Please forgive me if I now unleash the full power of my razor sharp intellect, perspecacity and ability with confrontational rhetoric and respond thus:

Huh?

KFG

Re:why so far ahead of linux? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158261)

Ignoring the fact that the parent post was a joke for a moment, BSD has been around since the 1970s.

The original Windows (not NT, which is a different OS) was released in 1985 (Windows 1.0), and the last version was released in 2000 (Windows Me).

Linux and NT are about the same age: Linux 1.0 was released in 1994; Windows NT 3.1, (which was really NT 1.0, but called 3.1 to match the version number of Windows 3.1) was released in 1993.

Also:

Windows 2000 = NT 5.0 (really 3.0, since NT started with version 3.x)
Windows XP = NT 5.1
Windows 2003 = NT 5.2

Re:why so far ahead of linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8159160)

2000 is 5.00.2195 XP is 5.1 ... something 2003 most likey will be 5.2 or 5.5. The BSD's are still older.

Re:why so far ahead of linux? (3, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157523)

So why is BSD at version 5.2.1 already, and LINUX is still stuck at 2.6?

Pff, FreeBSD is still stuck at version numbers, while some Linux distros have cool movie characters names [debian.org]. I'm still waiting for FreeBSD Potato or FreeBSD Woody. But then again, FreeBSD doesn't exactly gives woodies to anyone does it?

Yes, it does... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157960)

It does to admins who count on their servers to run under _any_ workload.

In other news... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157473)

I saw Janet Jackson's tit last night.

I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (0, Troll)

yer_momma (748288) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157482)

... but the community really turns me off. I've seen numerous comments of how Linux users are just "childish clueless newbies who hate Windows". Yes, I dislike Windows, but how the hell does that make me a clueless newbie? Why do BSD people act so high and mighty? Please clue me in.

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157525)

Yes but.. couldn't a lot of Windows users considering Linux also say the same thing about Linux people?

Yes, I use Windows, but how the hell does that make me a clueless newbie? Why do Linux people act so high and mighty? Please clue me in.

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (1, Insightful)

yer_momma (748288) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157724)

Yes but.. couldn't a lot of Windows users considering Linux also say the same thing about Linux people?

Linux users just like to bash Windows (the OS), not its users (people). BSD fans tend to act like condescending assholes towards Linux users (people). See, there's the difference.

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158652)

Oh come now. Any Slashdot article that is even remotely related to Microsoft or Windows is filled with posts insulting Windows and Windows users. Some BSD fans, esp. in Linux-advocacy forums like Slashdot, behave the same way, but most real users of BSD or Linux (as opposed to the advocacy nutters) are just normal people without any hostility towards other OSes.

I personally prefer the BSD community to the Linux one, but this is more a matter of politics (I'm not a fan of the GNU philosophy) than anything else. Both 'communities' seem quite nice to me, and it's just a pity that someone as rational, inclusive and clear-minded as Linus Torvalds chose to link his kernel to a project (GNU) run by someone like Richard Stallman (who, despite having done a great deal of helpful work with GCC, has been one of the most polarising figures in the history of open source, owing to his spat with James Gosling, which seems to have left him bitter towards anyone who doesn't agree with his political philosophy).

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (1)

rob_macgregor (222660) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157533)

I've seen the same comments from Linux users about *BSD users (except replace Windows with Linux in your comment).

Keep in mind that in any group you'll get the loud mouthed ignorant people who just want to bash others. Or people from other groups who want to persuade people not to join that group...

Go visit the newsgroups some time.

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (2, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157534)

I've seen numerous comments of how Linux users are just "childish clueless newbies who hate Windows"

This comment coming from someone who calls himself "yer_momma". Amusing...

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (2, Interesting)

andih8u (639841) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157626)

And yes, the my OS is better war is the technological equivalent of standing on the playground screaming "my dad can beat up your dad!" Some OS' do things better than others. Don't see why everyone has to get in a bitching contest about them all the time.

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157946)

my dad *can* beat up your dad!!! BITCH!!!!11 --Jesus

Re:I was a Linux user considering FreeBSD... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157746)

Well stereotypes don't just start by themselves.

Remember though that just like any stereotype what you actually see from a group doesn't necessarily paint the whole picture. For linux OR FreeBSD.

Honest question (5, Interesting)

4lex (648184) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157486)

I would like to test kernels from time to time, as I test linux distros. Apart from [debian.org] Debian [debian.org], what is the state of bulding familiar systems (with familiar package management, etc) on different kernels, e.g. FreeBSD?

Is there any possibility to get a Debian-like (or Mandrake-like, why not?) experience with non-linux kernels? I would certainly give them a try... Or are there FreeBSD live-CDs with a hardware auto-recognition comparable with that of knoppix? That would be a nice way to try, too :)

Re:Honest question (-1, Troll)

yer_momma (748288) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157505)

Don't benchmark the BSD versus Linux! If Linux wins, the BSD snobs won't let you hear the end of it. They'll flame and spam you to death saying your test was unfair (curiously these people never seem to do any benchmarks themselves).

Freesbie (4, Informative)

Louis Guerin (728805) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157587)

... is a FreeBSD-based liveCD. You can find it at www.freesbie.org. I downloaded it awhile ago but haven't yet checked it out, must get onto that. So many distros, so little time. L

[PATCH] More time (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158112)

So many distros, so little time.

Try the attached patch.

---time.h.orig
+++time.h

-typedef time_t unsigned int;
+typedef time_t unsigned long long int;

Re:Honest question (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 10 years ago | (#8158085)

You can run Debian userland on the NetBSD kernel:

http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/

While I applaud the goal of ensuring that the Debian userland is a bit more portable, in the long run it is doubtful that it can be as well integrated as a normal NetBSD system. As someone who uses NetBSD as his preferred platform, I can attest to the growing "Linuxisms" in open source software.

Chris

Re:Honest question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158478)

I'm not aware of any non-Debian projects to put a Linux-ish userland on top of a BSD kernel. Moreover, one of the best aspects of the BSD systems is that they're complete systems (like UNIX), as opposed to kernels (like Linux) that have to be bundled with other software into 'distributions' (although, ironically, BSD was originally a sort of 'distribution' of UNIX). This means you can expect all of the pieces of the system to be held to a similar level of quality (in terms of code, as well as documentation, etc.), and to be broadly consistent.

I'm a fan of BSD (esp. NetBSD), but the BSD kernels probably aren't going to offer any significant advantages over Linux, if any at all. Moreover, if you're using a multi-processor system, Linux is likely to win hands down. The various BSD approaches to SMP might prove to be better than the Linux approach in the long run, but they might also end up not being as good, and certainly it will be some time before there's any likelihood of catching up.

I've personally found the interactive performance of FreeBSD (but not NetBSD or OpenBSD) somewhat better than Linux (on single-processor desktops/notebooks), but with all of the latest improvements in Linux 2.6, I'd be surprised if it can't offer a similar interactive experience to FreeBSD (maybe not quite as good, or maybe a bit better, but probably similar).

As for CDs, my experience has been that, apart from ACPI systems (which I've had bad luck with on BSD and Linux), the BSDs detect all my hardware fine (assuming drivers exist), but the generic kernels tend to be rather bloated (since they're designed to more or less run on any hardware), so it's a good idea to build a custom, trimmed-down kernel if you really want to use BSD.

Why respond to a troll? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158597)

Well, because the fact this guy/gal knows enough of Debian to know about GNU/Hurd, yet not know about GNU/BSD...s/he may just not have enough brain cells to visit GNU/FreeBSD [debian.org] or GNU/NetBSD [debian.org] or perhaps it is a poor grasp of English.

Such a project looses BSD features of how the development of the kernel/userland is together and introduces the glibc problems VS say the FreeBSD feature old being able to run older code compiled on FreeBSD. An example of this 'older code' problem would be WordPerfect 8 for Linux. To run that on, say, RedHat 9, you'd need to track down the old glibc's. Yet seti for FreeBSD 2.X will run on 4.X series just by adding COMPAT_2X to the compile of the FreeBSD environment.

A Brief synopsis (5, Informative)

the real darkskye (723822) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157532)

of what has been reported broken in 5.2 and MFC'd to 5.2.1 can be found here [bsdforums.org]

I just hope I can use my USB mouse with out needing a PS/2 mouse plugged in and my sound works again!

Fixed bugs ? (-1, Troll)

Krapangor (533950) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157535)

What have they done about the smell ?

Re:Fixed bugs ? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157908)

What have they done about the smell ?

They removed even more GNU programs. Shit, you should smell Linux... it's like Eric S. Raymond and Richard M. Smellman after a month of not bathing.

I for one am very excited about 5.* (5, Interesting)

0xfc (737668) | more than 10 years ago | (#8157552)

I am sure many users of FreeBSD who own computers with multiple processors are eagerly waiting to switch around 5.3. I know I am drooling over better performance but patience is the key. After reading that pdf on the new ULE scheduler, I became even more excited by all the hard work put in by the FreeBSD team. I am still a user of 3.x and mostly 4.x with one 5.x box. I cannot be more pleased with this operating system's stability since 3.4. Two hundred day uptimes are taken for granted with FreeBSD users. Also in 5.x perl was removed! thank you for getting that mess out of the base install. One always had to upgrade it anyway for recent software like spamassassin. Keep putting the FreeBSD stories on slashdot editors, because isp admins run it.

slashdot... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157571)

distrowatch, sometimes I cannot tell the difference.

The only difference being that with distrowatch the links will still work.

Come on CMDR get your ship sorted.

Dead OS walking. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157597)

I smell dead.

Re:Dead OS walking. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158045)

I smell dead.

Have a shower, troll!

Re:Dead OS walking. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158631)

I smell dead.

Bathe more often with Linux [uspto.gov] then. I'd recommend the shower gel.

Sux0rs (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8157962)


In a startling turn of events today, a previously little-known fact came into the public eye: "*BSD Sux0rs". This came as a complete surprise to the BUWLA, or BSD Users With Large Assholes, as they previously thought that *BSD 0wned.
"You see, even though I have never contributed code to any BSD project, I thought it was my duty to be a big asshole to others which don't use the OS I do, because it just 0wnz.", said one FreeBSD user. "Now that I know it sux0rs, though, I have to go find something else to be an asshole about."

One notorious OpenBSD fanatic known as WideOpen, told reporters, "I have to kill myself. This isn't how it was supposed to happen. My BSD has always been the best, and shouting that opinion in other people's faces at every chance I got has been my only hobby. It was all I ever did. It was what got me out of bed in the morning. Now I have to die. I will jam my bedpost up my ass until I hit my brain. It is the only way to go: BSD style."

In the volatile world of operating systems anything can happen. "At least we don't sux0r as much as Windows users", BigAzz, a relatively well-known NetBSD user said. "Screaming things in people's faces is my calling. Now I need to scream that BSD sux0rs. What a sad world. At least I won't kill myself like those uber-asshole OpenBSD guys. They are just way over the top. Or were, at least."

Nobody knows for sure what the future holds for the state of operating systems, but with Netcraft confirming the sux0r status, *BSD users all over the world will have to stick something else up their asses from now on or risk looking even more gay than they used to.

It's not fine yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158350)

I will not install FreeBSD-5.2.1-RC until that it is sufficient stable and supports FFS2-fine-stable-and-complete and ext2/ext3 for interoperatibility with my linux.

open4free

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158438)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

26978

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158441)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

1081

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158443)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

22126

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158444)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

19232

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158447)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

25831

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158451)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

13896

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158453)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

10188

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158464)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

8724

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158469)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

656

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158477)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

11592

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158482)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

22604

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158488)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

29756

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158489)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

20776

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158494)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

27960

My personal experience in the FreeBSD world (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8158499)

I've been an avid follower of the developments in FreeBSD for around 5 years now, so my overview of the entire history of "glue that binds" FreeBSD together isn't complete. That said, I've come to be a bit disappointed at how events in the last 18 months or so seem to be pushing the project in a direction that has made things more difficult, instead of more successful, that has shown distain for experience and quality and made FreeBSD a platform for large ego's to push their personal projects down everyone's throat.

The statistics sample from 2001 over a year was a cheap attempt to minimize Matt's contribution to the project. The reason why he has been mostly silent is probably one of the most prominent signs of his superior maturity. The fact that the official defense (mostly fronted by Greg, atm) he wasn't such a substantial committer is crap, for the most part. If one wanted to go by the stats, Jeff Robertson (sorry if I munged the spelling) would be one of the key committers, and his UMA system isn't even entirely ripe yet, it's just been committed within the sample timeframe. That suddenly phk is at the top of the list, is simple a result of his newest attempt to add another large chunk of bit rot to the project that he can later claim not to have time to maintain "unless someone is willing to pay for my time" (like the atm bits, the half-finished devd monster, et.al.) One can hardly get him to look at his malloc bits, that put his name in lights at some point in the long past.

Matt didn't contribute because he was convinced that that the smp development direction that was chosen (my impression at least from the archives and my fading memory) was overly complex, too complex for the number and talent level of the contributers involved, and that it would delay a release from the -current branch significantly. So he was right. I'll almost bet that that was a constant sore for John, who still hasn't gotten his long-promised, but little delivered re-entrant work done, but he always had time enough to object to any other commits that might help along the way. Strangely Julian and Matt could work together. One might attribute certain commits to both Matt and Julian (if that would matter anyway, since -core is interested in proving the opposite statistically).

If the issue here had anything to do with IPFW, then you all better get out your C-coder hats and take a little more time to fix that rotting pile of muck that has been the standard broken packet filter interface for FreeBSD long past its possible usefulness. A packet filter with no central maintainer which is subject to once yearly random feature bloat through some wild university project from Luigi. The brokenness that Luigi introduced (and the repository bloat through backing out and recommitting, ad absurdum) was probably no less a threat to security than anything Matt did. If the security officer was to be blatantly honest with himself, ipfw would be marked broken for either a full audit or full removal (just port obsd's pf or something that someone actually actively _cares_ about).

You've alienated Jordan, Mike, Bill Paul (for all I can see), Greenman, you constantly rag on Terry, even though he's seen and done more with FreeBSD than most of you, O'Brien is on the verge of quitting (since he, like I, am not convinced that GEOM is anything more than an ego trip that will never be completely maintained or usefully documented). There are certainly others, too, that have attempted to make technically correct contributions, but didn't fit into the sort of paranoid "glee club" that core would like to have around them. You guys lack the talent to steer the positive from Matt into the project and let the crap fall by the wayside. I'm not saying Matt's rants are the most intelligent thing he's done, but he's sat by the wayside and watch the superstars beat up the code to a point where it's less stable, slower, and more bloated than it ever was. I, for one, can understand his frustration (as I can with Mike's, Jordan's, and a few others), although I find his method of expressing it extreme, I often wished he'd have just visited the offenders personally with a clue bat.

All in all, history will judge if -core has made the right decision. I personally believe it was a decision made in weakness. The loss the project as a whole will suffer is greater than the bruised ego's the -core has had to deal with in its communications with Matt. Matt was an extremist, but he put up or shut up. I wish I could say that for most of -core. This is a personality confict in a technical project. I'd say that most of you take this just as personally as Matt did, but instead of insulting him in a moment of anger, you shoot off your own respective feet, lose a good deal of experience and embarass the man publicly. You talk the talk of respect, but you aren't walking the walk. I'd say most of you need thicker skin. In the end, FreeBSD folk will walk smiling though the streets, but the project will become a cult of likeable people, instead of one that achieved technical excellence. That will, imho, be what history says of the current -core. Hint: lose the touchy-feely, hack the code.

PS: if I've offended anyone (yeah, I singled a few out), prove me wrong, but spare me your insultedness. It's become a pathetic hobby in -core.

30166

5.x production release date? (1)

bmedwar (693432) | more than 10 years ago | (#8158851)

what will be the first 5.x production release? When will it be out?

Re:5.x production release date? (3, Informative)

DES (13846) | more than 10 years ago | (#8158986)

The 5.x branch is expected to go -STABLE with FreeBSD 5.3, which should be out some time this spring. There is a list of outstanding issues at http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/todo.html [freebsd.org].

its a dead man walking (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8159054)

_d8b____________________d8b_______d8,
_?88____________________88P______`8P
__88b__________________d88
__888888b__.d888b,_d888888________88b_.d888b,
__88P_`?8b_?8b,___d8P'_?88________88P_?8b,
_d88,__d88___`?8b_88b__,88b______d88____`?8b
d88'`?88P'`?888P'_`?88P'`88b____d88'_`?888P'

______d8b________________________d8b
______88P________________________88P
_____d88________________________d88
_d888888___d8888b_d888b8b___d888888
d8P'_?88__d8b_,dPd8P'_?88__d8P'_?88
88b__,88b_88b____88b__,88b_88b__,88b
`?88P'`88b`?888P'`?88P'`88b`?88P'`88b

The Sux0rs Status (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8159038)


In a startling turn of events today, a previously little-known fact came into the public eye: "*BSD Sux0rs". This came as a complete surprise to the BUWLA, or BSD Users With Large Assholes, as they previously thought that *BSD 0wned.
"You see, even though I have never contributed code to any BSD project, I thought it was my duty to be a big asshole to others which don't use the OS I do, because it just 0wnz.", said one FreeBSD user. "Now that I know it sux0rs, though, I have to go find something else to be an asshole about."

One notorious OpenBSD fanatic known as WideOpen, told reporters, "I have to kill myself. This isn't how it was supposed to happen. My BSD has always been the best, and shouting that opinion in other people's faces at every chance I got has been my only hobby. It was all I ever did. It was what got me out of bed in the morning. Now I have to die. I will jam my bedpost up my ass until I hit my brain. It is the only way to go: BSD style."

In the volatile world of operating systems anything can happen. "At least we don't sux0r as much as Windows users", BigAzz, a relatively well-known NetBSD user said. "Screaming things in people's faces is my calling. Now I need to scream that BSD sux0rs. What a sad world. At least I won't kill myself like those uber-asshole OpenBSD guys. They are just way over the top. Or were, at least."

Nobody knows for sure what the future holds for the state of operating systems, but with Netcraft confirming the sux0r status, *BSD users all over the world will have to stick something else up their asses from now on or risk looking even more gay than they used to.
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...