Updated FreeBSD Release Schedule 347
Serin K Medusa writes: "The folks over at FreeBSD.org have put up a new 'roadmap' detailing the plan of action for the remainder of the year. In particular, check out the plans for a 5.0 preview and expected dates for 4.6.
Interesting reading if you're following -CURRENT."
Well planned release (Score:5, Interesting)
I would really appreciate if Linux kernel set stable checkpoint to indicate "This is a stable kernel" instead of 2.4 series trial and error approach.
Re:FreeBSD is Dying (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:5.0 is a pretty big change. (Score:1, Interesting)
Furthermore, and, er, "reversely" (can I say that?) will some of the stuff that Apple has been working on (integration of FreeBSD over the micro-kernel who's name I forget, something to do with drivers, etc.) be integrated back into FreeBSD?
With Jason Hubbard now working at Apple and with the *nix underpinnings of MacOS X (IOW: Darwin), how much cross-polination will occur?
Re:Well planned release (Score:2, Interesting)
...and it shows. (Score:5, Interesting)
The packages/ports collection rocks. Software works as documented. Documentation exists.
I can't wait to see all the goodies planned for FreeBSD-5.
Anyone who is interested in UNIX should check it out. It is one of the very "cleanest" implimentations out there, and it also happens to perform quite well.
Go ahead download the
-Peter
Re:Well planned release (Score:2, Interesting)
Obviously if Linux has never crashed on you, you have missed out on the 2.4 series.
There is one thing that Linux has going for it that BSD does not, and that is the experimental factor. People extend Linux in crazy ways that BSD just doesn't go. That is a direct reflection of design philosopy of each system.
Re:hear, hear! I ditched linux for freebsd. (Score:2, Interesting)
Just last week I tried out FreeBSD 4.5-RELEASE and I must say I'm impressed. The whole thing feels really professional and tightly bundled, and the ports tree is a dream. I havn't found anything that isn't straightforward. It still blows my mind that I was able to do whatever I needed to do by looking in logical places, or at worst doing my one stop shopping for info at www.freebsd.org.
The project feels like one team built the whole works as opposed to everything being a mishmash from whoever showed up for amature night.
Best of all, I don't have to look at that fat, stupid penguin. It was cute a couple of years ago, but its a really insipid logo that makes it seem like a kiddie project.
Re:It's Interesting to Me... (Score:5, Interesting)
The FreeBSD license doesn't preclude commercialization, which makes it far, far, far, more appealing for putting on commercial users' desktops.
Of course, the rock solid stability, better planned releases, centralized control, yadda, yadda, yadda, are no doubt factors that made it more appealing than Linux as a base. But even if those things were all equal, the GPL alone would have prevented Apple from basing OS X upon Linux.
Similarly, I'm working on two projects that will be commercialized; I'm using FreeBSD as the base, and sleeping well knowing that I won't have any licensing grief down the road. Linux and it's supporting utilities are just too fraught with GPL restrictions; if the core technology of Linux were leaps and bounds above FreeBSD, it would be more of a dilemma. But in terms of the kernel and core utilities, they really are neck and neck. I make my living creating this value-added code, I can't afford to give the source away for my modifications or extensions, and live off of services or whatever. (And the zealots will no doubt scream "if you don't like the GPL, don't use software that uses it!" Well, despite the kneejerk reaction that might be, that's exactly the right advice in my case, I'll use FreeBSD.)
I do think it's a shame for Linux, though. If Linux didn't have this restriction, and had four or five offshoots of commercialization, I think it'd be taken a lot more seriously on the desktop. With the release of OS/X, BSD really did leapfrog Linux in terms of popular acceptance on the desktop. Linux might have been the beneficiary of this, if it were more BSD-like in its licensing. And FreeBSD seem to be gaining even more momentum every day.
In any case, choice is good. I love Linux, but I choose BSD.
-me
BSD is DEAD? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Well planned release (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm confused. Isn't that the point of the auditing? ``Here, we found this problem. Here's a patch to fix.'', ``Here, this code was sloppy, here's a patch to clean it up so it doesn't create a problem in the future'', etc?