Beta
×

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

Thank you!

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

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

FreeBSD: Not Exactly Dead

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the the-kind-of-death-we-long-for dept.

Operating Systems 184

quantumice writes "It would seem that despite being dead and there only being six of us who use it, FreeBSD has clocked up nearly 2.5 million active sites according to Netcraft. So by my estimates that must mean that I and each of my 5 friends run 416 667 sites. That might explain my high bandwidth usage."

cancel ×

184 comments

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

Gentlemen (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9374867)

Start your trolling

Re:Gentlemen (3, Interesting)

kwench (539630) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374909)

I'd love to... but I still don't understand why everybody is raving about *BSD being dead.

After having learned that Windows XP is a VMS clone [cs.vu.nl] and that Linux is a Minix clone which is a UNIX clone which is a MULTICS clone which is a CTSS clone which is a FMS clone which I have never heard about and which is probably dead, dead, dead [adti.net] I'd think that everything - even BeOS and QNX (and this FreeBSD clone MacOS X) are UNIX-influenced (if not based) and therefore dead, dead, dead. 8-)
I used to prefer FreeBSD over GNU/Linux because of the straightforward install without bells and whistles and the easy way to compile parts of the system. The only disappointing thing is the lack of drivers for my exotic hardware, at least I was so far not able to find working drivers for my external CD-writer, my laptop's USB and a single of my three USB webcams.

Well... then I discovered Gentoo and everything was fine again... 8-)

Re:Gentlemen (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9380499)

Just a bunch of persistent slashdot trolls. That's it. They don't bother sites that provide better coverage of all things BSD. The slashdot trolls seem to be afraid of BSD taking over their advocacy turf or something. Recall the rather bizarre hostile reaction to a bsd section being added to slashdot.

Re:Gentlemen (1, Interesting)

ArbitraryConstant (763964) | more than 10 years ago | (#9383255)

The longest I've tracked Gentoo stable without something vital breaking is about 60 days. I've had situations where the stable branch wouldn't compile because some of the packages required a package in the unstable branch. If anyone, anywhere, had tried it in any way on a -stable system before it was released to the stable branch, it would have been caught.

FreeBSD isn't perfect, but it's telling that FreeBSD-current works more consistently than Gentoo-stable. Give Debian-unstable a shot, it's more consistent.

Trolls rarely be where expected (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375025)

Interestingly enough, stories that would seem to be obvious [slashdot.org] troll fodder don't seem to attract all that much troll interest.

Go figure.

Re:Trolls rarely be where expected (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375482)

Not enough trolling in this thread? How about my homage to KING P? Ahem...
I AM KING OF THE P-FUNK PEOPLE (score:-1,troll)

YOU CANNOT STOP ME

Re:Gentlemen (0)

Rick the Red (307103) | more than 10 years ago | (#9378726)

Start your trolling? Why? The "BSD is dead" trolls have managed to troll up an entire story. Anything further would diminish the perfection of that accomplishment. Besides, in this case they'd be "redundant" as well as "troll". "Redundant" but not at all "offtopic".

Re:Gentlemen (1)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9384483)

Exactly. When I saw this story I shook my head. Drink to the BSD trolls tonight. They've been so influential that they now have their own Slashdot story. The editors have been trolled.

first and second posts? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9374877)

Netcraft confirms it, bsd.slash is dying.

Uptimes (4, Informative)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375155)

FreeBSD and BSD/OS are beating any OS. Just visit Sites with longest running systems by average uptime [netcraft.com] .

Re:Uptimes (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375934)

Sigh. Linux, Solaris and some other UNIX variants wrap their uptime counters at 497 days -- so they CAN'T be on that list.

It's not remotely an indication of FreeBSD's quality.

Are you serious??? (2, Informative)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9376520)

Not all OSes can have those uptimes. BTW, what you're saying about the uptime thing I guess it was resolved in the Linux kernel 2.6.x series.

Re:Are you serious??? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9378414)

Aren't you tired of these fucking CUNTS that point that wrapping thing out every time someone praises FreeBSDs uptime. Me and you other five should just keep quiet about it. We don't want any twit fanboys interested in BSD anyway.

Re:Uptimes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9380599)

Why exactly do they wrap their uptime anyway? It would seem to me that a system which would report an uptime would at least do it consistently no matter how long the system had been up. I don't know about Solaris or whatever, but what exactly is Linux's excuse?

Re:Uptimes (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9383473)

It's a simple overlow problem. Essentialy at 497 days (or whatever the cutoff is), the unsigned 32-bit number reaches its max point and "resets" itself to 0. Now, you might be wondering which 32-bit number I'm referring to. Well, Netcraft uses the timestamping component of the TCP/IP header to figure out most of the reported uptimes. The timestamping component starts at 0 when the machine is first booted, and every X milliseconds it gets incremented (The X varies from platform to platform). If you google, you'll uncover more.

Re:Uptimes (4, Funny)

kayumi (763841) | more than 10 years ago | (#9377343)

That's nothing compared to the downtimes. I have a 200Mhz notebook running FreeBSD 3.5 which I haven't switched on once these last two years. (Most likely because I dropped it and the screen stopped working).

The reason you dont see other OSs on there (2, Informative)

Tezkah (771144) | more than 10 years ago | (#9379945)

From their FAQ [netcraft.com] :

Additionally HP-UX, Linux, NetApp NetCache, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD cycle back to zero after 497 days, exactly as if the machine had been rebooted at that precise point. Thus it is not possible to see a HP-UX, Linux or Solaris system with an uptime measurement above 497 days.

The *BSDs is very neat, and will probably be my OS of choice on my next computer (selling my mac and either getting a laptop or desktop PC), but lets not get carried away ;)

-Tezkah, user 7 of 7!?

The purpose of this story? (-1, Troll)

Fulkkari (603331) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374910)

Does anyone seriously think FreeBSD is dead? Then why was this story posted to "prove" than FreeBSD is alive? I don't see any reason why to try prove to the trolls than the *BSDs are alive. The main thing afterall is that YOU think it is a good operating system - not somebody else.

Next story, please.

Re:The purpose of this story? (4, Insightful)

ctr2sprt (574731) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374968)

This story is posted because BSD doesn't generate a lot of exciting news. Well, that's not true: there's lots of exciting news for people who care about BSD. But none of the editors care much about BSD. They like Linux and MacOS X, and talking trash about MS and SCO. This means that they have trouble identifying the stories that actual, honest-to-God BSD users find interesting. But they still feel they ought to give us something, since after all BSD has an entire section on Slashdot. And I guess they are trying to encourage Open Source Brotherhood, not realizing that most BSD users would prefer not to be associated with most Linux users.

question for all the BSD users (1, Insightful)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375079)

Have you submitted interesting BSD stories and had them rejected?

Re:question for all the BSD users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375657)

Personally, I believe in using the right tool for the job... Which means it could be windows, it could be FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD or Linux.

Overall, OpenBSD is my favorite. So if/when I submit a story, it's to undeadly.org and not slashdot.

Re:question for all the BSD users (1)

sumbry (644145) | more than 10 years ago | (#9380804)

Yes. I submitted this same story like 4-5 months ago and had it rejected.

Re:question for all the BSD users (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 10 years ago | (#9381006)

This story is insultingly non-news toward BSD---not intentionally, though.

Interviews are real stories. Releases are real stories. These stories that are completely predicated on stats generally go over like lead balloons anyway.

Maybe it was just the way that the submitter worded everything. References to trolls don't belong in the headline. Ever.

Re:The purpose of this story? (2, Funny)

javax (598925) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375124)

The rules of BSD Club:
  1. Rule of BSD Club: Don't talk about BSD
  2. Rule of BSD Club: Don't talk about BSD
  3. if this is your first night with BSD, you have to code
The rules of Linux Club:
  1. Rule of Linux Club: Fuss about how cool Linux is as loud as you can!
  2. Rule of Linux Club: Fuss about how bad Microsoft/SCO is as loud as you can!

Re:The purpose of this story? (3, Funny)

HolyCoitus (658601) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375149)

Bah... The reason BSD Club has those rules is because the members are dying, so they are unable to talk anymore and the new recruits are the only ones that aren't suffering from horrible diseases that prevent them from coding. The new recruits have to pick up the slack.

Since when has the BSD crowd enjoyed posting flamebait? Hehe. Aren't you breaking your rules?

Oh, and Linux is SO COOL! SCO SUCKS. Microsft.. *checks his notes* sucks! Is that still the stance, or are we hating someone else now?

All in jest though. I want to have some BSD installs, but I am quite lacking in hardware. Perhaps one of the dying folks would leave me a spare box in their will?

Re:The purpose of this story? (1)

niker (593109) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375244)

Since when has the BSD crowd enjoyed posting flamebait? Hehe. Aren't you breaking your rules?

I believe the grandparent was trying to be funny, playing with the knowledge that there is indeed a "hip" factor in GNU/Linux zealotry and large corporation bashing

All in jest though. I want to have some BSD installs, but I am quite lacking in hardware. Perhaps one of the dying folks would leave me a spare box in their will?

You could just get a cheap harddrive with at least 5GB on it, install *BSD and dual boot.

Suggestion: Freesbie [freesbie.org] , you don't even have to install to try it out

Re:The purpose of this story? (1)

HolyCoitus (658601) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375443)

Yeah, I know the grandparents intentions. Just had the urge to poke fun at him. Also, I wouldn't call SCO a large corporation. Hehe

I have Freesbie already and have played around with it a bit. I want an install, but I also want a BeOS install. I have a spare 133, and my other computer that I have full access to has all IDEs used along with stuffed 10 gig hard drives.

I'm thinking about just getting a 200 gig Seagate, and partitioning it up rather gratuituously with Gentoo and 3 flavors of BSD. I also need a router, which the 133 might turn into, but it would be fun to possibly play with BeOS on it... I need to find another old box and just have 2 of them.

Sorry for rambling. About to head to bed. Have been working on changing the way I use my computer again for the millionth time. Started using Mutt and ratpoison today from Fluxbox and Thunderbird.

Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9377018)

Your nickname contains the word "Coitus". Something you'll never engage in.

Re:Irony (1)

HolyCoitus (658601) | more than 10 years ago | (#9379798)

Your name contains coward, something I am too! *whimpers*

Re:The purpose of this story? (5, Insightful)

gangien (151940) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375237)

And I guess they are trying to encourage Open Source Brotherhood, not realizing that most BSD users would prefer not to be associated with most Linux users.

Really? that's why every linux convention thing I've been too, has had a BSD booth. Or almost all conversations with BSD users seem to involve Linux in some way. Please. A win for BSD is a win for Linux and vice versa. Soon as linux takes over the desktop BSD will win converts.

Re:The purpose of this story? (1)

cipher chort (721069) | more than 10 years ago | (#9382050)

You see BSD booths at Linux cons because there aren't a whole lot of BSD cons. Linux is the media's baby right now, so it's what gets all the press and all the buzz. The BSD people are merely trying to get peoples attention to the fact that they are doing kool things too.

As for the original statement, yes it is true that most BSD users (pick any of the BSDs) prefer not to be associated with Linux and avoid Linux users. Don't take my word for it, read the archives for any of the BSD mailing lists.

The reason Linux gets the buzz is because Linux users and developers are extremely loud and abrasive. Meanwhile, BSD developers keep their heads down and plod along, not caring to "evangelize" and not making outrageous comments to the press and analysts.

Your last comment about "a win for..." is exactly the difference between Linux and BSD. Linux is trying to "win" something (so far as I can tell, it's putting Microsoft out of business and pissing on the ashes). BSD developers are just trying to develop stable and secure operating systems (full OSs mind you, not just kernels) that can be used in production environments. BSD is not trying to "win" anything.

Re:The purpose of this story? (1)

name773 (696972) | more than 10 years ago | (#9382859)

oh, and bsd isn't trying to be a mainstream desktop os. that's the reason i'm switching (my desktop, ironically) to freebsd tommorrow after exams let out :)

Re:The purpose of this story? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9384546)

> Soon as linux takes over the desktop BSD will
> win converts.

A win for Linux is a loss for everyone. Linux
is not about Unix excellence. It's about rabid
zealots pushing political and social constructs
on people through their utopian licensing scheme
which will save the worl from the evil of [ fill
in the blank ].

Re:The purpose of this story? (2, Insightful)

Charles Dart (731692) | more than 10 years ago | (#9378309)

Personally, for a server I love a boring OS. Thats why I use FreeBSD on all my servers at home (Solaris at work, bleh!) For the desktop where I want eye-candy OS X all the way. Once I get in the terminal it is so much like FreeBSD I can really get things done.

I just got an ipod and it is the sweetest gadget I have ever owned and the way and the integration with my ibook is amazing. If you haven't tried it and you like music do what ever it takes to get an apple laptop and and an ipod. I was waiting for the color screen but I decided to get started with a 15gig and give it to my wife when I get a color one. I am having a lot of fun with it and if I had known I would have bought one sooner. I can't wait to get my hands on one of those airport express dealies.

Re:The purpose of this story? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9379289)

my god. you are my clone!

Re:The purpose of this story? (3, Informative)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 10 years ago | (#9380969)

It's a joke. Lighten up. Sheesh...

Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (0, Redundant)

Micro$will (592938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374929)

But I have to admit this is funny...

DEAD OPERATING SYSTEM SKETCH Cast:
Mr. Praline: John Cleese
Shop Owner: Michael Palin

A customer enters an operating system shop.

Mr. Praline: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint. (The owner does not respond.)
Mr. Praline: 'Ello, Miss?
Owner: What do you mean "miss"?
Mr. Praline: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint!
Owner: We're closin' for lunch.
Mr. Praline: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this operating system what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, *BSD...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?
Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. It's dead, that's what's wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, it's uh,...it's resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead operating system when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.
Owner: No no it's not dead, it's, it's restin'! Remarkable OS, *BSD, idn'it, ay? Beautiful kernel!
Mr. Praline: The kernel don't enter into it. It's stone dead.
Owner: Nononono, no, no! It's resting!
Mr. Praline: All right then, if it's restin', I'll wake it up! (bashes at the keyboard) 'Ello, Mister *BSD! I've got a lovely fresh kernel update for you if you show...

(owner hits the keys)

Owner: There, it spewed some debug output to the command line!
Mr. Praline: No, it didn't, that was you hitting the keys!
Owner: I never!!
Mr. Praline: Yes, you did!
Owner: I never, never did anything...
Mr. Praline: (yelling and typing into the console repeatedly) 'ELLO COMMAND PROMPT!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your nine o'clock cron job!

(Rips out hard drive from computer case and thumps it on the counter. Shoves it back inside the case and reboots the system - blank screen.)

Mr. Praline: Now that's what I call a dead operating system.
Owner: No, no.....No, it's stunned!
Mr. Praline: STUNNED?!?
Owner: Yeah! You stunned it, just as it was finishing an I/O task! *BSD stuns easily, major.
Mr. Praline: Um...now look...now look, mate, I've definitely 'ad enough of this. That operating system is definitely deceased, and when I purchased it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack of responsiveness was due to it bein' in the process of recompiling itself after a particularly comprehensive code update.
Owner: Well, it's...it's, ah...probably pining for some dilettante dabbling.
Mr. Praline: PININ' for some DILETTANTE DABBLING?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that? Look, why did it fall flat on its back the moment I started Emacs?
Owner: *BSD prefers swapping everything out to the hard drive! Remarkable variant, id'nit, squire? Lovely kernel!
Mr. Praline: Look, I took the liberty of examining the system when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it had been printing any text at all to the screen was because of all the WORRYING COMPILER WARNINGS encountered while it was being rebuilt.

(pause)

Owner: Well, o'course it was spitting out those warnings! If I hadn't updated the kernel with an unstable development build, you might have had your FTP server compromised [slashdot.org], and VOOM! Bye bye to your business.
Mr. Praline: "Server"?!? Mate, this OS wouldn't "serve" if you put four million volts through it! It's bleedin' demised!
Owner: No no! It's pining!
Mr. Praline: It's not pinin'! It's passed on! This OS is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! [lemis.com] It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! The numbers continue to decline for *BSD but FreeBSD may be hurting the most. All major marketing surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is extremely sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among hobbyist dilettante dabblers. In truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.*BSD's foot is in the grave.Development of *BSD nowadays is mired by bylaws, committees, reports and milestones. Technically, the *BSD project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips the ability of the developers to deliver. There's no simple solution to this. Why would anyone choose to use a *BSD over other faster, more stable systems? We can all agree that *BSD is a failure. Yet why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between myriad incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities? The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD. Fact: *BSD is an ex-operating system!!

(pause)

Owner: Well, I'd better replace it, then. (he takes a quick peek behind the counter) Sorry squire, I've had a look 'round the back of the shop, and uh, we're right out of UNIX variants.
Mr. Praline: I see. I see, I get the picture.
Owner: I got Microsoft Windows XP Professional.

(pause)

Mr. Praline: Pray, is it difficult to setup, use and maintain?
Owner: Nnnnot really.
Mr. Praline: WELL IT'S HARDLY A BLOODY REPLACEMENT, IS IT?!!???!!?
Owner: N-no, I guess not. (gets ashamed, looks at his feet)
Mr. Praline: Well.

(pause)

Owner: (quietly) D'you.... d'you want to come back to my place?
Mr. Praline: (looks around) Yeah, all right, sure.

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (0, Offtopic)

gonaddespammed.com (550312) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374940)

How bored were you?

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (2, Informative)

Artega VH (739847) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375320)

I call karma [slashdot.org] whore [slashdot.org]

I can't find the original source though... pity...

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375394)

I can't find the original source though... pity...

The original source? Monty Python?

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9382109)

Funny don't get you no karma, foo.

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (1)

DeezyChee (587489) | more than 10 years ago | (#9382266)

Yes, very informative asshole. It's old as hell, but since noone posts it but trolls, nobody ever sees it. I think Micro$will should be modded up to +5 Ballsy.

To add insult to injury, no only can you not gain karma with Funny, you can still lose karma by being modded down.

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (-1, Offtopic)

noselasd (594905) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375729)

This is funny because of ... ??

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9376077)

it's monthy python, and it claims *BSD us dead. clearly, it's one of the pinacles of /. humor

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (1)

kace (557434) | more than 10 years ago | (#9376944)

This is funny because it is an adaptation of an hilarious Monty Python sketch in which the John Cleese character is trying to return a dead parrot to the pet shop. If you've ever seen it before then you probably sprayed Coke through your nose when reading this.

Now back on-topic, this story is a re-run, it comes up again every few months and is exactly the same. What we all need are bots to repost our old comments whenever "Netcraft" and "BSD" appear in the same story summary.

And, BSD rules. (ruleZ! -- ? or that too linuxey?)

Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (1)

noselasd (594905) | more than 10 years ago | (#9384846)

I have seen the sketch, and I agree, it's funny as hell.
This however, did not make me laugh.
As for bots posting to *BSD stories !? Grow up goddamnit.

I don't care what anyone else says (1)

ChipMonk (711367) | more than 10 years ago | (#9380188)

I thought it was funny.

You know what's *really* dead? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9374976)

Stupid ass BSD is DEAD jokes.

They
stopped
being
funny
when
BSD
died

Re:You know what's *really* dead? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9379140)

A BSD troll is like a retarded kid with a xylophone.

pair Networks (4, Interesting)

rixstep (611236) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374987)

pair [pair.com] have been using it all along. They've got well over 100,000 domains running. They're but one company.

Oh yeah - Apple's another...

so, umm.. (2, Funny)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 10 years ago | (#9374997)

does this mean that domain hijackers/squatters use openbsd? They sure could use the security anyways..

what a pointless story!

What we need (3, Insightful)

krist0 (313699) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375020)

is to be able to moderate an entire story as a troll.

Developer laments: What Killed FreeBSD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375053)

The End of FreeBSD

[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

Discussion

I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

Shouts

To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

Future

I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

= Mike

--

To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt

I have.. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375069)

1 machine that runs Mac OSX (a Powerbook)
1 machine that runs Windows 2000 (games machine)
1 machine that runs FreeBSD (workhorse server)
1 machine that runs BeOS 5 (old machine, not seriously used)

I consider all of the above to be "best of breed" operating systems. Linux absolutely blows because of the fragmented userbase. I have a hard time caring about it because of the thousand different distributions all doing things differently.

FreeBSD beats the crap out of Linux for:

* Ease of use - extremely well documented, everything is logically organised
* Reliability - they.. shock.. *test* before they release! (unlike Fedora's GRUB which nuked my drive when I tried it)
* Compatibility - the ports tree is fantastic, plus it runs Linux executables

In short: FreeBSD is great. If you've ever become frustrated with Linux, give it a try. I guarantee you'll love it!

FreeBSD in a nutshell (5, Insightful)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375199)

It's a complete OS.
It's not a clone.
Everything runs faster.
It doesn't mess up with your MBR.
It does not come with a particular browser pre-installed.
It's always fun to run FreeBSD. [mavetju.org]

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375828)

It's a complete OS. - So are all the Linux + GNU combos

It's not a clone. - Eh? Dunno what that means.

Everything runs faster. - Feels zippy for sure, but nothing really runs much faster, most stuff all the same

It doesn't mess up with your MBR. - of course it does. It has to boot doesn't it?

It does not come with a particular browser pre-installed. - Eh? You can choose to install a browser when you install FreeBSD just as you can with Debian or anything else. Do or don't, up to you.

Not much argument there... but FreeBSD is a sweet system and has that coolness factor over Linux.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (1)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9376807)

Linux by itself is not a complete OS. You need GNU tools + BSD tools to have a complete OS.

Linux is a Unix-clone.

Most stuff isn't the same. The FreeBSD OS is not the same as the Linux kernel and GNU tools. It boots up much faster, shutdowns much faster, and, generally speaking, most apps run faster.

When I was saying it doesn't come with a particular browser pre-installed I was referring to Windows. ;)

Yes, the songs found in the FreeBSD songbook are funny.

The BSD daemon is much cooler than the penguin.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9384519)

> The BSD daemon is much cooler than the penguin.

Tux is just plain gay!

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375982)

Faster? Linux 2.6 obliterates FreeBSD, both on SMP systems and on desktops. Plus, Debian is a complete OS. Slackware is a complete OS. Mandrake is a complete OS. Stop trying to confuse things.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (1)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9376836)

You're saying it by yourself. Linux itself is not a complete OS. It's just a kernel. There's no problem about saying how things really are. IMHO, FreeBSD is much faster than any OS for PCs. If you wanna see it by yourself, just try it. It's free. ;)
www.freebsd.org [freebsd.org]

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (4, Insightful)

DashEvil (645963) | more than 10 years ago | (#9378465)

Linux 2.6 does not obliterate FreeBSD.

The last benchmarks I saw (Linux 2.6 vrs. FreeBSD 5.x) proved them to be simular performance wise.

Stop mischaracterizing the parent posters argument. Their argument was that Linux isn't a complete OS, not that Mandrake or Slackware isn't.

Personally, I'm pro FreeBSD, for reasons that are my own. You can cry and whine about it all you want, but if you are to critize my OS choice at least use facts.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (3, Insightful)

xoboots (683791) | more than 10 years ago | (#9379577)

Stop mischaracterizing the parent posters argument. Their argument was that Linux isn't a complete OS, not that Mandrake or Slackware isn't.

Does it occur to you that that is a frivolous point? So FreeBSD is a big monolith whereas we can create any custom OS using the Linux kernel + various tools (which turns out to be a blessing for embedded and limited systems). I think the original poster was trying to slag "Linux" because it was "just a kernel" whereas FreeBSD is a "full-blown OS". But that's putting one's head in one's ass because nearly anyone using the Linux kernel will be doing so from a fully packaged OS like Debian or Slackware, etc. Saying otherwise is the subterfuge.

And don't tell me that the "Linux" factions are more fragmented because of the amazing variety of choices available. Most things are standardized or on their way. Besides, is it not true that FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD et al represent factions on the BSD side? I do agree that BSD is mostly better in those regards, though.

Please don't get me wrong: FreeBSD is a very fine OS. I just don't see why *BSDers feel the need to talk about that "other OS" whenever they bring up their own. Is your OS not worthy of being talked about in its own right? I suggest it is and it would be nice to see discussions that actually followed that ideal for a change. Mainly because in today's world, the old adage that "*BSD is so much better than */Linux" proves to be either false, misleading, or tragically unimportant in significant ways.

To be honest, I haven't run a *BSD OS in a long while. Mainly because I'm not fond of the license, but that's my own personal preference at play. (And BTW, no matter how good *BSD may ever be or become, some will never, ever use it for this reason alone. Same can be said of */Linux.)

Cheers!

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9377478)

When I ran it, it felt realllllly slow. The filesystem is really solid, but lacking in the speed department, I prefer ReiserFS.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (2, Funny)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9377919)

Uhm... If FreeBSD is realllly slow, then it's time buy a new computer.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9378510)

From my experience, FreeBSD is slower, albeit only marginally: I've been running apache and squid from FreeBSD for the past month or so, but I'm planning to switch back to Slackware when I get the time.

And while I appreciate the value of FreeBSD--I like its start-up script placement, its ports system, its feel of efficiency--I do not like its less than stellar hardware support. While poor hardware support was a problem in Linux (for me at least) seven years ago when I first started using it, it is no longer an issue: everything I have is correctly detected in Linux. Not everything is correctly detected in FreeBSD.

So, the only advantages FreeBSD has over some Linux distributions are its init scripts, its ease of upgrade, and its uniformity. Slackware uses *BSD style init scripts. Using slackgrade I can update my installed packages. And I am willing to sacrifice uniformity for a larger selection of software.

If there wasn't Slackware, maybe I'd use FreeBSD. Or maybe I'd use Gentoo ;).

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9379971)

Nope, it's time to compile Gentoo on your system. When you can build a system from scratch, from source, you can fine tune everything for performance. None of this 'built for 386' crap that you find with Red Hat, Debian, or BSD.

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (1)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9381223)

How funny! If FreeBSD runs realllly slow on that computer, imagine trying to compile Gentoo Linux...

Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (1)

dru (4742) | more than 10 years ago | (#9378024)

turn on soft updates (umount /your/fs ; tunefs -n enable /your/fs)

Re:I have.. (0, Flamebait)

Korpo (558173) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375213)

Well, well...

My FreeBSD install died on a PII machine when trying to install a considerable amount of packages (not ports) - who tested that? ;)

Why should I use a Linux compatibility layer if I can simply stick to Linux? (what all the apps where developed for anyway)

Oh, and shame to all Linux distributions, because you had a problem with one program for one distribution!

Hail to anecdotical evidence! ;)

Guess what: Doing Linux drivers, Linux on embedded hardware, Linux administration, and Linux application programming gives me a job. Doing all of these things for *BSD, guess what it gives me??? A nice luke-warm thank-you! Go figure...

Linux: More drivers, more ready-to-run software, more choices, more developers, more community, more mailing lists, more innovation on the application level (virtually none of the FOSS apps are primarily targetted on BSD). Less code throw-away to Apple (OS X - FreeBSD) and Microsoft (Unix Services for Windows - OpenBSD). More books. More preinstalled computers. More platforms to run productive on (not proof-of-concept as NetBSD - kudos, though). More future, way more future.

Re:I have.. (4, Insightful)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375358)

Which packages did you try to install?

Why should I be using a Unix-clone (aka Linux distribution) when there's FreeBSD?

Wrong! Not all apps are being developed for a Linux distro. In fact, Firefox is being developed in Windows and later is ported to other OSes. Apache is being developed in FreeBSD. Most Linux distributions (if not all) are using many stuff from FreeBSD and saying it's a Linux app and not saying where it comes from. Nasty, uh? GNU doesn't have everything so they have to take some userland tools from other OSes (*BSD mostly).

One problem with one Linux distribution? Wrong, gnorw, wrong! The latest version of the Linux kernel has a very annoying bug... it doesn't detect correctly your hd's geometry and messes it up so you can't boot up Windows. So using ANY Linux distro with that kernel will give you problems. Maybe RMS introduced it as he wants everything to be GPL... a monopoly in the open source world! So, like Nas says in his "You can" song, read more learn!

Well, there are FreeBSD developers working on FreeBSD and getting paid for that. John Hubbard, Poul-Henning Kamp, etc.

Linux: more unstable drivers, some stable drivers taken from FreeBSD, fragmented distributions, what it works on Linux distro A might not work on Linux distro B (even using the same package management like RPM!), full of politics, etc.

Virtually none of the FOSS apps are primarily targed on *BSD? Uhmm... once again, read more learn. It seems you don't give a damn about *BSD. It's OK, but please don't talk about something you don't know you. Thanks to BSD Unix and its friendly licence the TCP/IP (and the Internet) was born. Many commands you use on your lovely Linux distro have been taken from FreeBSD, vi was born BSD Unix, Apache was born on FreeBSD, XFree86 was born on FreeBSD, etc. Go get a O'Reilly book about Linux and you'll read... what's a Linux distribution? Linux distribution = Linux kernel + GNU tools + BSD tools.
Repeat with me... read more learn, you don't have to be gangstas, ...

Re:I have.. (4, Informative)

Nighttime (231023) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375801)

One problem with one Linux distribution? Wrong, gnorw, wrong! The latest version of the Linux kernel has a very annoying bug... it doesn't detect correctly your hd's geometry and messes it up so you can't boot up Windows. So using ANY Linux distro with that kernel will give you problems. Maybe RMS introduced it as he wants everything to be GPL... a monopoly in the open source world! So, like Nas says in his "You can" song, read more learn!

Actually, it's the Windows installer that writes the incorrect partition table. When the Linux installer comes along it writes out a correct partition table that then prevents Windows from booting. But don't let the facts get in the way of a rant. :)

Re:I have.. (1)

phrasebook (740834) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375851)

But don't let the facts get in the way of a rant

And don't you let Linux get in the way of blaming Windows when something goes wrong :-)

Whether or not it's Windows' fault, you gotta deal with what's likely to happen. And I think you guys are referring to Fedora 2 - they should've tested that shit and accomodated the bug before release.

Re:I have.. (-1, Flamebait)

Korpo (558173) | more than 10 years ago | (#9376557)

Thanks to BSD Unix and its friendly licence the TCP/IP (and the Internet) was born.

Well, aren't we going a bit back in history to praise *BSD? It's like saying *BSD's biggest achievements are already in the past. ;)

Your "friendly license" is actually feeding Microsoft with free (as in no cost) code for killing Unix.

I guess this issue is much more "killing *BSD" than anything else. And *BSD developers seem to happily sit and wait for it to happen, because they don't seem to care about anything outside their little cocoons, at least that's the impression I get from coverage on kerneltrap.org.

Of course, as long as most of the *BSD guys sit on their laurels or develop for niches, and bathe in their historic glory, they will eventually become completely obsolete. Without the competition from Linux the *BSD developers wouldn't even care... Nothing worse than those youngsters dethroning the graybeards, that want to control who's allowed to play and who not.

Enough about trolling the flamebait! My point was actually: The guy in the original post had some points of anecdotical evidence, and I was responding on his level, clearly and quickly attracting your answer - which will be triggering an angry response to the first part of my post, condescending as can be. Isn't that "slashdotty"?

Frankly I do not care whether someone uses FreeBSD or Linux, they seem equally usable. I'm using Debian GNU/Linux, and it administers quite similarly to FreeBSD, and I simply looked into it first. Since me and my friends simply favor hardware support, FreeBSD is ruled out. I didn't buy a 3D graphics adapter for nothing, for example.

BTW, the figure of 2 million active sites does sound a bit more impressive than it actually is. When looking into their current survey you see 20 million sites, ~70% running Apache. So most sites aren't running FreeBSD, and it would be interesting if they listed "market share", not total numbers. Maybe totals still go up, but market share is sinking, or both rise. You cannot extract that (quickly) from the charts.

Nothing easier than getting the *BSD crowd angry...

Re:I have.. (1)

n0dez (657944) | more than 10 years ago | (#9377046)

Well, thanks to something that happened in the past there's the Internet today and anyone using any OS can connect to it. Isn't that nice?

Not all FreeBSD users and developers think the same way. You may find some using both a Linux distribution and FreeBSD, some are friendly, etc. It's pretty much the same story as with many other things. This is not a religion. Please don't generalize.

Re:I have.. (2, Informative)

Korpo (558173) | more than 10 years ago | (#9377501)

BTW, AFAIK Unix wasn't the 1st system with Internet connection:

Then, in 1980, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency needed a team to implement its brand-new TCP/IP protocol stack on the VAX under Unix. The PDP-10s that powered the ARPANET at that time were aging, and indications that DEC might be forced to cancel the 10 in order to support the VAX were already in the air. DARPA considered contracting DEC to implement TCP/IP, but rejected that idea because they were concerned that DEC might not be responsive to requests for changes in their proprietary VAX/VMS operating system [Libes-Ressler]. Instead, DARPA chose Berkeley Unix as a platform -- explicitly because its source code was available and unencumbered [Leonard]. Berkeley's Computer Science Research Group was in the right place at the right time with the strongest development tools; the result became arguably the most critical turning point in Unix's history since its invention. Until the TCP/IP implementation was released with Berkeley 4.2 in 1983, Unix had had only the weakest networking support. Early experiments with Ethernet were unsatisfactory. An ugly but serviceable facility called UUCP (Unix to Unix Copy Program) had been developed at Bell Labs for distributing software over conventional telephone lines via modem.[16] UUCP could forward Unix mail between widely separated machines, and (after Usenet was invented in 1981) supported Usenet, a distributed bulletin-board facility that allowed users to broadcast text messages to anywhere that had phone lines and Unix systems.
(taken from "The Art of Unix Programming" by Eric S. Raymond)

Of course nobody is giving VMS any credit no matter what it accomplishes anyway ... ;)

Guess you're in for a history lesson, too.

Re:I have.. (1)

javax (598925) | more than 10 years ago | (#9377426)

...because they don't seem to care about anything outside their little cocoons...
yep, but this seems to be more liberal then the linux zealots crusade against everyone else. BSD does not force you.
This is all like comparing Ghandi to Dschinghis Kahn . The empire of Dschinghis was for sure larger and had more soldiers, but that doesnt make Dschengis a nicer person, does it.
We all know the GPL was born out of anger and frustration...

Re:I have.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9382993)

This post is filled with much non-factual material I can't believe it actually has a 5 rating.

Re:I have.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375961)

* Ease of use -- yeah, FreeBSD is SO much easier for a newcomer than Lycoris, Linspire or Mandrake, isn't it?

* Reliability -- my Debian and Slackware systems have never, EVER crashed. Don't use one bug-ridden constantly-beta distro to reflect on ALL Linux. Solid Linux distros like Debian are nearly invincible, with a MUCH larger testing community than FreeBSD's. Plus, releases are supported by the security team for over two years; meanwhile, FreeBSD releases are supported only for 12 measly months.

* Compatibility -- FreeBSD doesn't even approach Linux for widespread x86 hardware support, particularly on laptops.

Re:I have.. (4, Insightful)

kjd (41294) | more than 10 years ago | (#9380934)

"Ease of use" (also "user-friendliness") should not be confused with "short learning curve" or "newbie-friendliness". FreeBSD is extremely easy for me to use, as an experienced user, and that is currently FreeBSD's largest target audience. Moreso for OpenBSD, which gets many "too hard to install" and similar complaints. It is easy to install when you know what you're doing. Making it more intuitive to newcomers to Unix-like OSes is not a priority for them, because it is written for and by hackers/professionals, and a very large userbase would overwhelm the small development team anyhow.

Your other two points do seem to be true. Linux in my experience has in general been reliable for a long time, and a wider variety of hardware (especially niche hardware like particular laptop support, etc). It should be noted that although FreeBSD's security team only publically commits to a year's worth of updates, older versions than this are normally updated when they are affected. It is also relatively simple to upgrade FreeBSD. This definitely does not compare with the commitment of support for other commercial Unix OSes (Solaris, AIX, etc) however.

Anatomy of a Failure (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375166)

When it comes to the subject of operating systems, most of us can agree on at least one thing, and that is the simple plain truth that *BSD is dying. But the deeper question is why? Why did *BSD fail?

Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personae?

The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. That hope is long gone, replaced by an inconsolable despair. A mournful, plaintive nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

very funny. (4, Insightful)

Eivind (15695) | more than 10 years ago | (#9375294)

But, as a matter of fact, if you read the netcraft report you yourself are linking to, then you see that indeed, FreeBSD is significant in webservers largely because a few large hosting-providers use it.

Quoting the article; The reason for this is FreeBSD's deployment with the operators of shared hosting systems, where tens and even hundreds of thousands of sites are collectively administered as part of a single system.

Yahoo alone hosts something like a quarter million sites.

Perhaps this also explains the low media-profile to some degree ? 10000 companies running 25 sites each are likely to collectively generate a lot more buzz than a single site running a quarter million sites.

Re:very funny. (3, Interesting)

aztektum (170569) | more than 10 years ago | (#9379816)

What exactly are you trying to say here?

That BSD is still dead because it's a small number of individual establishments using it, despite the large amount of systems they run it on?

2.5 million servers is still a big number, regardless of how spread out it is. Just b/c people say it's dead doesn't mean 2.5 million servers will be changed to Linux tomorrow.

Re:very funny. (2, Insightful)

Eivind (15695) | more than 10 years ago | (#9380534)

Simple.

I'm saying that with a usage-profile like that. (i.e. not terribly many users, but heavy users) they will tend to get a lot less publicity than they would if the same usage was spread over more users. This migth be part of the explanation for why FreeBSD gets so little attention inspite of doing a nice job for a lot of sites.

Re:very funny. (3, Funny)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 10 years ago | (#9380882)

You're saying since FreeBSD doesn't have 2.5 million prepubescent screaming nerds running it, the media doesn't pay attention? That sounds like a good thing! In fact, it sounds like a new motto:

FreeBSD: Move out of your parent's basement!

Re:very funny. (2, Insightful)

Eivind (15695) | more than 10 years ago | (#9384661)

Hi, don't get so defensive. I'm not trying to diss BSD at all. I'm all in favour of a healthy ecosystem of OSes. My ideal would be a situation where no single OS has a dominant position, that would ensure *real* competition and benefit all.

Besides, would you stop trolling ? I fail to see why it's of any relevance whatsoever, but I live 2000 km from my parents basement, together with my lovely wife and our yet-unborn son. The kid living in his parents basement is a clichee no more true about Linux than the "4.7 users and dying" clichee about BSD. Get over it.

Dead like door nail (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375488)

FreeBSD died because linux is sooooo superior.

Breaking news (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375501)

I just heard the sad news on talk radio. *BSD has died.

FreeBSD: Not Exactly Interesting (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9375529)

quantumice writes "It would seem that despite being dead boring and there only being six of us who read it, Netcraft news has clocked up nearly 1 uninteresting story about FreeBSD. So by my estimates that must mean that I and each of my 5 zealot friends must post this dullard nonsense to Slashdot. That might explain my high bandwidth usage."

Question (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9376894)

I love the way I can build the whole system from source, but I am wanting to try out Linux kernel. Is there a similar Linux system for free? Thanx.

Re:Question (3, Informative)

MarcQuadra (129430) | more than 10 years ago | (#9383392)

Yes, I don't know if you're serious, but Gentoo Linux is a build-from-source Linux distro that has a ports system called 'portage'

I myself use Gentoo because I prefer Linux over the *BSDs I've tried, but Gentoo lets me build from source VERY easily.

Cheers! (2, Funny)

funwithBSD (245349) | more than 10 years ago | (#9377403)

From user 5 of 6.

Re:Cheers! (1)

name773 (696972) | more than 10 years ago | (#9382821)

Cheers! where everybody knows your name...

Monitoring... (3, Interesting)

alexatrit (689331) | more than 10 years ago | (#9378109)

This is all rather dependant on the accuracy of Netcraft. Although most of the FreeBSD systems I maintain are identified correctly by Netcraft, there are several that always come back as unknown. Netcraft OS detections seems to be reasonable, but not perfect. Their webserver detection is as accurate as it can be, but uptime checks seem to be even less perfect.

I guess I must be (1)

josepha48 (13953) | more than 10 years ago | (#9379002)

one of your friends ;-) ..

*BSD is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9379355)

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 [amazingkreskin.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 dabblers. *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

*BSD Users (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9380757)

There are only 3 kinds of *BSD users:

- those who have migrated to another OS (former users)
- those who are planning to migrate to another OS (frustrated users)
- hobbyists

come back ... (1)

curator_thew (778098) | more than 10 years ago | (#9382303)


When you've done a proper study:

- investigate the use cases and # of use of different OS's in various market segments;
- investigate trends/decline/fall over the past couple of years, etc;

Otherwise, this is all just wanking around based upon individual data points that are interesting in themselves, but are absolutely useless in conveying a broader picture.

The best part about FreeBSD (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9382558)

Is that you don't have to deal with all that GPL bullshit.

BSD = Capitalism friendly

6? (1, Funny)

JamesTRexx (675890) | more than 10 years ago | (#9383256)

Nono.. There must be 7 because I use it too and I don't know any of you other 6 guys (or gals if there are any, but then this is slashdot and if even the Linux users can't get any, how on earth are dead FreeBSD users supposed to get any).

Elegy for *BSD (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9383450)


Elegy For *BSD


I am a *BSD user
and I try hard to be brave
That is a tall order
*BSD's foot is in the grave.

I tap at my toy keyboard
and whistle a happy tune
but keeping happy's so hard,
*BSD died so soon.

Each day I wake and softly sob
Nightfall finds me crying
Not only am I a zit faced slob
but *BSD is dying.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>