Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
BSD Operating Systems

The BSD Family Tree 116

Posted by Hemos from the learning-about-it-all dept.
A reader writes: "Every time BSD gets mentioned on Slashdot, the usual round of questions get asked. Most queries want to know what the differences in the BSDs are. For the April DaemonNews, James Howard has written the answer."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The BSD Family Tree More

The BSD Family Tree

Comments Filter:

  • Re:Before everyone else says it... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Similarly, RTMX is a set of extenstions to OpenBSD.

    I believe you meant to write RTFM.
  • ...neither do you ;)
  • More importantly, I don't believe Mach was "based on" any BSD. Mach is Mach and quite a bit different from a BSD kernel.


    Now there is the Lites server for Mach that provides 4.3lite services but that's not mach. I'm not sure why there is always the rush to put mach based microkernel designs in to the BSD family tree, it's not that different than taking the NT posix API layer and trying to label NT as a brand or flavor of UNIX.

  • You have to love these two.

    When I was using 386BSD in 91? (why not - I'd heard of BSD Unix, but not this Linux thing), Bill and Lynne would post to the 386bsd newsgroup.

    If someone was criticizing 386BSD to strongly, or unfairly, or a response to something bordering on flame was needed, they would sometimes both have a response there.

    Lynne was VERY straight-forward in her responses - along the lines of to hell with you, you stupid moron. (Not that she said things like that, but you always knew where you stood).

    Bill was a little more verbose in subtle, in that when he got done insulting you and telling you to piss off, you may even think you have been complimented and should say thank you.

    I really wish I still had some of the threads that illustrated this - it was a great fun to watch.
  • I used to hate comments like this. Recently I came to realize how much truth they contain. A friend of mine w/ a moderate understanding of *NIX asked me to help a (15 year old) friend of his install Linux. I agreed, and then found out that the purpose of this install was to make the kid's Half-Life server more stable. After about 10 minutes of 31337 questions, and asking why I went to a real university instead of a "computer college" where they "don't mess around with all that worthless history and stuff, they just teach you computers," I wanted to commit a murder-suicide. It's not often that you can feel your IQ leaking out your ear.

    I wish there was a way to keep such people from using Linux (as bad as that sounds) because they make those of us who use it to do real work look like hax0rz and script-kiddies.

    Just my $0.02 (and probably a match to start a flame war)
  • OK, maybe I've been misunderstood. I don't give a flying rat's ass how "cool" someone using Linux, or BSD, or windows is for that matter. I'm merely commenting that it is unfortunate that unlike the user base of windows, the user base of Linux tends to be judged based on the script-kiddies that use it.

    Now, i've bitten a little too hard on this flame-bait, and I'm going to get on with my life.
  • See what I said in comment #11.
  • Okay, have to say it. My copy of OS X arrived right at the same time this went up (I got back from the door and decided to load up Slashdot while opening the box). So I will need to install it soon enough.
  • NeXT's product line was so confusing I didn't think I'd get it right either and it looks like I didn't. I was only hoping to get the point across and I think I succeeded in that.
  • They aren't. They are packages you install on top of FreeBSD.

  • Re:Before everyone else says it... (Score:4)

    by howardjp ( 5458 ) on Tuesday April 03, 2001 @02:25PM (#317191) Homepage
    SecureBSD and TrustedBSD [trustedbsd.org] are really just extensions to FreeBSD. Similarly, RTMX is a set of extenstions to OpenBSD. I didn't think it would be good to include them in this. Addtionally, with BSD/OS effectively merging with FreeBSD, I didn't include it either. However, it gives me an idea for a new article... :)
  • From Unix History [wanadoo.fr]

    NeXTSTEP 0.8 Oct. 12 1988
    NeXTSTEP 1.0 Sep. 18 1989
    NeXTSTEP 2.0 Sep. 18 1990
    NeXTSTEP 2.1 Mar. 25, 1991
    NeXTSTEP 3.3 Feb. 1995
    OpenStep 4 1996
    Rhapsody DR1 Sep. 1997
    Rhapsody DR2 May 1998
    Darwin 0.1 Mar. 16, 1999
    MacOS X Server 1.0 Mar. 16, 1999
    MacOS X (DP1) May 10, 1999
    Darwin 0.2 May 13, 1999
    MacOS X Server 1.02 Jul. 22, 1999
    Darwin 0.3 Aug. 16, 1999
    MacOS X (DP2) Nov. 10, 1999
    MacOS X Server 1.2 Jan. 14, 2000
    MacOS X (DP3) Feb. 14, 2000
    Darwin 1.0 Apr. 5, 2000
    Darwin 1.1 May 15, 2000
    MacOS X (DP4) May 15, 2000
    MacOS X (beta) Sept. 13, 2000
    MacOS X Server 1.2v3 Oct. 27, 2000
    Darwin 1.21 Nov. 15, 2000
    MacOS X 10.0 Mar. 24, 2001

  • Same thing annotated:

    1. NeXTSTEP 0.8 Oct. 12 1988 - First running version of NeXTSTEP
    2. NeXTSTEP 1.0 Sep. 18 1989
    3. NeXTSTEP 2.0 Sep. 18 1990
    4. NeXTSTEP 2.1 Mar. 25, 1991
    5. NeXTSTEP 3.3 Feb. 1995
    6. OpenStep 4 1996 - Ported to multiple architectures
    7. Rhapsody DR1 Sep. 1997 - After buying Apple for -400 million this is the new direction, to run on both PPC & Wintel
    8. Rhapsody DR2 May 1998 - Last release, developers revolt & threaten to abandon Mac, rethink already under way.
    9. Darwin 0.1 Mar. 16, 1999 - Apple breaks new ground Open Sourcing core of their next-gen OS, to run on PPC & x86
    10. MacOS X Server 1.0 Mar. 16, 1999 - First commercial release, Rhapsody-derived, PPC only
    11. MacOS X (DP1) May 10, 1999 - Retooled next-gen OS, to include backwards-compatibility, PPC only
    12. Darwin 0.2 May 13, 1999
    13. MacOS X Server 1.02 Jul. 22, 1999
    14. Darwin 0.3 Aug. 16, 1999
    15. MacOS X (DP2) Nov. 10, 1999
    16. MacOS X Server 1.2 Jan. 14, 2000
    17. MacOS X (DP3) Feb. 14, 2000
    18. Darwin 1.0 Apr. 5, 2000
    19. Darwin 1.1 May 15, 2000
    20. MacOS X (DP4) May 15, 2000
    21. MacOS X (beta) Sept. 13, 2000
    22. MacOS X Server 1.2v3 Oct. 27, 2000 - Likely last release of Rhapsody-derived server
    23. Darwin 1.21 Nov. 15, 2000
    24. MacOS X 10.0 Mar. 24, 2001 - First commercial release of new MacOS X
    25. ?MacOS X Server 10.0? ~ April 24, 2001
    26. ?MacOS X 10.n? ~ July, 2001 - First release installed on hardware
  • Apple computer has long held a niche among the least computer-literate in the marketplace.

    I dunno about this -- the most computer illiterate people are Wintel's primary demographic. This is why Intel promotes the Pentium III to make your Internet faster (and gets away with it).

    Apple's demographic tends to be holier-than-thou arty types and interface nuts. My experience is that Mac OS users tend to be very computer aware, if not literate, because since 1991 or so, you have to have really loved the Mac OS to put up with expensive hardware, corporate idiocy, and really, really poor (official) technical support.
    "Beware by whom you are called sane."

  • I dunno about this -- the most computer illiterate people are Wintel's primary demographic. This is why Intel promotes the Pentium III to make your Internet faster (and gets away with it).
    And this is different from selling a computer by color?

    Yes, it is. The first is a lie (okay, 90% untruth, or deliberate fudge). The second is filling a desire in the marketplace.

    Don't try to be cute if you're going to be wrong.

    But, in my experience, the large majority of Mac users are in fact quite stupid when it comes to how their system works.

    *sigh* The large majority of any random group of computer users don't understand how their system works. This doesn't prove your point.

    A *larger* majority of drivers have no *clue* how an internal combustion engine works! However, the group that drives BMWs or Mercedes tend to be savvier drivers than drive Camaros or Trans Ams or Firebirds.

    I know it's dangerous to use an automobile analogy, but I'll try to head off the complaint I know you'll have:

    "But those are more expensive!"
    Yes, so are Macs (in general). However, I'm speaking from a quality/performance perspective. A Trans/Camaro/Firebird driver might or might not go for a BMW or Mercedes if price were not an issue, but a BMW or Mercedes driver would NEVER go to a Trans/Camaro/Bird, regardless of price.
    "Beware by whom you are called sane."

  • You're welcome to disagree, but I'm a bit amazed at your vitriol.

    but mac users are knuckleheads, bar none (if this is what you meant by computer awareness, then I do agree with you). I've listened to Mac users in CompUSA harp about how you have to have a mac if you want to play mp3s or dvds.

    Bar none? Then both I and Steve Wozniak are knuckleheads? You're either one hell of an asshole or an idiot, then.

    In my experience as an unofficial computer support person, I have fewer problems with Mac users than Wintel users. I can match you anecdote for anecdote, if that's your wish.

    Child, they've been pulling this shit since 1984. Nothing new. The only difference is that there was free technical support.

    But there was nothing to compete with it until about 1991 or so, when Windows really started to make inroads with 3.0. But, of course, you just wanted to spew venom in an unfocused rage. My mistake...


    "Beware by whom you are called sane."

  • Bar none? Then both I and Steve Wozniak are knuckleheads?
    I guess so. Wozniak I can omit, because I'd tend to believe that he's never had to deal with his own company form a pure customers point of view.

    Idiot -- you can't say "bar none" and exclude the Woz.

    In my experience as an unofficial computer support person,
    So, you've never had any real experience caring for more than the machine you use on a regular basis, and you feel you have that you are knowledgable enough to comment on the entire state of Mac users? This is at the very heart of that Knuckleheadedness of which I've spoken.

    Jackass -- don't assume. I say unofficial, because I'm the local nerd, thus I get all the tech support questions from friends, family, co-workers, accquiantences, and the people I run into at the bar -- "You're in computers? My machine crashes when... "

    In other (smaller, in deference to you) words: I don't get paid for it, but I support computers nonetheless.

    Knuckleheadedness is not answering my original post, just pulling selected bits and indulging in ad hominem attacks based on partial quotes.

    Again, I can match you anecdote for anecdote -- produce some real numbers and real statistics, not self-serving anecdotes. Or, you can just simply rage at Mac users, since you seem to be so intent on doing so.
    "Beware by whom you are called sane."

  • Some has done the same for Linux

    OpenBSD also advanced the state of code auditing. Beginning in 1996, the OpenBSD team began a line-by-line analysis of the entire operating system searching for security holes and potential bugs. Unix systems have been plagued for decades by the use of fixed-sized buffers
  • Even thou PicoBSD is FreeBSD its now a form of distribtion. Even only on 1 floppy!
  • I have such a filter. It's called "reading at threshold 2". I can either be egalitarian and give everyone equal time, looking for all the gems of wisdom AC's and new people might post ... or I can enjoy reading slashdot.

    Personally (as a FreeBSD freak) I think the guy is a pro-BSD troll just making the linux camp look bad (and of course BSD as well, er wait, it's all twisty now). Trollers troll, coders code. The latter are worth paying attention to.
    --
  • The state of code auditing on Linux pales in comparison to what OpenBSD has done. Just look at the amount of BugTraq submissions last year.
    Cheers,
    Tomas
    ===========
  • Bar none? Then both I and Steve Wozniak are knuckleheads?

    I guess so. Wozniak I can omit, because I'd tend to believe that he's never had to deal with his own company form a pure customers point of view.

    In my experience as an unofficial computer support person,

    So, you've never had any real experience caring for more than the machine you use on a regular basis, and you feel you have that you are knowledgable enough to comment on the entire state of Mac users? This is at the very heart of that Knuckleheadedness of which I've spoken.

    you just wanted to spew venom in an unfocused rage.

    Didn't expect you to notice that my rage is pointed precisely at a company that routinely abuses its unknowledgable customers, and towards the mewling hoards of customers who bend over and take it and ask for more. Knucklehead.
  • I dunno about this -- the most computer illiterate people are Wintel's primary demographic.

    I do NOT concur. Yes, there are plenty of knuckleheads using wintel machines, but there are TONS of people using these machines. In my experience as a computer professional, I find that Mac users are much less capable of dealing with minor problems that arise on their systems. They may know all of Wired's buzzwords, but mac users are knuckleheads, bar none (if this is what you meant by computer awareness, then I do agree with you). I've listened to Mac users in CompUSA harp about how you have to have a mac if you want to play mp3s or dvds.

    because since 1991 or so, you have to have really loved the Mac OS to put up with expensive hardware, corporate idiocy, and really, really poor (official) technical support.

    Child, they've been pulling this shit since 1984. Nothing new. The only difference is that there was free technical support.

    Apple is a tyrant even more so than Microsoft. Not only do they control the operating system and software development, but they dictate what hardware you can buy to run that software on and are the only suppliers of said software. Talk about "1984". It should have been Steve Jobs face up on that big screen.
  • you don't have the user # to back up your statement :P
  • agreed :)
  • Uhh... actually "Can Linux run on one of these" kind of went out of style two years ago. get with the times.
  • I have an idea for a poll. Let's put up the question of whether or not /. should have AC posts enabled.

    There's a bunch of guys really ruining /.

    News for nerds are supposed to be just that, "news for nerds". Stories are supposed to ignite thoughtful discussions not flames or stupid AC posts.
  • Sure he does, I got this account ~sept '97

  • sigh (Score:1)

    by Crag ( 18776 )
    "Through simple one-line commands, entire applications are downloaded, integrity checked, built, and installed making system administration amazingly simple."

    If you aren't a "I must compile all my apps" nazi:

    apt-get install package

    Otherwise:

    apt-get build-dep package
    apt-get --compile source package
    dpkg -i package.deb

  • Please, can someone track this guy down and beat him senseless?
  • "Mass market" means that it's suitable for the teeming unwashed millions. Buy it preinstalled. Buy it shrinkwrapped and install it without breaking a sweat. Be able to configure it without being an amateur sysadmin. Be able to use it without knowing how it works.
  • The problem with this is that it makes it look that FreeBSD isn't secure, or OpenBSD isn't portable, for example.

    When in fact:

    - all three are more secure (by default) than any Linux;

    - OpenBSD runs on about 10 architectures;

    - all three are usually faster and more efficient than Linux.

    This is not a flame or religious argument. I use Linux on my main desktop machine. But the BSDs (which I use on a couple of servers, and am also trying on the desktop) "feel" faster.
  • Or one of these: #43 [slashdot.org], #81 [slashdot.org] or my very own intelligent post.
  • "Also, new releases of an OS every couple of years is nothing like nightly builds"

    Ok, I'll bite...
    You're right, I mean, why would I want exploits fixed nightly, hardware updates nightly, etc. when I can wait a couple of years for them.

    Of course service packs do come out more than once every couple years, but they are essentially patches to a nightly build.
  • Actually, I have copies of NeXTStep 3.3 for Black Hardware, Intel Hardware, Sparc, and PA-RISC, as well as OpenStep for all these platforms. (My '040 NeXT Cube runs OpenStep 4.2)
  • A) So which is it, a workstation, server, or advanced data center? If you're going to be a good troll, you have to constantly misdirect responses to *new* fallacies, not just keep repeating the oldone.

    B) See A). And make sure to hide your head up your ass until after Service Pack 3, then start talking about how Windows Trilennium is gonna fix all the problems with W2K. And, I just use "vi" everywhere, period, without checking to see if it's installed; but I'm still trying to figure out how a lack of alternatives is something for you to be proud about. Though, since every M$ user I know reverts to notepad for simple text, lists, notes, I suppose you must have a good reason to be afraid of alternatives.

    C) Ooh, a factory. Gee, it must have been sealed with a kiss by a guy in a white lab coat. From your damaged brain, it's clear you were born and raised in a factory and fed on factory food. Oh, yeah, "make install", jackass. Have fun with those $95 support calls.

    D) Yawn.

    You bots are all the same, add a little Microsoft Advocacy and out comes the same old tired arguments. I couldn't have said it better myself.

    The best argument against Microsoft's long term supremacy is history; not one single technology has been dominated by single players and proprietary mumbo-jumbo variant standards for longer than a few decades. An early lead ALWAYS turns the greed robots to vain attempts to stop the race and freeze time at moment they take the lead. Even with the state backing them up, they can't do it forever. Just look at what happened to telecommunications since the Ma Bell breakup; cellphones and pagers everywhere, an explosion of telecommunications services, the Internet... Back when you were born around 1980 there was a phone (gee, no one had to ask what kind of phone you had, how wonderful!) rented (ooh, a subscription model, how wonderful!) from the telephone company, period, and using any other kind could get you jail time. But that was better, right?

    Microsoft has served their purpose, and now it's time for them to go to the elephants' graveyard to die. Ten years after they slip, the same dumbass commentators on financial news shows will be saying "It's amazing to think that anyone would run a company based on the idea that consumers would only want one choice of operating system. No wonder Microsoft stock has slipped so much. Their new CEO, Steve Jobs*, has got to turn them into a company focused on their customers and offer them the choices and services they need, or the next earnings report will be even worse."

    * Sorry about then Jobs thing. Just couldn't resist trolling a little myself.

    Boss of nothin. Big deal.
    Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.

  • Slashdot is not as good as it used to be.
  • look at the date kid
  • Ok then.

    In response to #4...

    Slashdot ISN'T as good as it used to be (like back in '98, a 300 reply story was BIG)

    =]
  • Ok, now we know what they all are .. what can they do?

    Can I compile all my favourite GNU utils, and run my favourite webserver and scriptlanguage and so forth on any BSD?

    If so .. then is there any real difference between GNU/Linux, BSD, and Solaris, if I compile GNU tools on all three?

    For example, I feel 'safer' working on my "GNU/Solaris" than on any Linux (especially RedHat) -- maybe it's just the hardware, or maybe it's the scalability (/dev etc.)

    Are there (non-X) apps which will only work on one particular UNIX variant?
  • I disagree. He is not passing judgement on how cool these people are at all. I think he is merely trying to comment on how there are some "posers" out there who make the whole thing look bad. The media already thinks all Linux (*NIX) users are a bunch of hackers, and clueless little script kiddies like this don't help.

    JOhn
  • Check out Nortons ghost... I've used at a several different jobs, and I must say it's quit easy and painless. I can't remember if it does multiple cd's, but I can't see your base install being over 700-800mb. And ghost does quit well and compressing everything. I think the highest I've seen was about a gig, and it took something like 17 minutes to "install" on a 16x or 24x cdrom.

  • A correction about NeXTStep (Score:4)

    by Noer ( 85363 ) on Tuesday April 03, 2001 @02:43PM (#317224)
    a minor correction...

    "NeXT eventually quit making hardware and implemented NeXTStep for other operating systems, changing the name to OpenStep. "

    Actually, NeXTSTEP was the OS, as i recall, and its name was changed to OPENSTEP when it was ported to Intel hardware. NeXTStep was the set of frameworks for rapid app development, which was called OpenStep on OPENSTEP as well as on the other operating systems on which it ran, such as Solaris and Windows NT.

    This is pure nitpicking, and I don't mean to detract from a really excellent article. But NeXT Inc's product line was always a bizarre confusion of different capitalizations; I may not have it quite right either.
  • I dunno about this -- the most computer illiterate people are Wintel's primary demographic. This is why Intel promotes the Pentium III to make your Internet faster (and gets away with it).

    And this is different from selling a computer by color?

    Apple's demographic tends to be holier-than-thou arty types and interface nuts. My experience is that Mac OS users tend to be very computer aware, if not literate, because since 1991 or so, you have to have really loved the Mac OS to put up with expensive hardware, corporate idiocy, and really, really poor (official) technical support.

    Apple's long time users are very literate. But, in my experience, the large majority of Mac users are in fact quite stupid when it comes to how their system works.

  • I'm not sure why the original poster considers this a big deal

    It matters only because the code in question used to be under the 4 criteria license. One of them was that you had to mention that you used BSD code in your advertising.

    Now...when in Microsoft's history have you seen advertising that said "This product includes software developed by the University of Califorina, Berkeley and its contributors"

    unlike many Linux coders, MS actually had the decency to leave the BSD copyright in the code they reused.

    I've seen Linux code where they removed the BSD license and re-licensed it under the GPL. Bad, bad linux coders.
  • There are way too many BSD's.

    As opposed to what, 180 seperate versions of Linux. And that is just the registered versions [www.ldl.cx]

    How many are NOT in their database.....

  • > There are way too many BSD's.
    No, not until everybody has his/hers very own BSD.
    Or two of them.

    > Are they better than Linux?
    Yes!

    A complete OS is always better than a lonely kernel.

    > Why do I have to pay $50 to get a copy of "Free" BSD?
    (Lame try for a word play.)

    BTW $50 is still cheaper than Red Hat's $79 "Deluxe Workstation" or $179 "Professional Server".

    > Why isn't it GNU/BSD?
    Why isn't it GNU/Windows?
    Why isn't it GNU/toilet paper?
    Why isn't it GNU/orange juice?

    I don't know it!

    > Can I have a sandwich?
    No, only a GNU/sandwich...
    (But you have to share what you make with it with all of us.)
  • Another idea:

    What about a "signal/noise"-meter.

    Every reader can give a vote to every article if it's signal or noise and the whole stuff is calculated to a single number.

    Over the months/years we will have a nice graph about slashdots decline.
  • > I did my own history based on a slashdot post I made some time ago. It's at
    > http://www.geocities.com/connorbd/bsd.html.

    Some nitpicking to your story:

    NetBSD is written with an uppercase first letter, like "FreeBSD" or "OpenBSD".

    Why do you keep that strange spelling through your whole article?
  • Why?

    He's such a poor soul:
    No life, no friends, no future...
    And he hasn't managed to get a Windows/Red Hat dual boot setup running on his Dell peecee.
  • Also from that post:

    "Virtually all users of Linux (and all other
    forms of Un*x) are unkempt, longhaired, beast-bearded dirty GNU hippies, and
    I am sick and tired of having to deal with them."

    (This was an april fool post by Linus or someone impersonating him, quite funny I must say compared to the slashdot stories of that date or the incredible boring trolls here.)

  • I have a feeling that #4 was moderately tongue-in-cheek. I could be wrong but that's the way I read it. Otherwise (s)he's a dork.

    -rt-
  • They do make NeXTStep for Intel. I have NeXTStep 3.3 for Intel [scootz.net]


    --

  • Didn't see it mentioned, but if the Jolitz's would have been more open about patches *AND* AT&T wouldn't have sued BSDI, there is a very good chance that Linux would have never taken off like it did...
  • The OPENSTEP OS was "offically" called:
    OPENSTEP for Mach
    You then had OPENSTEP for Solaris
    OPENSTEP for NT for the other OSes.
  • For an example, please refer to this post. [slashdot.org]

    -gerbik

    flamebait: food of the gods
  • will norton ghose work in freebsd, though.
  • you wanna know why we don't take YOU seriously? because your nick is l33t j03.
  • no mention of BSD relations SunOS, Solaris and AIX. IBM's AIX started out as a BSD and then they grafted System V on to it.SunOS was based on BSD. I think Solaris 1 was bsd based while Solaris 2 was based on UNIX System V(R4?). I wonder how many unixes don't use anything from bsd ?
  • Unless you want SMP or a piece of hardware that Free supports that Open doesn't.
  • You are right. Nobody is going to ask you if it is secure or trusted because it isn't.
    Are you running Professional, Server, Advanced Server, DataCenter??
    Did you upgrade from 98, ME, NT or is it a clean install?
    Are you running FAT16, FAT32, NTFS (NT 4 version) or the new version of NTFS?

    I bet you are glad you didn't have to answer the other questions though.

  • Since I'm already offtopic.

    I'm a network administrator on an NT network. We have 95,98,ME,2000 pro,2000 server, linux, unixware, netware, etc. and you better be worried about dependencies file versions if you want to keep it running. I'm currently dealing with some semaphore timeouts thanks to a service pack update. I did an uninstall and it is still there and thanks to a backup tape screw up no reliable backups on 2 of the servers. Now I get to rebuild these servers but I know how to do it myself because I don't rely on the factory to do it for me. You assume they are alike but if you had to support them you would quickly realize they aren't and even service packs make a big difference. SP1 was a huge improvement for 2000.

    I learned most of my testing techniques from an old manager of mine that was huge into AS/400 and went overboard on redundancies and testing every possible solution even if it seems a little out there. We tested and hammered R&D servers for months before they went into production. The benefit of this is that we only had to reboot those servers for service pack updates and they were rock solid. I realize that this isn't the norm for NT and it is the only way to keep NT from like most people complain about.
  • A) It takes a lot of work to make it secure because it isn't by default. Trust me, I've done it but it wasn't easy and takes a lot of time to keep on top of it.

    B) 9x, NT, 2000 are just as different and from the same company. There used to be a time you could run Windows with IBM OS/2 or Microsoft. And yes I am a bot. beep, beep, whirp.

    C) You obviously have run into the Office 97/2000 issues yet. Where so you think the term "DLL Hell" comes from?? You must not have much installed on this machine. You have other people install and troubleshoot for you. It seems that you are a bot too!

    D) Are you sure that's what they installed at the factory?? I've worked with enough computers to know that default installs are rarely the same and a lot people where installing the old version for compatability and so they wouldn't have to get a lot of support calls.

    I use Microsoft more than I use *nix but that is changing. I realize that they all have their strengths and weaknesses. You should use the right tool for the job. Anyone who only uses one thing and thinks what everyone else does about it is bot whether it is Linux or Microsoft.
  • But compared to the more than 8 YEARS that FreeBSD has been doing it, apt-get nothing cool at all.

    Both of you suffer from the same delusion, namely "My OS does [whatever], so yours doesn't matter".

    Just because Debian comes along and offers excellent port/package tools too doesn't invalidate FreeBSD. Just because FreeBSD has offered excellent port/package tools for years before Debian did doesn't invalidate Debian.
  • the ever popular #8:

    8. Predictions of the typical /. post
    number 8 is actually becoming more popular (why am i telling you?) than 1-7. in fact, are you in violation of #4 and #7?
  • Can't somebody put a freakin' filter to block this idiot out?! This damn thing pops up every time BSD gets mentioned...

    /Brian
  • I don't know, I rather liked the article...



    Who is this shithead who keeps posting BSD-is-dead anyway? It's become rather pointless and tiresome.



    ObKarmaWhoring: I did my own history based on a slashdot post I made some time ago. It's at http://www.geocities.com/connorbd/bsd.html [geocities.com]. I fancy it's a bit more technical than this version (which I've added a link to), and perhaps a bit less dispassionate (it was a /. post, after all). Wouldn't mind updates, though.

    /Brian

  • ...let me be the first to ask: What about SecureBSD [securebsd.com]?
  • Darn it, He was thurough. I wanted to be the zelot and piss and moan about how MacOS X / Darwin wasn't there, but sure enough, there it is mocking me from the bottom of the page. You like that don't you? You like laughing at me? Well, laugh at me now!!!

    *Calls the exorsist and removes the daemon*

  • IIRC from Tannenbaum's OS book, the Mach kernel was created using 4.4BSD. The researchers creating the Mach kernel replaced parts of the BSD kernel with services using the Mach kernel, while Mach was still being developed. In the end, the BSD kernel was entirely gone. This allowed them to have a working operating system to test throughout the development of the Mach kernel.

    Of course, they could have used some other kernel for this, but BSD is what they used. Or I could be completely wrong and badly in need of caffine. ; )

  • Thats funny!

    Can I have a piece of your GNU/sandwitch? I have some GNU/orange juice to share.

  • Why do I have to pay $50 to get a copy of "Free" BSD?

    Try going to linux central and picking up a CD for $2. Or just download the ISO and burn it.
    --
  • informative, yet...classy....

    althou, if i have to read about Theo leaving NBSD one more time, I'm gonna puke...That's like that one friend you have who keeps showing you the picture of his trophy girlfriend and tells the story of how they met at each showing...

    NO SPORK
  • "If Linux were a beer, it would be shipped in open barrels so that anybody could piss in it before delivery"

    Yup...that about sums up the proccess of Linux :-) I gotta remember this analogy....priceless...

    NO SPORK
  • As a Linux user who is just doing some BSD stuff for the first time this week this article is very useful.

    I have a feeling this article might begin a flame war however :-)

  • Any have any good links for makeing a custom FreeBSD install CD? I have a FreeBSD install here that I want to burn to CD as it's standardised install for several machine, I want to be able to put the CD in the drive, boot off it and then install it. I have the FreeBSD system setup on a HD here so think of it as backing up a current system and making an install CD out of it.

    I have no clue where to even start or if this is possible? There must be some real gods here though that can explain how the installer works and how to make just one large package from a file system and have it install from a bootable CD.

    Sorry, I know this is kinda off topic but I'm more than stuck with this, one week of FreeBSD experience is just not enough :-(

  • ah haa, so the packages are just compressed tar balls. Good I must be able to hack something together, maybe. This system is a router that needs to be rolled out to a handful of sites and the admins on the remote sites are NT guys who have not touched any *nix systems, ever. I just want to give them a CD, boot the machine that I'm shipping with the CD and follow very very simple fdisk and label instructions, install the one package =full directory structure. I will (hopefully) have remote access to the boxes by dial up then to do the rest. Everything works with my install but how to package it is still a mystery but you have helped a great deal thank you.

  • I found this [wanadoo.fr] while looking around on the net.

    Wow a full Family Tree of UNIX this thing is huge

  • Try `man 1 rdist`:

    Rdist is a program to maintain identical copies of files over multiple hosts. It preserves the owner, group, mode, and mtime of files if possi- ble and can update programs that are executing. Rdist reads commands from distfile to direct the updating of files and/or directories.

    If this is something you'll be doing regularly, just do the most simple install on each of the machines and let rdist do the rest.

    If it's a one-off install (but what about updates, patches, etc.?), you could use your favorite backup method to back up the one computer and restore to the others and just edit the few machine-specific files, like /etc/rc.conf (or use /stand/sysinstall).

    If you don't have a favorite backup method, get one. See `man 8 dump` for the most robust one you'll see, but you're probably already comfortable with tar which should work just fine for this.

    But, really, how much have you customized it? One of the strengths of the BSDs is the ports system. On a well-run system, 99% of everything outside of /usr/local, /var, /home, and /tmp is identical from one machine to the other. If you've done your install right, you can just copy /usr/local and be done with it. Making /usr/local be a network mount wouldn't be a bad idea, either.

    I have many complaints about RPMs; the biggest is that they do all their work to the main filesystem. /usr/local is there for a purpose! It keeps software you've installed from the critical parts of the operating system and vice-versa. Make a backup of /usr/local, and you've saved yourself almost all the hassle of a re-install after a disaster. Nuke /usr/local, and you're left with a stable system.

    There's a myth that an installer has to be something complex. See OpenBSD (my favorite OS, though I'm writing this from FreeBSD because I just can't kill the darn thing and thus have no excuse to re-install it!) for what's probably the easiest installer out there (but perhaps not the prettiest): first, you partition the drive (the worst part of the experience, but using the defaults in the docs works just fine); then, you type in your network information (IP, gateway, hostname, etc.); then you pick the packages to install; finally, you tell it what timezone your in and give it a root password. The packages are nothing more than compressed tarballs. If you didn't install one and want it later, all you have to do is untar it to the root directory and, presto! you've got that package.

    There's no reason you can't do the same thing.

    b&

  • If all you want is a router--why didn't you say so?

    Send them the boot floppy for OpenBSD 2.8 and have them do a basic ftp install with the default packages. Get the root password via secure means.

    Use ssh to get to the machine. Update /etc/rc.conf and /etc/rc.sysctl to your pleasure; they're self-documenting. All you'll really want to do is enable the bits about ipf and maybe ipnat (in the former) and IP forwarding (in the latter) and maybe alt-ctrl-del rebooting (in the latter).

    Copy over your own /etc/ipf.rules and maybe /etc/ipnat.rules files which you've thoroughly tested aforehand. The IP Filter HOWTO (c.f.) tells you everything you need to know about how to create the files.

    Reboot.

    Have a beer in celebration!

    FreeBSD would also work fine, but you have to spend more time turning off services, patching holes, etc. It's more work to get it to the point you want. Again, I love FreeBSD, but it's not as well suited to being a router as is OpenBSD. OpenBSD begs to be used as a router, or a secure Web server or....

    In short, OpenBSD is already set up almost exactly the way you want your router set up. Just add firewall rules, and you're done.

    Good luck!

    b&

    P.S. When you're done, buy a few official OpenBSD CDs to help support Theo and the gang. b&

  • Which does not make it less[1] true...


    [1] or more

    ---
  • (Sorry to have to tell you this.)

    You haven't been faithful to Slashdot have you? Otherwise you'd have known this was the forty thousandth appearance of this troll. It's second in popularity only to goatsex.

  • How about a graphical history... (Score:3)

    by scum-e-bag ( 211846 ) on Tuesday April 03, 2001 @02:35PM (#317264) Homepage Journal
    How about a graphical history... [wanadoo.fr] and also include unix, linux, blah, blah, blah...
  • I know this sounds stupid, but basically the differences between the 3 *BSDs are:

    FreeBSD - simple installation

    NetBSD - portable

    OpenBSD - secure

    That's pretty much what it comes down to, I take it?
  • Wow why did you pay $50 for a copy of FreeBSD, I just downloaded a cd image. Maybe you should try reading the documentation better, then you would know that it is Free.
  • Well, duk, of course SunOS is BSD based. Bill Joy is one of the founders of Sun! Through SunOS 4.1...., SunOS was BSD by definition, basically Joy taking the latest releases across the bay to Sun when it suited him. As of SunOS 5.x (Solaris 2.x, 7, 8) Sun entered into an agreement with AT&T to merge SunOS and SVR4. They were originally going to rewrite the OS completely in C++ (the famous "Spring" kernel), but that never happened. What did happen is that Solaris 2.x contains mostly SVR4 base with BSD add-ons in terms of the file system and VM system. The userland utilities are almost all SVR4. Sun's major contribution was originally a userland select(3) implementation, but around 2.5 they re-implemented it inside the kernel bcause poll(2) is just too clumsy and that whole TLI library inheirited from AT&T is just too wierd for words.

    AIX, as far as I remember, was always System III/V based with significant inheiritance from BSD, just as all major UNIX vendors tried to import in a mix and match fashion the best of BSD and System III/V. IBM, similarly to HP, had very few qualms about making willy-nilly changes just because they could do it. They ennded up with that horrendous SMIT and they also trampled all over select(2), adding a horrible extension to allow waiting on both sockets and msgq's.

    Don't get me started on the abominations perpetrated on UNIX by HP-UX--the history of that is just too convoluted to bear. Suffice to say that HP-UX 11 is the closest to a standards-compliant UNIX that HP has ever produced. You can almost port applications from other versions of UNIX without change!

  • nice article, glad to see a rehash of history for the new folks running in terror from the land of blue screens and aliases for real commands done in python http://minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au/Unix_History/ http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/unix/ http://www.unix-wizards.com/tree.html
  • NeXTStep HW and OS until 3.3 (68040 hw)
    OPENSTEP OS ran on NS (black hardware) Intel, SPARC (32), and HP OPENSTEP Framework ran on Windows (nt?) and Solaris (this was to be able to create apps that ran across platforms with just a recompile
  • from the point of view of a NeXTStep freak (well used to be) you got close enough and made a good point..thanks
    (plus you made me try and remember how it all worked out) oh yea I got somthing wrong too NeXTStep 3.X(3?) also ran on Intel, SPARC, and HP
  • The root Berkeley Systems Distribution, is, as may know, the Dark Lord, diabolos, Satan himself. However a few years/eons ago many of these "forked," excuse the pun, into lesser, but still potent, demons. Ba'al Zebub, the lord of the flies, and Lucifer are 2 well-known forkings. Asmodeus is another, though now defunct. Also, such things as incubi and succubi plague servers to this day, in rather unpleasantly sticky ways.

    Interesting in the study of much BSDemonology, unlike Linukism, we find no root demon such as Vilhelm von Gatus, a caricatured figure "from Red Mound of the Northwest" embodying an all-encompassing, swallowing evil. Whether or not astute /. readers will be able to elaborate more on BSDemonology remains to be seen.

    --

  • they also wouldn't know sarcasm if it kicked them in the nuts.

  • Every time
    anything gets mentioned on Slashdot, the usual round of comments get posted. Most posters want to know:
    1. How to work in some ani-M$ message.
    2. How to stick it to the MAN
    3. How to sneak in suggestion for cool features that someone else should add to some open source projects.
    4. How to say /. is not as good as it used to be, while having a 230000+ account#
    5. How to post something even though you don't care / know anything about the topic, just because your fans are demanding it.
    6. How to avoid being mod down with obviously OT comments and never actullay read the damn article.
    7. How to post it in as fast as possible


    ====

  • Isn't that what the *BSD guys complain about linux? Too many versions, too many different types of packages etc. What exactly prevents me from starting a new freeBSD distribution? In fact, secureBSD and TrustedBSD seem to be "BSD distributions".

    Magnus.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Here's the summary, for the attention-span deprived:

    FreeBSD really rocks,
    But only Intel / Alpha box.
    The 'Net' one runs on so much more.
    The 'Open' one is more secure.

    Now I know my BSD's. Won't you come and play with me?

    (written in years gone by, when I had a different ID)

  • The ftp utility included with Windows NT is BSD ftp. Seriously, run strings on it... you'll find "Copyright 1983 the Board of Regents of the University of California".
  • Now here I am, coming back from the Chicago confrence just to find this absolutely beautiful article on BSD, and I think to myself, "Hey, the article seems to cover everything I've been whining about for all of slashdot-dom."
    And yet, I kept getting marked down by moderators with FreeBSD over OpenBSD and NetBSD preference, or just simply their own idea of what they think BSD is. Well, I've got one thing to say to you, "GO PORT SOMETHING UP YOUR..err ATARI!"

    Ah, venting really does feel good. So, as I am forever destined to ask, "Who's up for volleyball!?"
    .oO(I don't even play volleyball...I don't know why I ask that...I really don't)

    Not certain how to moderate? This article is uninformative, ego boosting, flaming (and I don't mean Andy Dick) and possibly mildly amusing. I'd mark me a troll, but I'm so used that...really, check out my karma! However, in the future, you may want to consider how much you know versus how much I actually understand when you and your moderating companions logon and say, "Oh, I don't agree with that idea at all," because, and this may be just my opinion, but I think two and half decades of unix-based experience outways three and half years of "User Friendly", though, I do love it when Pitr's alpha-geek rival is on...DON'T TELL ME WHAT HAPPENED TO THE APPLE!
    I read this thing three months at a time, and I'm going to find out next week...you people keep sending me previews...you know how mean that is?
    Oh, and also, this post is incoherent and whines at probably the same eight people...

    Further note to Anonymous Cowards who may make some unsupported whiney comment in reply to my post, or will just say something disgusting in vulger...: :P
  • Rob and Jeff strongly believe in free speech and that everyone should be given their say, and I quite rightly agree, to an extent. Personally, I think only registered slashdot members should be allowed to post anonymously, and that secondly, there should be some criteria to allow the deletion of articles, specifically those that have hate speech and/or disgusting-unrelated information.* Yeah, you could argue based on what I said, "But, such-and-such shouldn't necessarily be deleted even though it could be considered hate speech," or something similar and I'd agree. However, you should know perfectly well I'm referring to "Kill the fucking niggers, the bastards are bringing us down"** kind of hate speech, not "Personally, I think all you Amiga users are just bunch of pathetic wussy faggots, if you bothered to openly and freely distribute your operating system, maybe there'd be more than 49 of you pussies."***
    I've always believed a person should say what they want, but should also be held responsible for what they say. As for the member-only anonymity, that could simply be that the user-information and post number are kept in a seperate log-file, allowing the editors/meta-moderators to see which users most consistantly post less diplomatic articles, and I'm not just talking language, either...
    This way anonymous cowards could even be mailed through an old fashion cgi mailing deamon, like the kind many other bboards that require membership use. Yes, this would require repliable email, but that can be kept in a seperat secure and encrypted log altogether.
    Of course, no one's required to listen to the ramblings of an old man, but I think they should every once in awhile.****

    *If your new to slashdot, or just allow this to be blacked out of your mind, I'm talking about all those disgusting posts of fetish-sexuality, such as fecal eating, and other, usually sex-related, actions.
    **I don't possess any such views and sincerily apologize to anyone I've offended.
    ***Well, no offense to Amiga users, but such an opinion, if you got rid of the insults, would, in fact, have value, philosophical/theoretical, but still of some idea of value.
    ****I don't ask for much, just once every three posts will do, specifically, the ones that I'm really cooking on, and I don't mean by karma mark-down either.
    *****It would be nice if there was an "insert footnote" button I could use here; in sgml, I can have these pop-up on hover, not that I'd recommend slashdot to go that extensive of an upgrade...just some nice PHP will do;-)

  • A large part of the reason for that anonymity is to protect the coward from the people viewing the post, which, my idea, would do sufficiently...well, unless someone's going to hack into a linux box and...oh, heh, nothing to worry about, unless an editor gets paid off.
    just can't stop laughin'...
    hack into a linux box
    I crack me up.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close