Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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 Released

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the now-in-technicolor dept.

BSD 110

Kalev writes "The FreeBSD Release Engineering Team has announced FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE. This is intended to address several bugs and vulnerabilities discovered in the FreeBSD 5.2 release. See the Release Notes. The release is now available for downloading. If you are currently running FreeBSD 5.x, you can easily cvsup to it or use binary upgrade feature of sysinstall."

cancel ×

110 comments

FP (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397173)

First Post!!! Ha ha ha Ken Rupo, you suck!

Point point releases? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397220)

Is it just me or are point point releases of FBSD pretty rare? Almost seems like 5.2 was a bit of a rush job.

Re:Point point releases? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397489)

No, it wasn't a rush, but people didn't test it enough.
That is usually the problem, 5.1 ran so well that people didn't want to test the RC's, thus some bugs didn't get ironed out for _their_ hardware.
The thing is, if these people had downloaded the livecd of RC2 and sendpr'ed this release wouldn't be needed.

You should blame people for their lack of will to test but strong will to always complain.

Re:Point point releases? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409205)

And some of us have crappy hardware, like Toshiba, Packard Bell or Compaq computers that simply have hard-or-impossible-to-work-around bugs.

Re:Point point releases? (5, Informative)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8397529)

Is it just me or are point point releases of FBSD pretty rare?

You're right. The only other one was 4.6.2-RELEASE. (I'm not counting the 2.2.x releases -- 2.2 was a major version number :) ).

Almost seems like 5.2 was a bit of a rush job.

5.2 was right on the boundary between "experimental" and "stable". As such, lots of people started using it once it was released, but few people actually participated in testing it. I believe that 5.2 had one of the longest ever periods between code freeze and release.

Re:Point point releases? (2, Insightful)

rsidd (6328) | more than 10 years ago | (#8397682)

You're right. The only other one was 4.6.2-RELEASE.

Can't have been the "only" other one, since it implies a 4.6.1-RELEASE before that :) And there was a 3.5.1-RELEASE too.

Re:Point point releases? (4, Informative)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8398060)

4.6.1 never existed. It was going to exist, but some security issues appeared, so it was aborted. But you're right, I forgot about 3.5.1-RELEASE, mostly because it was never tagged in the CVS repository.

Re:Point point releases? (5, Informative)

shlong (121504) | more than 10 years ago | (#8398215)

4.6.1 never existed. It was going to exist, but some security issues appeared, so it was aborted. But you're right, I forgot about 3.5.1-RELEASE, mostly because it was never tagged in the CVS repository.

FreeBSD 4.1.1 existed also, and was tagged. However, it was a branch off of RELENG_4 instead of RELENG_4_1 and turned into a disaster. But yes, ever since 3.0, we've had few point releases.

Re:Point point releases? (1)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8398444)

FreeBSD 4.1.1 existed also, and was tagged.

Umm. I knew that. I even used FreeBSD 4.1.1. Sigh...

Re:Point point releases? (4, Interesting)

dohcvtec (461026) | more than 10 years ago | (#8401591)

Funny, 4.1.1 was the first version of FreeBSD I used, and I was hooked right from then. Heh, even a "bad" release of FreeBSD is still pretty good compared, oh, say, a bad RedHat release (anyone remember the whole GCC 2.96 fiasco?)

Re:Point point releases? (3, Funny)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | more than 10 years ago | (#8404849)

Remember? I'm still dealing with it... Oi!

Re:Point point releases? (2, Funny)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8406763)

Heh, even a "bad" release of FreeBSD is still pretty good compared, oh, say, a bad RedHat release

A "bad" release of FreeBSD is pretty good even compared to a "good" RedHat release.

(In my defense re: forgetting about 4.1.1, I was thinking about point-releases-due-to-problems, not point-releases-due-to-added-features.)

Re:Point point releases? (0)

CaptainPinko (753849) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409515)

what was the gcc fiasco?

Re:Point point releases? (1)

NuShrike (561140) | more than 10 years ago | (#8411337)

or the RH VM fiasco.

Re:Point point releases? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8419800)

Yeah that was a good one, they admit mistakes, learn from them, and try not to repeat them.

Let's not bring up the ongoing (5 friggin years) FreeBSD 5 fiasco.

Your .sig (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8405898)

Scott, you're a fucking idiot.

Troll Glass

Re:Point point releases? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8399141)

actually if you had looked at http:www.freebsd.org/releases/index.html [freebsd.org]

You would have noticed that 4.1.1 was the first point point release in almost two years after the decision that they were unneccesary extra work.
For 4.1.1 it was decided it was worth it because of the expiring of the RSA patents, it allowed the security pieces to be more easily merged in for US users.

Re:Point point releases? (5, Informative)

shlong (121504) | more than 10 years ago | (#8398024)

Almost seems like 5.2 was a bit of a rush job.

As Colin pointed out in a peer post here, 5.2 had quite a long release cycle. If you look at the 5.2 release schedule [freebsd.org] you'll note that we spent almost 2 months on it. Add in that 5.1 was released in June of 2003, and you have quite a long dev cycle. We did the best that we could to manage risks in the 5.2 cycle, but shortly afterward it became apparent that there were some significant bugs in certain modules that didn't gain much attention until after the release was made.

Re:Point point releases? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#8422125)

Scott H Long ... shlong.. hah! You shlong. Or is that shlong spelled schlong?

FTP mirrors [FreeBSD 5.2.1] (1)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#8400391)

I've just started downloading FreeBSD 5.2.1 from

FTP site:
planetmirror.com
remote directory:
/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/5.2.1/


Happy Unixin' ;)

Second *BSD is dying post (-1, Troll)

keesh (202812) | more than 10 years ago | (#8397226)

I smell a corpse.

(posting anonymously to preserve my precious karma)

Re:Second *BSD is dying post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397321)

LOL. j00 choad licker!

Re:Second *BSD is dying post (-1, Offtopic)

kworthington (678559) | more than 10 years ago | (#8398085)

"(posting anonymously to preserve my precious karma)"

Riiiiight... and you previewed your comment before you posted, huh?
Isn't it great when a troll forgets to click that pesky little "Post Anonymously" checkbox, and you see his real username? Especially when it's such an old and stale troll about BSD dying?

Anyway I have been running 5.2 for a while and it has been solid:
Uptime: 11:30AM up 39 days, 20:47, 6 users, load averages: 2.04, 2.01, 2.00

I have only tried FreeBSD once before, I believe it was in the 4.x series, and it was OK as a server, but I couldn't get X to work. I was still semi-new to the Linux/Unix world at that point, so that may have been part of it, but 5.2 works well as a server and a desktop, which was not very difficult at all to get running. So even though I didn't need to feed that trolls, I figured I'd chime in with my (good) experience with FreeBSD 5.2...

Re:Second *BSD is dying post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401362)

i believe it is traditional to include the "posting anonymously to preserve my precious karma" phrase when intentionally posting logged in... maybe you're not oldschool enough to remember those days

Re:Second *BSD is dying post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8404422)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dbblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

Re:Second *BSD is dying post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8414130)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: kworthington is a humorless retard.

Cool! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397240)

Despite the claim that 5.x isn't yet the
production branch, we've been running it on
all our development machines and servers for
6+ months now. Apparently the FreeBSD
release engineering team has pretty high
standards! We're really looking forward to
FreeBSD 5.3, which has M:N threading and
the new O(1) scheduler as the default.
Thread creation in our application is
blindingly fast *and* runs on many CPUs at
once. After getting off the poor Linux 2.2
and 2.4 threading, there was no turning back.

Re:Cool! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8399686)

For the record, FreeBSD's scheduler was already O(1), it just didn't handle SMP extremely well. The new ULE scheduler handles the SMP case much better, along with other nice improvements. See Jeff's paper at http://www.chesapeake.net/~jroberson/ULE.pdf [chesapeake.net]

The release engineering team certainly does have high standards. Trying to live up to the stability reputation. But keep in mind that 5.x still is considered in testing and major changes can still be afoot that can cause instabilities. So please still keep in mind what -current means, http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/h andbook/current-stable.html [freebsd.org] , and read the early adopters guide.

5.x will get better and better as it approaches 5.3R, so while some of the problems running a -current release are lessened, one should still be aware of all this and the higher standard for fixing one's own problems when running 5.x. RTFM is not an insult when running 5.x, its simply a price of entry to a great OS.

Re:Cool! (3, Interesting)

Warped1 (68788) | more than 10 years ago | (#8401162)

Lucky you.

I downloaded this yesterday, and for the life of me, I could not get it to install on my laptop. It would either kernel panic while extracting packages - or shortly after, I was multitasking ;) - or it would freeze while extracting packages.

I believe I had FreeBSD 5.1 on this laptop before so I don't know what's up. I just had OpenBSD 3.3 on that slice earlier, and it looks like I'll give OpenBSD 3.4 a shot now.

And yes, I'll most likely be a bad person and not spend the time necessary to submit a decent bug report. *shrug* Time time time ...

But anyway, I've used Free before and it's cool - infact I wanted to slap that on my laptop instead of Open.

Re:Cool! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401542)

I had the same problem with installing 5.2-R on my laptop, however 5.1-R went on smoothly. Right now I got phlak linux on it but will soon return to 5.1 and try to cvsup. ;)

Re:Cool! (3, Interesting)

HeelToe (615905) | more than 10 years ago | (#8404410)

Well, I'm using it for a home server. It has been worlds worse than FreeBSD 4.8 ever was for me. I have had numerous hangs that I cannot explain, 3 of which resulted in a corrupted /usr filesystem.

I just did a buildkernel/buildworld for 5.2.1. Here's hoping it is better, cause if it's not, I will have to roll back to 4.8 or heaven forbid, gentoo.

Re:Cool! (3, Informative)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 10 years ago | (#8405414)

I didn't have any problems with 5.0 or 5.1, but 5.2 gives me the occasional kernel panic. Something I have never seen in my life on any OS until the last few months. Like you I'm building 5.2.1 right now, hoping that this will solve the problem.

Re:Cool! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8418242)

It's odd because I've had the exact opposite. I've been running FreeBSD 5.x since October on my personal server/firewall/sometimes workstation and it has been remarkable. I moved from a previously abused Mandrake 8.1 system that more closely resembled NetBSD than Mandrake. I've experienced most FreeBSD releases since 4.0 and I can say that 5.x has been the best experience yet.

No crashes, no headaches (once I figured out patching the kernel to unbreak ppp (FreeBSD needs to sync with the OpenBSD ppp) and get altq), although ULE seemed to slow things down on my single-processor machine so I reverted to old 4BSD scheduler.

Thanks for the great release FreeBSD team and keep up the excellent work!

Brandon

Unfortunately (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397252)

We really have to admit that FreeBSD is in decline. In all likelihood, there may be only one more (or possibly two) releases before FreeBSD goes away forever.

I know it is now almost a mantra set in stone that "FreeBSD is dying". Unfortunately, the abuse of that fact by trolls has obscured the truth, that truth being that FreeBSD really is dying.

My main reason for moving away from FreeBSD has been twofold. First, to avoid the constant political infighting and bickering. And secondly, to investigate more promising and viable entries in the operating systems sweepstakes. FreeBSD is no longer a legitimate player, I'm sorry to say.

Re:Unfortunately (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397514)

He's right. The various user-land utilities are swapped back and forth between the various *BSDs like a free-love hippy girlfriend. However, the limited number of kernel developers is severly limiting kernel devlopment.


FreeBSD and NetBSD are currently in discussions to combine kernel development and possibly even merge back together. Even Theo deRadt is talking about a combined *BSD userland utility team.


BSD won't "die", but I think we will see a merger within the next 2 years.

Re:Unfortunately (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397988)

Wow, if true, that would run counter to years worth of BSD propaganda. Sounds like a excellent engineering decision, because truthfully, all the BSDs are just about equally portable and secure, and FreeBSD has an enormous performance advantage.

Re:Unfortunately (4, Funny)

anthonyrcalgary (622205) | more than 10 years ago | (#8399771)

Even Theo deRadt is talking about a combined *BSD userland utility team.
oh god I hope not. They'd kill each other over philosophical issues.

Re:Unfortunately (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8403780)

Even Theo deRadt is talking about a combined *BSD userland utility team.

oh god I hope not. They'd kill each other over philosophical issues.

He just wants to be back on the netbsd team!

Again! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397265)

I just fucking upgraded from 5.0 to 5.2!

Motherfuckers. thanks.

Re:Again! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397282)

Praytell, how can one upgrade a rotting corpse?

Updating from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE. (5, Informative)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8397567)

[I posted the message below to -current and -security, providing an easier upgrade path from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE]

In order to provide an easy update path for i386 systems from
FreeBSD 5.2 to FreeBSD 5.2.1, FreeBSD Update will now update
systems running FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE. To take
advantage of these updates, install and run FreeBSD Update, and
reboot into the new kernel:

# cd /usr/ports/security/freebsd-update && make install clean
# cp /usr/local/etc/freebsd-update.conf.sample /usr/local/etc/freebsd-update.conf
# /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update fetch
# /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update install
# shutdown -r now

If you have recompiled any files locally, FreeBSD Update may
not be able to update them automatically (it will complain).
With the latest version of FreeBSD Update (version 1.5), you
can use one of the following commands:
# /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update --branch crypto fetch
or
# /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update --branch nocrypto fetch
depending upon whether you installed the "crypto" distribution,
to force files to be updated. (If you're not sure if you
installed the "crypto" distribution, you almost certainly did).

FreeBSD Update will update a 5.2-RELEASE system to the exact
binaries distributed with 5.2.1-RELEASE, with the following
exceptions:

1. Files under the following directories will not be updated:

/usr/ports
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/man/cat*
/usr/src

The ports and src trees can be updated using cvsup; the files
in /usr/share/man/cat* are rebuilt from (updated) man pages
automatically.

2. FreeBSD binaries include, in their headers, the value of
__FreeBSD_version on the machine where they were compiled.
This value was bumped from 502000 to 502010 as part of the
release engineering process; binaries for which this is the
ONLY change will not be updated.

As always, this is something I'm providing personally; it is
in no way endorsed by the Security Officer, Release Engineering
team, or the project as a whole.

Colin Percival

YOU GODDAMN FUCKING KARMAWHORE! *BSD IS DEAD! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8402148)

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_
g_______________________________________________g_ _
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o_ _
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a_ _
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t_ _
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s_ _
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e_ _
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x_ _
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*_ _
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g_ _
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o_ _
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a_ _
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>__|_/_____t_ _
s______/_/\|___C_____)_*BSD__|__(___>___/__\____s_ _
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e_ _
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x_ _
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*_ _
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g_ _
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o_ _
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a_ _
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t_ _
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s_ _
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e_ _
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x_ _
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_


Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Re:Updating from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE. (3, Insightful)

__past__ (542467) | more than 10 years ago | (#8403149)

Completely offtopic question: Do you have any idea how many people actually use your service? Are there any plans to make it an "official" offering of the FreeBSD project?

Thanks for offering it, by the way. It is both technically interesting and good to have (even if I personally don't use it).

Re:Updating from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE. (4, Interesting)

cperciva (102828) | more than 10 years ago | (#8403690)

Do you have any idea how many people actually use your service?

Yes. Around 100 systems per day; in total, somewhere around 2500 systems have been patched.

Are there any plans to make it an "official" offering of the FreeBSD project?

Yes. I recently joined the FreeBSD security team, and now that 5.2.1 is out of the way, I'll be pushing to get the integration underway.

What a shame (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397660)

It is a real shame that while Linux 2.0 still remains alive and well, *BSD is in a state of utter and complete decay.

It's ironic that despite the best efforts of Theo and the FreeBSD core team that the *BSD is slowly rotting and decaying into a morass of filth and gore; meanwhile the Linux bazaar is brimming with newfound hope and glory.

Re:What a shame (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8398428)

Comments about BSD dying are biased blabberings of blithering linux losers.

Repeat after me, "BSD creates, Linux leaches, Microsoft profits"

I feel pretty secure with FreeBSD, given that since the 5.2 release on January 12th eight people have committed as contributors, 1 to documentation, 1 to ports and 6 to src. During which only one member resigned. Indication that FreeBSD is growing, not dying.

FreeBSD will chug right along as it has for over ten years. Linux on the otherhand will bloat, splinter, and implode.

Re:What a shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8399224)

Well, that about the commits, well, there have been quite a few commits [xl0.org] .

Re:What a shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8404002)

FreeBSD will chug right along as it has for over ten years. Linux on the otherhand will bloat, splinter, and implode.

Who's the troll now?

Shameful Moderation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8416182)

Why is this type of anti-Linux drivel modded up but anti-BSD trolls are modded down?

Re:What a shame (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8419526)

Oh yeah I suppose Linux must have ripped off FreeBSD's shitty SMPng to enable it to run on 512 CPU systems, right?

Yes sir, FreeBSD is really creating a big steaming pile of shit since branching FreeBSD 5 oh, about 5 years ago. Yep, they've basically been going backwards in terms of speed and scalability and stability for the entire life of FreeBSD 5.

I don't know if you call that chugging along or not. I rather thing it is the collective egos of the FreeBSD team bloating, splintering and imploding. They've alienated most of their capable developers, and the only people left sit around all day and brag to each other about how much better they are than Linux.

Re:What a shame (-1, Troll)

flynns (639641) | more than 10 years ago | (#8406196)

Y'know, I was just thinkin'...

...if you made a live CD off of FreeBSD...

...you'd be able to boot from the living dead!


*ducks*

hey (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8397758)

what's this, i used sysinstall to upgrade to 5.2.1, but when i rebooted it all seemed the same? did i miss something?

Re:hey (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401599)

uname -a

does that look the same?

Re:hey (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8404032)

They changed the default theme to "Luna".

FreeBSD's Soul Released (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8398579)

"The FreeBSD Release Engineering Team has announced FreeBSD's soul has finally been released from its rotting cadaver. This is intended to sever the binds which keep FreeBSD chained to the material world in an neverending state of undeath. See the Release Notes. The soul is now available for eternal judgement. If you are currently running FreeBSD 5.x, you can easily pray to it or pay your respects at the viewing on Saturday."

How's FBSD on AMD64? (3, Interesting)

scrytch (9198) | more than 10 years ago | (#8399850)

I've been pondering getting an AMD64 box, but I'm wondering how well it supports AMD64, what the performance is like, etc. Anyone running such a setup have any stories? Linux is the alternative here, but I would much prefer FreeBSD if it's feasable.

Re:How's FBSD on AMD64? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8399903)

There are AMD64 release notes and ISOs for 5.2.1 on the FTP site, as well as a full set of application packages. Looks pretty well supported...

Re:How's FBSD on AMD64? (5, Informative)

eht (8912) | more than 10 years ago | (#8400048)

The AMD64 platform is currently a Tier 1 FreeBSD platform.

Current Tier 1 platforms are i386, Sparc64, AMD64, PC98, and Alpha.

Current Tier 2 platforms are PowerPC and ia64.

Current Tier 3 platforms are S/390(R).

All systems not otherwise classified into a support tier are Tier 4 systems.

All information lifted verbatim from the FreeBSD website most of it from Section 10 of the Committer's Guide, Support for Multiple Architectures [freebsd.org]

So expect as much support for AMD64 as you would for the standard PC version, the only thing keeping AMD64 back is it's not a widely distributed and therefore not as well tested.

Re:How's FBSD on AMD64? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8405976)

Hmm interesting. So the various tiers must mean something like this:

Tier 1: A few people have reported booting up OK.
Tier 2: Completely broken.
Tier 3: Somebody somewhere said they'd like to start a port.

Re:How's FBSD on AMD64? (4, Informative)

mi (197448) | more than 10 years ago | (#8401638)

It works, except for the kernel modules. Currently, you need to compile everything you need into the kernel. kldload-ing does not work yet.

The 32-bit emulation is supported and turned on by default, although some 32-bit binaries, may have problems controlling some hardware with ioctl-s, because the sizes of structures are often different.

I wouldn't recommend it as a workstation, because too much stuff out there (open source and not) is poorly written and thus unportable and will break during compile time (at best) or at run-time (at worst). Think about all the foolish assumptions, that sizeof(int) == sizeof(void *) and shudder.... I don't think NVidia offers their drivers for amd64 either, and so on.

Makes a (very) nice server, though...

Thank Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8400627)

I have been running FreeBSD since the 3.x days. Right around this time Linux became popular but I stuck with FreeBSD for several academic reasons. At that point one was as good as the other, but as time went on this changed. Linux started gathering a huge following and it really hit its stride. The developers made leaps in bounds in hardware support. Meanwhile, FreeBSD crawled from 3.x to 4.x, which was a great improvement to be sure, but not as rapid or large as what Linux had been offering.

Being locked into FreeBSD by familiarity and investment at that point I wistfully watch the GNU community race ahead. I wish something would start a similar firestorm of FreeBSD development. I thought nothing of it when Apple bought NeXT in 1996. The Rhapsody project, which was basically just adding some Apple technology to OpenStep, didn't interest me. When Steve Jobs announced Mac OS X in 1999, however, my ears perked up at the mention of my favorite Unix. Apple was going to update the very cores of OpenStep into something new FreeBSD was going to be a huge part of that.

Since Mac OS X v10.0 was released in 2001, Apple has been filtering BSD code in and out of their kernel, userland, and libraries. This code then makes its way back to FreeBSD. Apple's pattern is to sync every major Mac OS X release with the latest major FreeBSD release. For example, Mac OS X v10.1 corresponded to FreeBSD 4.4 and Mac OS X v10.2 matched up with FreeBSD 4.7. By the time Apple released Panther, their contributions back into FreeBSD had amassed into a new FreeBSD milestone, the 5.x branch. Mac OS X v10.3 contained bits of both FreeBSD 4.9 and FreeBSD 5.1.

Look at it this way, only after Apple started modifying FreeBSD 4.x and submitting their modifications did FreeBSD progress to the 5.x branch. The advanced VM and SMP code that allows Mac OS X to run so efficiently is the very same code that finally put FreeBSD on the level with Linux. I run FreeBSD 5.2 on a four-way Xeon box at work and thank Apple every day. If it weren't for the Mach micokernel from Apple we wouldn't be able to do these nice things with FreeBSD now or probably ever.

It's also kind of ironic how such a big deal was made by Wind River Systemd buying out both BSDI and Walnut Creek Software. (Does anyone remember this?) The plan was to merge BSD/OS into FreeBSD and sell a special enterprise edition of the operating system while still maintaining the Open Source project. Sadly this fizzled out. No one ever predicted that Apple, of all companies, would ride in with the cavalry and pick up the pieces. Apple has done much more than Wind River ever managed to.

After such a long and precarious history FreeBSD is finally going somewhere and we no longer have to worry about the latest hardware support of when the next release will be. We're firing on all pistons now, and within a couple more years there will be more FreeBSD installs than Linux or Solaris! I'm not so proud that I can't see what is behind this. Apple saved FreeBSD and I have no problem admitting or accepting that. I doubt many others who use FreeBSD do, but I just wanted to point it out.

Thank you, Apple, for saving FreeBSD.

Re:Thank Apple (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401494)

What an odd troll...

Apple has made no significant code contributions to the freebsd codebase to date, AFAIK. Certainly not the scheduling and SMP code. You guys are slipping.

Re:Thank Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401751)

What an odd troll...

Could just be an ignorant user.

Re:Thank Apple (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401866)

I think the parent of your comment is the ignorant user. Apple has hired several FreeBSD folks and actively submits changes to code not only to FreeBSD but the KDE group, Apache, and others.

Re:Thank Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8402163)

The comments about the SMP code and the 'birth' of 5.0 is wrong. 5.0 had more to do with the BSDI/Walnut Creek merger than Apple's "involvement".

Re:Thank Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8403650)

No, it appears to be some sort of troll. The exact same post just appeared in another discussion (and got modded -1: Offtopic)

Fuck Apple. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8402118)

Thank you, Apple, for saving FreeBSD.

Apple did not "save" anything. FreeBSD was in no danger of dying and was quite healthy before Apple came along and cherry-picked the codebase (something they could quite legally do given the BSD licence).

And Microsoft copied BSD code into Windows - and that certainly doesn't mean that they like or want to help FreeBSD.

and we no longer have to worry about the latest hardware support

Tell me - what x86 hardware does Apple sell?

If it weren't for the Mach micokernel from Apple

Windows NT / 2000 / XP runs on a variant of the Mach kernel. Mach is a fairly standard, well documented design principal. Apple did not make the FreeBSD kernel.

They only thing that Apple "saved" was money when they killed NeXT in favor of using BSD code.

If there's anything worse than a "*BSD is dead" trolls - it's the Steve Jobs-humping Apple morons like yourself.

Re:Fuck Apple. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8402964)

Wow, you're an idiot.

The kernel Windows NT/2K/XP runs on is in no way shape or form related to mach. It came from work IBM and Microsoft started in the early Eighties to replace DOS. It eventually became OS/2 and Windows NT and the rest is history.

Windows XP does not run on Mach or any variants thereof.

Re:Fuck Apple. (1)

Chreo (694625) | more than 10 years ago | (#8406157)

The kernel Windows NT/2K/XP runs on is in no way shape or form related to mach. It came from work IBM and Microsoft started in the early Eighties to replace DOS. It eventually became OS/2 and Windows NT and the rest is history.
Well, if I remember correctly then the work IBM and MS did together was based upon Mach so OS/2 is based upon Mach. However, that work did not carry into the NT-kernel as MS modelled the kernel "after" VMS when they broke the collaboration with IBM on OS/2.
Windows XP does not run on Mach or any variants thereof
Agreed

Re:Fuck Apple. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8407602)

No, you're thinking of OS/2 for PowerPC. IBM used a form of the Mach kernel in the early Nineties that ran on PowerPC and ported OS/2 to it. This Mach version was also going to be the basis of Apple's Pink and Taligent efforts which failed.

Re:Fuck Apple. (4, Informative)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | more than 10 years ago | (#8411297)

If it weren't for the Mach micokernel from Apple
Mach is from Carnegie Mellon, by way of NeXT.

Windows NT / 2000 / XP runs on a variant of the Mach kernel.
XP does not run on Mach. It was a microkernel, made with a lot of input from DEC VAX guys. Over the years it has shed a lot of Microkernel attributes and become more of a macro style kernel.

Mach is a fairly standard, well documented design principal.
Microkernels are a fairly standard, well documented, design principal. Mach is an instance of them.

I actually agree with some of your other statements, your parent poster was an uninformed fanboy. Apple has contributed to BSD though, check out the BSD project list and see where.

Re:Thank Apple (3, Interesting)

Ricin (236107) | more than 10 years ago | (#8402265)

Please name 5 specific examples of important contributions from Apple to the FreeBSD kernel or userland.

Hint: "The advanced VM and SMP code that allows Mac OS X to run so efficiently is the very same code that finally put FreeBSD on the level with Linux" is sheer nonsense. But I'll let you humor me and come with some example commits. Links to cvsweb or something would be nice.

Re:Thank Apple (err correction) (1)

Ricin (236107) | more than 10 years ago | (#8402283)

Correction to the hint above: should have included the sentence before that one as well that claims that this is because of Apple's contribution to the codebase.

WARNING: PATCH YOUR BSD NOW! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8401979)

CERT SecAD NBSD4536A746
Advisory: Olfactory disturbance during *BSD use
Affected: NetBSD all versions
FreeBSD all versions
OpenBSD all versions
Description: The dead corpse of a *BSD operating system emits a foul, disgusting smell which reduces the
productivity of the users.
Recommended activities: - use nose plugs
- removal of *BSD operating system, replace with Linux or Windows XP

Re:WARNING: PATCH YOUR BSD NOW! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8410933)

How much do I treasure a true idiot. All I can say is that you made me smile before I have to get ready for work.

XP or Linux? You do have some sort of sever disorder that has yet to be identified by the medical community. In the mean time please lite up a fat one and chill.

Re:WARNING: PATCH YOUR BSD NOW! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8412355)

I think you are the one with a disorder: you reply to a troll expecting them to become offended and stop posting. lol

Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8402222)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dbblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

Re:Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8410986)

A recent article by samsun? That was back in 2001 and not to mention that it wasnt tweaked by any freebsd users. Linux comes with a optimized kernel. BSD comes out for max stability.

And yes there was a follow up to the article in which there were suggestion on tweaking the kernel and BSD was inline with performace with the other OS'. However, they never mentioned the alterations that were dont to the OS'. There could have been way more that would have increased the performance.

Perhaps reading more that just the first page and looking at the pictures would be of more benefit to yourself. Even better, try installing it or are you afraid of a text based installer......

Trolls are soooo cute.... and probably fuzzy...

YHBT YHL HAND (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8412338)

you fell for a cut and paste troll

Re:Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8420060)

I can't believe this, somebody fell for the BSD is dying troll that has been floating around here for 4 years. that is almost as bad as falling for the 17 meg file troll.

What is it about (4, Interesting)

coughski (639362) | more than 10 years ago | (#8403515)

Operating Systems that invokes such spite between proponets? IMHO FreeBSD works very well I run 4.8 for my server and have never had a problem never crashes and it does what I need it do. For my Desktop I run SuSe 8.1 and it works very well for most everything I need. I suspect I could use both as a server or a desktop with few problems. I am not a developer or sys admin but I do enjoy tinkering with networks and computers and *nix or *bsd based systems. I just wonder why I see posts like "FreeBSD is dead" from a supposed linux user when clearly both operating systems are actively growing. cough

Re:What is it about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8404363)

Who says they are from Linux users? How do we know this is just not a attempt by BSD users to smear Linux by getting people like you to become more sympathetic to the BSD side?

Re:What is it about (1)

DashEvil (645963) | more than 10 years ago | (#8405011)

Maybe what you said was an attempt to smear BSD users by claiming that they want to smear Linux users by getting people like you to become more sympathetic to the Linux side!

Seriously though, I find the BSD trolls to be quite amusing. Regardless of their association one can hardly dispute the fact that they have unmitigated social issues and I derive some kind of cold satisfaction from that.

Re:What is it about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8406895)

They have "social issues"? You're there sitting at your computer, reading about BSD and getting worked up about claims that it's dying, and THEY have social issues?!?

Heavens!

Re:What is it about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8411352)

finding something amusing is, in your mind, "getting worked up" about it? what a sad, sad life you must live.

Re:What is it about (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8412318)

I think its sad that you take time out to worry about trolls. as the saying goes, YHBT YHL HAND

Simply question (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8405685)

If I want production stable as recommended by the FreeBSD team, I should use 4.9-RELEASE because 5.2-RELEASE is still being tested.

Will there be a point where the FreeBSD team says "go for it" or is it going to be a judgement call as it is with a Linux kernel?

Re:Simply question (3, Informative)

thdexter (239625) | more than 10 years ago | (#8408851)

Yes, probably with FreeBSD 5.3, the 5.x branch will become -STABLE and 4.9 will only be supported for critical security flaws. (4.9-STABLE, not -RELEASE, it's what's out, and 5.2.1-RELEASE.)

I'm confused... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409161)

I thought -STABLE was pretty much a snapshot of -CURRENT and that, after testing, it becomes -RELEASE.

Re:I'm confused... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8411174)

Then be enlightened. [freebsd.org]

Re:I'm confused... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8416656)

So -RELEASE follows -STABLE which follows -CURRENT.

That's what I said but the explanation to my top-level post implied -STABLE follows -RELEASE.

Yes (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8416782)

The -BURIAL always follows the -WAKE.

IPSEC still broken (4, Informative)

dokebi (624663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8408246)

It looks like the KAME implementation got borked between 5.1 and 5.2. ISAKMP packets get filtered even when they're not supposed to.
see here [google.com] .

So they released the body already? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8413808)

That was a quick autopsy.

BSD Starting (2, Interesting)

SphericalCrusher (739397) | more than 10 years ago | (#8415022)

I've never been a big BSD fan, as I've only used it a few times. I'm more of a Linux person. I truly respect BSD though, and for that, I'm going to be throwing together a box just to install this new version of FreeBSD on.

I feel that it will better help my knowledge in UNIX to learn it. I don't want to dualboot.

Perfectly normal (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8415300)

Dead bodies can retain gas for several days or even weeks after death, leading to periodic releases. Users installing this new release are advised to equip Hazmat suits with appropriate filtration.

The Status of the Sux0ring (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8416173)


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.

Problems with BSD 5.2.1 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8417009)


I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you BSD fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a BSD box (a PIII 800 w/512 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this BSD box, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Emacs Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various BSD machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a BSD box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the BSD machines faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 800 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that BSD is a "superior" machine.

BSD addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a BSD over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

The Feeding Tube (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8418987)

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

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

FreeBSD 4.5, February 2002... (3, Interesting)

Anthony Boyd (242971) | more than 10 years ago | (#8419395)

...was the last release of FreeBSD that I've purchased. I got the 6-disk toolkit to go with it -- tons of apps, it made for a great installation. I have no idea if 4.5 is considered a "good" release relative to the other releases, but it made me (mostly) happy. However, I did have one system -- an old laptop with a panel that needed WD drivers -- that just seemed to miss the FreeBSD sweet spot. It used a PCMCIA card to connect to my LAN, but FreeBSD 4.5 had only "early" PCMCIA tools then (which seemed weird, considering it was only a couple years ago). So I couldn't ever get the network up and running. Later releases had better PCMCIA, but they also used Xfree86 4, which couldn't handle my old LCD with its Western Digital chipset.

Soooo... now I'm wondering. The new 5.2.1 is surely excellent at PCMCIA. But does it have Xfree86 version 3 as an install option? If not, does Xfree86 4 have support for the WD chipset now? I'd really like to get FreeBSD running on my old laptop(s), but it seems that just as the PCMCIA started getting good, Xfree86 went modern and left a bunch of systems in the dust.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...