Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Operating Systems Unix Software Upgrades BSD

DragonFly BSD 3.0 Released 102

Posted by timothy
from the it's-full-of-bug dept.
An anonymous reader writes with word of the release earlier this week, after eight months of development, of DragonFly BSD 3.0. The release includes improved scalability through finer-grained locking, improvements to the HAMMER file system in low-memory configurations, and a TrueCrypt-compatible disk encryption system. DragonFly is an installable system, but it can also be run live from CD, DVD, or USB key.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DragonFly BSD 3.0 Released

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Will Try it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968&gmail,com> on Sunday February 26, 2012 @09:07AM (#39163317) Journal

    Why not use one of the bazillion free download managers? I assume by your sig you don't use Windows but I assume Linux has similar software.

    As for TFA, how does this compare to the other major OSes, like OSX, Win 7, Ubuntu, or even PC-BSD? What advantages does it give over the others? What are its best features? Why would you recommend this over other OSes? This is why i hate announcements like TFA because they don't give someone who doesn't use the OS a reason why we should care or try it.

  • Re:Will Try it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by unixisc (2429386) on Sunday February 26, 2012 @11:48AM (#39164199)

    The BSDs - FreeBSD, OpenBSD, et al, would have to go through an official and formal certification w/ the Open Group in order to be certified as Unix. I don't doubt that they'd pass, but then, I don't doubt that Linux would pass either. That too, every version would have to be certified separately. I doubt that any distro would want to go thru the expense of doing it, and so the only certified Unixes out there are the ones like Solaris, HP/UX, AIX and OS-X.

    The licensing issue is also somewhat tangential here - if a BSD has something that Linux hasn't, a customer will have no issues working w/ BSD, since BSD code can be incorporated in and released as a part of anything from proprietary to GPL3 software. If Linux has something that BSD hasn't, customers who need it will work around it, like Google did w/ Android. On the Linux side, I can see it getting confusing, since Linux is not going to become GPL3, but the things it uses - glibc, gcc, etc have become GPL3, which is a source for potential confusion.

    Aside from that, I agree w/ the others like kestasjk below - few will care about whether it's genuine Unix or genuinely free software.

  • Re:Will Try it (Score:4, Insightful)

    by smash (1351) on Sunday February 26, 2012 @11:04PM (#39168607) Homepage Journal

    I tell you what, the BSDs would be a lot more likely to pass than Linux, as they're directly descended from the AT&T unix code base, and continue to do things the "Unix way". Mac OS X (largely FreeBSD userland) has been certified as Unix. Linux is a clusterfuck of NIH syndrome and GPL software that is often different for the sake of being different.

    And the GPL is NOT free. It contains restrictions on what others can do with the code you release (i.e., they can't close it). Just because you might not like the possibility of code being closed, restricting people from doing that is not more free than allowing people to do anything with it.

Our business in life is not to succeed but to continue to fail in high spirits. -- Robert Louis Stevenson

Working...