VMWare/Quake 3/Unreal Tournament on FreeBSD

There have been a spate of reports about the usefulness of FreeBSD's Linux ABI recently. First off, Daeron wrote in with the news that VMWare now runs on FreeBSD, thanks to the efforts of Vladimir Silyaev. Vladimir has a page up with instructions and caveats. Secondly, Jacob Hart has confirmed that the Unreal Tournament Demo works flawlessly. Finally, Mark van Woerkom has created FreeBSD ports skeletons for Linux Quake 3 Test.

hrm

[mistalinux]

I'm all about open source, but I definately agree with the other poster. This should definately go in the BSD section. You know, the one that was created to show that Slashdot is not just a Linux bigot forum.

This is *not* flamebait, just a true opinion of a dedicated slashdot reader :)

Re:hrm

[mattc]

This is in the BSD section! See the red coloring..?

Re:hrm

[Anonymous Coward]

Then perhaps Slashdot should make a Linux section and relegate all Linux articles to said section; until that time, however, until the time where no operating system news reaches the front page(and be honest, every trivial piece of Linux news does reach the front page), then BSD stuff has just as much right to occupy front page space as does Linux stuff.

Re:hrm

[nikc]

mistalinux wrote:

This should definately go in the BSD section.

It is, that's why it's got the BSD section colours.

N

Re:Why is this shite marked as "news"

[hattig]

I like your -5 karma. -- from one message !!!

I wonder if it is going to go down anymore?

The front page of Slashdot provides a mixture of news which may or may not be of interest to people. If you aren't interested in the topic, then don't read it. That is the simple option. There are a lot of people out there who are interested in FreeBSD, and run it at home (like me) and the news that some more software will run natively is great.

Not everybody runs Linux. I have run Linux (SUSE and Red Hat) and I have recently turned to FreeBSD 3.3. I also run AmigaOS, because I like its architecture, messaging system, ARexx, datatypes and proper shared libraries, amongst other things. Doesn't mean to say I think it rules supreme though, as it is way out of date in many areas.

Variety is the spice of life. Otherwise there would only be DOS.

Re:Why is this shite marked as "news"

[The Muffin Man]

Everytime the name "BSD" is mentioned, some morons feel the urge to tell us that Linux "rulez" or stuff like that. Hey, what's your problem?

I'm using FreeBSD on my server and Linux on my laptop and I'm happy with both of them. I want to read news about both these operating systems on Slashdot.

I don't need news about Star Wars, but - hey, no problem - I simply don't read them.

If you really think that BSD systems shouldn't be mentioned here, why don't you propose a poll in that direction?

Two more things:

1. In case you still didn't realize: This article IS in the BSD section.

2. What about a statement like "Why don't you Linux cats give it up? Windows rulez the know universe - and then some" two or three years ago?

NetBSD created the Linux emul subsystem...

[perry]

Just wanted to point out that NetBSD originated the Linux syscall emulator FreeBSD uses. By definition, we run anything they do in this stuff -- we created the code, after all. :)

What's needed now are native ports.

[Brett Glass]

It's nice for FreeBSD users that Quake, VMWare, StarOffice, and other products published as native binaries for Linux can run on the Linux ABI, but it may be bad for the platform in the long term. Vendors will simply say, "We don't need to support FreeBSD; just run the Linux version!" Such an approach would consign FreeBSD to being Linux's ugly stepsister -- potentially forever.

This has happened to other platforms. The Windows emulation in OS/2 virtually eliminated development of native OS/2 applications.

Another example: FreeBSD has a larger installed base than Solaris, and yet there are more native ports to Solaris than to FreeBSD. FreeBSD users should be concerned that this is a sign that the phenomenon mentioned above is starting to happen.

My take: FreeBSD users will have to bombard manufacturers with requests for native ports to overcome the negative effects of emulation.

--Brett Glass

With 3DFX support?!

[Ledge Kindred]

Can someone clarify or point to a place I can find more info on the UTdemo stuff? I have a friend who is a BSD-devotee and would like to use some of the Linux software that uses GLIDE/3DFX but apparently the "/dev/3dfx" interface that most software uses nowadays is something he's never been able to get working under FreeBSD because you have to make a kernel module for GLIDE to access the hardware in non-root environments and that's a totally Linux-specific interface. Does this mean someone's "ported" the /dev/3dfx driver to FreeBSD or what?

-=-=-=-=-

VMware

[Chalst]

I am delighted to see that VM ware now works with FreeBSD: this was
the one piece of software that I really regretted not being able to
run under FreeBSD.

I suppose it is too early to hope that there is much user experience
of the port in terms of robustness?

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[Chalst]

Thought provoking post, but I disagree with the pessimism. FreeBSD
and Linux appeal to different kinds of user: Linux appeals more to the
innovation hungry user, whilst FreeBSD appeals more to users who care
more about the robustness of the whole system.

I also think that free software is much more able to weather a decline
in fashionability: FreeBSD doesn't *need* to be the hippest OS on the
block for year in, year out incremental development to be
made by the people who value its strengths.

Yes. With 3DFX support!

[Anonymous Coward]

...but apparently the "/dev/3dfx" interface that most software uses nowadays ... access the hardware in non-root environments...

The short answer? You can't.

Nobody has ported the Linux /dev/3dfx interface to FreeBSD (yet) so you'll have to be content accessing your 3DFX hardware the "old fashioned" way by running the program as root.

Now before you all start screaming about the security implications of doing this, remember:

It's not like you'll be running the client on some critical machine such as your network's firewall, proxy, DNS, etc. If indeed you choose to do this, it's probable that the game client is the least of your network's security conserns...

Only the root user can make use of the XFree86 DGA extentions' full potential.

In the Q3A documentation ID recommend running Q3A as root anyway. 'Nuff said.

Oops; duplicate posting.

[Brett Glass]

Moderators: Please moderate the above down to -2, or remove it altogether.

Re:BSD World domination

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it is looking more and more like BSD is the choice for our companies serious computing needs.

I love Linux, but in each release we see more and more code hastily thrown into the system in order to remain in the "race" for the desktop.

It might even do it - you will wind up with a desktop OS that can play games, runn all the latest downloaded source and all the rest uf it on your stereo sound card... and it will be even less stable than it is now.

So...

* (Free|Open)BSD for servers and firewalls
* Linux for desktop machines

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[Brett Glass]

What a platform finds it hard to weather is a dearth of useful applications. Why do so many people still use Windows, like it or not? Because they can't get the apps for other platforms.

Likewise, BSD users will be forced to other platforms unless there is native application support. Emulation is a stopgap measure, but does not cut it for mission-critical work. Software vendors will refuse to support applications when they run under emulation.

--Brett

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[Chalst]

Native ports will tend to `furnish themselves' when it comes to free software, so emulation is crucial really only for commercial software.

The rise of Linux means more and more free software is being written. For applications software like star office it is likely we will have to rely on emulation, but I don't really see what the issue is: it isn't harder to use shrinkwrapped software under an emulator than it is `native code'. I don't see why `mission critical' is an issue if one trusts the emulator.

Packages used to run other packages, like VMware, is a different matter: this I would like to see run native code.

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[crumley]

Another example: FreeBSD has a larger installed base than Solaris, and yet there are more native ports to Solaris than to FreeBSD.

Does FreeBSD really have more users than Solaris? Or does it just have more users than Solaris/x86? I don't have any data either way, but I'd be surprised if there aren't more Sparc boxes out there than FreeBSD boxes.

As for having more native ports, it doesn't surprise me at all that Solaris has the lead. It is probably a relatively easy port from Sparc Solaris to x86 Solaris, so in many cases it might be a no brainer to do the port if there is any customer demand. And considering there are probably very big differences between the Solaris and FreeBSD markets, and the fact that a strong company like Sun is behind Solaris, it doesn't surprise that more companies are natively supporting Solaris.

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[Mr. Protocol]

FreeBSD does not intend to displace Linux. It represents a choice in the market, not a competitor aiming to crush the competition. It is currently most popular among those who run large servers, and the tools for mounting large servers do run as native ports.

However, it is a strongly stated goal of FreeBSD to be binary-compatible with Linux to the greatest extent possible, and I think this article indicates that FreeBSD is far along the path to that goal. Again, the aim is maximum freedom of choice, which is why I believe that the FreeBSD camp sees the port of the Debian user-space software to a FreeBSD kernel as a good thing.

It is not that FreeBSD wants to displace Linux on the desktop. It is that FreeBSD wants to support those who want to run FreeBSD on their desktops, without penalizing them for choosing something other than Linux.

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[GPB]

My take: FreeBSD users will have to bombard manufacturers with requests for native ports to overcome the negative effects of emulation.

It isn't emulation at all. It is binary compatibility. With the linux libs installed (and it is very easy to do with ports), FreeBSD should be able to run both FreeBSD and Linux binaries natively. It isn't perfect, but it does get rid of a lot of the negative aspects of emulation.

-B

Re:hrm

[SirGeek]

But it doesn't show up when you look for topic=bsd. [slashdot.org] I believe THAT is what was getting referred to.

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[norbot]

I agree whole-heartedly. Case and point is Corel WordPerfect. I have been running the Linux distribution on my FreeBSD box for several months now. I have had no problems with the emulation. The installation process was also painless thanks to the ports collection.

Re:What's needed now is a binary interface

[norbot]

No vendor wants to support a multitude of platforms. The cost of porting the software and creating distributions for a fragmented market is high. The sales channel faces similar difficulties. However, a combined market that encompasses all Linux distributions and *BSD can be very attractive to a vendor. The goal should be to homogenize these OSes sufficiently to allow a single binary software distribution to serve all. This would require a consistent binary interface in addition to an abstraction of the file system layout. I believe that this could be done without jeopardizing the uniqueness of any of these OSes. As GPB pointed out in an earlier post, FreeBSD already provides binary compatibility with Linux rather than an emulation of Linux.

Re:What's needed now are native ports.

[edhall]

What's wrong with running the Linux version of software? You've got to drop Windows-think; we're not playing Microsoft's game here. It's not zero-sum. Linux is not BSD's enemy. To a large extent, a gain for one is a gain for all the free OSes.

Are companies like Yahoo going to move from FreeBSD to Linux just because the latter has more native apps? I doubt it. FreeBSD has a secure niche in the server market, and neither it nor the other BSD's show any signs of resting on their laurels. Let Linux claim the desktop--if it can do so before the whole concept of the desktop PC becomes an anachronism. BSD will still be there, humming away in the infrastructure.

OS/2 comparisons are meaningless. BSD doesn't have the full force of Microsoft seeding FUD about its emulation and actively trying to change ABI's from under it. BSD isn't charging developers a premium to develop for its platform. BSD can't hang ISV's out to dry like IBM did. Review your OS history: Windows emulation didn't kill OS/2--IBM did. It was a textbook case of a mainframe vendor making all the wrong moves for the desktop market despite their superior product.

Here's a thought experiment: if IBM had put the sourecode for OS/2 under the BSDL (before MS managed to squirm the Windows ABI out from under it), don't you think Windows would have been booted to also-ran status by other OS vendors, each building on the OS/2 code base and competing to be the best "better than Windows" OS? Free software has a wholly different dynamic than the commercial software world. It doesn't depend upon the welfare of a single corporate division for its continued existance.

As for this "negative effect of emulation," I fail to see any, unless you take the "Linux Uber Ales" contingent too seriously. Serious Linux folks are embarassed by those guys; I've seen little other than respect for BSD among the linux-kernel group, for instance, just as I see more and more respect for Linux among the BSD core team. (I subscribe to both of their mailing lists.) BSD is growing. Make it easier for those folks entranced by the Linux hoopla to try BSD, and it will grow even faster. Try to divide the BSD and Linux worlds too strongly, and you'll only hurt both. Emulation is an unmitigated Good Thing, since it helps put BSD on an equal footing with the media's darling Penguin without making alternative (read: non-MS) OSes more forbiding for vendors through unnecessary fragmentation.

-Ed

What of Alpha and others?

[Jacobian]

Doesn't this whole binary compatibility thing ignore platforms other then x86?

Re:VMware

[bugg]

I've used it, its nice.
Slow on my box, but i think that at leas 99% of that is at the fault of my box and VMWare eating resources :D

Now we just need vmnet

Re:FIRST *NAKED AND PETRIFIED* POST!!!!!!!

[nerdling]

wow. me too.