FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE 414
Triumph The Insult C writes "FreeBSD 4.7 is out. Here is the announcement. New items include an option for IPFW2, a number of disk controller updates, security updates, and some changes to userland. Remember, please use a mirror." Among other things, the release announcement says: "FreeBSD 4.7 also incorporates all of the security and bug fixes from
4.6.2 (released in August 2002), including several ATA-related
bugfixes, updates for OpenSSL and OpenSSH, and fixes to address
several security advisories." And here are the release notes.
Heh jsut in time :) (Score:3, Insightful)
No, dont ask me why they were selling BSD (quite heavily actually) along side Linux on most stalls.
Oh, and a note to KDE and Gnome teams, having blank stalls with two spotty kids sitting at laptops, with no promotional items or banners or posters really isnt a good way to promote your product guys. (And believe it or not, they were sat next to each other, AND NOT FIGHTING
Re:Why run *BSD (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What is the relevance of FreeBSD today? (Score:5, Insightful)
And why stop now? Merge Mozilla/Konqueror/Opera to create the "Super-Duper-Magical Internet & File browser(tm)" too!
Damn, I think we have a winner in that product! Maybe we should call it Windows XP?
Really, I often read on
I don't want a "single best-of-breed Free Unix distribution" just because such a thing isn't possible. So instead of having only one distribution "to bind them all", I prefer having the choice between a lot of good and different ones.
no java? who cares (Score:4, Insightful)
No native JDK 1.4.
It's on linux, windows and solaris. The announcment of the license thingy with Sun came out 12/01 and I haven't heard anything yet.
Still no CARDBUS support yet? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the only thing keeping me from running it on my laptop.
Re:What is the relevance of FreeBSD today? (Score:2, Insightful)
That's kind of funny. The nvidia driver works fine under x86 Linux. What it really comes down to is you can have 15,000 different Linux distributions but they're all basically the same when it comes to kernel, libraries, X distribution, etc. So, getting the Nvidia driver to work under Debian is just as easy as getting it working under Red Hat or Mandrake. FreeBSD on the other hand seems to be a stable solid target with a well supported standard configuration base yet it has much less driver support available for it. Why is that? Less users spurring development I suppose.
Re:What is the relevance of FreeBSD today? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously. I have several custom ISO's I made for myself for easy deployment of boxes. They all cvsup after install, and then install a ream of ports suited to the purpose of the machine. Like a webserver, database server etc. Complete with a scripted sysinstall! It's very easy to do. "make release" is my bitch :)
Boot from the CD, partition/label, go have coffee and return to a machine ready to deploy. I love it.
Re:Ehem... (Score:2, Insightful)
The Unix philosophy is to have many small tools. So, while you could already do yes n | cp, why now add an '-n' option to do the same?
PS: the moderator could at least give some classification...
Re:This is the funny part... (Score:5, Insightful)
But really who cares? Pick an OS... and just use it. I don't see FreeBSD in competition with Linux anymore or vice versa. There are pretty clearly different communities of users with different values. This leads to different kernels and different levels of documentation and standards and practices. Wow, that's pretty general but I think its also common sense.
USE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU AND KEEP YOUR RELIGION TO YOURSELF
Re:FreeBSD rules! (Score:1, Insightful)
- all the stuff I like (bash, Python, Java, PostGres, webmin) is there
- KDE is fast, very fast!
- boot time is amazingly fast
- the Ports system is *amazing*
what's not to like about it?
What a silly comment to be modded up.
Sorry, but everything you mentioned exists in every Linux distro.
If you want Ports, Gentoo Linux has an improved system.
Basically, everything you mentioned in your post can be done, now, with Linux (more specifically, Gentoo.)
If you're looking for reasons to use it, just be honest with yourself: You want to use something less popular so you can feel l337. And we all know that Linux is just way too popular for some people here.
Re:FreeBSD rules! (Score:3, Insightful)
If I absolutely had to use Linux as my main system, I would probably use Gentoo. No doubt about it. But the mere word "linux" is not enough to make me switch back. FreeBSD does what I want it to do and does it well. It's not about being 1337, it's about using the system I want to use.
p.s. I bet both FreeBSD *and* Gentoo users are wondering what all those complaints of sluggish KDE coming from Redhat, Mandrake and Debian users are about...
Re:What is the relevance of FreeBSD today? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What is the relevance of FreeBSD today? (Score:2, Insightful)
- Documentation! That is: MANPAGES. Lots of 'em, updated and well written. In fact, you can (should) expect to find a manpage or nine for just about every single file/program/function/device in core. That means a lot less hunting around on the net when something isn't quite right or when you're programming.
The handbook is nice too, but the thing I miss the most when on a linux-system (any linux-system) is good manpages.(Btw, does anyone know what the regexp-engine in gnu-sed 3.02 can do? I'm trying to port my favorite $display_filter...)
Re:FreeBSD does NOT rule (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes it does prevent you from selling it, or at least it does prevent you from selling it to the second customer. Why would they bother to purchase it from you if they can just get it from the first customer?
The GPL causes organisations to transition from a sale/licensing model to a professional services model which is a rather large shift for any company that doesn't do it---and frankly the professional services model doesn't work in a number of markets.
This is an argument that I've seen many times, and I don't quite understand exactly how users have the opportunity to get screwed. I mean, ``oh no, someone can put their own license on BSD code!!!'' Well, this does not mean that they can put their license on the original BSD code. So what if they add a few features and slap their own license on it? Does it matter? How exactly are the users getting ``screwed''? Maybe the users might ``get screwed'' if they choose to buy the new code and accept the EULA on it. But, why exactly should I care that they make that choice? In fact, who am I to deny them that choice?
The GPL puts unreasonable restrictions on what I may do with code, and so I generally try to avoid contributing to projects that use it. It is actually too expensive for me to do so, since I do not want to be legally required to provide the source code to things that I write for free to anyone who asks for them for the next 3 years. By using the GPL, I actually ``get screwed'' for writing code. It costs me additional money and time beyond what I'm willing to do for free.
As an example. Say a friend of mine is having a hard time with a piece of GPLed code and he asks for my help. I hack it a bit, and send him the compiled program. It still doesn't quite work, so we repeat the procedure 5 times until it works exactly the way we think that it should and then I send him the final code. Two years later, he still has all 5 binaries that I sent him and src to the 5th one. He asks me for src to the 3rd one, which I don't have because I editted it to make the 4th one. Now, I am in flagrant violation of the GPL and my [ex-]friend may be able to start legal proceedings and what not against me.
It simply isn't worth my time dealing with any of that crap for free, so I will only work on GPLed code if I am paid a lot of money to do it. No sane person assumes a liability without compensation.