NetBSD 1.5ZB 73
Dahan writes: "I just saw that the development branch of NetBSD is now at version 1.5ZB. A change log is available for those interested. Note that although the title of the page says it's a list of changes from NetBSD 1.5 to 1.6, NetBSD 1.6 is not out yet--the page lists changes that will be in 1.6 whenever it's released. (And when will that be? "When it's ready," of course.) Standard caution about not running development kernels on mission-critical systems applies, although I've been running 1.5ZA on my DEC^H^H^HCompaq Alpha PC164 web/mail/DNS/whatever server for a few months now, and it's been great. And for those of you used to the Linux version numbering scheme and are wondering what all these letters mean, here's an explanation of NetBSD's version numbering."
NetBSD Concurrency Model (Score:1)
Specifically, for concurrency, is there a default inter-thread communication protocol or is it standard synchronization events? Our company has the OS under consideration.
Re:NetBSD Concurrency Model (Score:3, Informative)
Anyway, pthreads, which is pretty much the Unix standard, has a set of mechanisms available for synchronizing the multiple threads.
Inter-process communication between threads, processes, etc. happens pretty much the way you want it to -- message passing via sockets, shared memory, whatever you like. It is pretty much the way any POSIX style system works.
The advantages of NetBSD are not primarily in the API, which it shares with most POSIX systems, but in the license and the quality of the implementation.
Re:NetBSD Concurrency Model (Score:2, Informative)
In terms of pthreads, NetBSD has chosen the approach used in Solaris, Digital Unix (now Tru64) etc. of using Scheduler Activations. On an MP system, two threads will indeed run on different processors if you like.
It is true that NetBSD does not yet have a preemptable kernel and that our SMP support is not incredibly stunning yet. We're working hard to fix that.
Re: I am TROLLING for your INSECURE *BSD (Score:1)
Re:NetBSD is dying (Score:1)
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:3, Insightful)
Out of curiosity, how real is this advantage? Are there things that make NetBSD more portable than OpenBSD?
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:2)
I'm sure NetBSD does the same?
Where are the Free ISO images of OpenBSD? (Score:1)
I think you're here bashing NetBSD because you can't handle the competition. If you were truely confident in your position that "NetBSD has reached its endgame" you wouldn't need to preach to the Slashdot community, you would just sit quietly and wait. Instead you're here bashing NetBSD since, in my opinion, you're AFRAID to lose.
For all your talk of security, your product seems to have just as many holes, or more, as anyone else's product. While you're busy beating your... chest, NetBSD is busy beating OpenBSD.
You won't make ISO images available apparently because you don't want to lose your only source of income. Meanwhile NetBSD makes ISO images available for many ports, and also creates ISO images of tons of prebuilt packages for NetBSD/i386. How is that for competition?
Oh, and I think I even coined the term "OpenBSD" for you. Look it up on the original NetBSD (port-sparc) mailing lists if you don't believe me.
Re:Where are the Free ISO images of OpenBSD? (Score:1)
Re:Where are the Free ISO images of OpenBSD? (Score:1)
You are mistaken here. There isn't really a competition here, per se. OpenBSD is just the logical evolution of NetBSD. NetBSD has already served its purpose in history. Only zealots like yourself would term any two open source projects as being in "competition" with each other. It is obvious to the clearer-thinking among us that two free projects, by their very nature, can't compete with each other. To say anything else is simply measuring the length of your penis with the popularity of your OS of choice.
You won't make ISO images available apparently because you don't want to lose your only source of income.
Take a good look at the BSD license, you fucking moron. Exactly where in there does it say that someone can't make a derivative work and sell it on his own terms? If you're so interested in depriving programmers of income, why don't you spout your foul little grease-hole off in favor of the GPL?
Meanwhile NetBSD makes ISO images available for many ports, and also creates ISO images of tons of prebuilt packages for NetBSD/i386.
Yet another thing that you fail to notice is that most of the useless platforms NetBSD gets ported to don't support booting off of CD-ROM images. Yes, that's right. It's entirely useless to make a CD-ROM image for the PDP-11 port.
Re:Where are the Free ISO images of OpenBSD? (Score:1, Informative)
You do what I did the first time I installed NetBSD. It was my old Toshiba Laptop, which doesn't have a CD drive.
I copied the files onto another box with an NFS server running and used a boot disk to install over NFS. There are other network methods of installing. A CD-ROM is just a handy bandwidth boosting method of distributing a lot of binaries and tarballs.
You're not going to tell me there isn't networking available on the PDP-11 are you?
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:2, Insightful)
However, just to set the record straight, I will point out that:
0) NetBSD is very much alive and vibrant. If you look at the sheer number of commits per day to the NetBSD tree, one will see that pretty quickly. There are a lot of NetBSD developers and users, and the developers are very active.
1) Multi-platform portability is pretty damn useful in the embedded systems world. Maybe running on a StrongARM or a low power MIPS design isn't interesting to you, but it is very interesting to people building things like routers and set top boxes. We pay our bills at Wasabi thanks to this. How many platforms will we ultimately port to? Well, people keep paying Wasabi to port to new things, and there are people outside of Wasabi doing NetBSD ports, too. As long as people keep designing new computers, I don't think NetBSD will stop adding ports.
2) NetBSD is successful enough in terms of design wins to support our company fairly nicely. It is also successful enough in terms of developer resources that I'm proud to say we've got a damn good operating system and it keeps getting better all time. There are a couple hundred very good engineers who commit to the NetBSD tree, and a cast of thousands submitting patches and updates.
3) Generally speaking, the OpenBSD guys are smart and nice people -- I get along with a lot of them very well. Guys like Todd, Niels and Angelos (to name a few) are fine engineers and I have plenty of respect for them.
Excuse me?! (Score:2, Interesting)
When moving between Linux distributions or Free/OpenBSD architectures, there is always an adjustment period where you must learn the intricacies of the new environment. Not so with NetBSD.
Re:Excuse me?! (Score:3, Informative)
Theo de Raadt is the FOUNDER and LEADER of the OpenBSD project. He was kicked out of the NetBSD (for which he was also a founder) for what they said were "behavioral" problems (which is somewhat true, but it was really more politics). So you may have real life experience (wow, so important you had to BOLD) with all those UNIXes, but he has real life experience CODING them.
Second, that isn't the real Theo. He didn't even spell the name right. Its Theo de Raadt, not Theo DeRaadt.
Thirdly, OpenBSD is just as good at what it does as Net/FreeBSD. Bind, Apache, and almost everything else compile just as fine on OpenBSD as they do on Net/FreeBSD and Linux. As for "comfortable"...well....thats a matter of opinion. NetBSD tries to port to everything first and works on other projects second (theres nothing wrong with it, its just what they do). OpenBSD works more on the practical side. You'll never see an (official) dreamcast port simply because it not practical for what OpenBSD does. Lets not also forget that the OpenBSD's "anal-retentive" security policy has brought us free versions of SSH. Also, just because freeBSD doesn't have other ports, doesn't mean its not portable. They just chose to focus on two architectures for what they see as practicality.
You are right on one thing. That was just another /. whiner kiddie.
Re:Excuse me?! (Score:1)
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:2)
But, I mean, not bad - and I eagerly await future works.
Dave
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:1)
Good job though. Plenty of folks can now consider themselves trolled.
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:2)
If NetBSD is so obsolete, why are other projects like say, FreeBSD importing NetBSD code? Oh, and they are intending to use the NetBSD startup rc scripts too... How's that for an 'obsolete' system?
Ah well, you are probably a troll and an imposter... Back to getting a make build done on my rickety SparcStations... I just upgraded them to 1.5ZA... And those things aren't speed demons... Now I can do it all again.. Sheesh :-)
Re:NetBSD stopped being useful once I forked OpenB (Score:1)
When 1.6 will branch.... (Score:2, Informative)
Our hope is to pick up the pace of releases now that we have a lot more infrastructure for doing fast release engineering. A lot of that was developed only in the last six months.
Good job... (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:Good job... (Score:1)
There will be binary snapshots on ftp.netbsd.org soon. They are always in ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/arch/{alpha,i386,
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
I was referring to the FACT that 1.6 IS NOT out. Which is like when slashdot posted FreeBSD 4.5 _was_ out, when it wasnt.
This implies that slashdot (or someone) claimed that 1.6 was out, when it wasn't. Only problem is that it's not like when slashdot posted that FreeBSD 4.5 was out--nobody is claiming that NetBSD 1.6 is out.
Yeah, thanks for the random stupidity, as well.
No prob, glad to have been of assistance.
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
Re:Good job... (Score:1)
Funniest ... exchange ... ever.
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
PKB!!!
Actually, /. has this feature that lets you know when someone's replied to one of your comments. It's sort of like the difference between interrupts and polling. Sounds like you're still using the polling method.
anyways, I never said 1.6 was out or that anyone did.
If so, you're -1, Redundant for repeating what I said with an awkardly-structured sentence. Looks like someone gave you -1, Flamebait instead though. Heh
Re:Good job... (Score:2)
rc system (Score:4, Interesting)
There's an interesting PDF paper on the design and implimentation [mewburn.net], some conciderably more terse and less interesting official documentation [netbsd.org] and a Daemon News article [daemonnews.org], and for those uber geeks, the CVS repository [freebsd.org] where you can compare with the other BSD's.
You'll note FreeBSD -CURRENT is looking at adopting it, while Open sticks with the tried and tested BSD4.4-type setup
Re:*BSD is dying (Score:1)
What next? (Score:1)
I wish I could get FreeBSD to work (Score:1)
Re:I wish I could get FreeBSD to work (Score:2)
But, I'll bite. Check the device naming conventions. They really make (for my mind anyway) a lot more sense.
Your linux
Try mount -t ext2fs
Hope that works for you. If not man mount_ext2fs(8). Also, you shouldn't have to recompile the kernel explicitly with ext2fs support either. Usually the system will auto load these modules if it needs them.
Also, check out the handbook [freebsd.org] and the FAQ [freebsd.org]
Let me know if it works.
-Peter
Re:I wish I could get FreeBSD to work (Score:1)
Hope I didn't come across like an ass, I just got very frustrated with the several times I tried to get it working.
I haven't completely given up, just close. I'll give this a try before hanging it up for awhile.
Re:I wish I could get FreeBSD to work (Score:1)
If you want to do anything with IPv6, you NEED BSD (Score:1)
Linux (even with USAGI patches) doesn't even do IPv6 multicast routing.
There is even a project on Sourceforge for Netbsd to support XCAST(+), which is the main reason why I am using netbsd as the router OS for my thesis project.
(Xcast is a method of multicasting a packet to a FEW destinations, unlike standard multicasting using multicast trees with rendez-vous points which can flood whole networks)
I love linux, and when you know linux moving to Netbsd can sometimes be a little awkward. Linux is just so much more userfriendly.