Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
BSD Operating Systems

FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 Almost Ready 175

Posted by timothy from the open-ended dept.
essdodson writes "Scott Long of the FreeBSD release engineering team has posted that FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 has been compiled and should be available shortly. Check it out and help make this the best FreeBSD release so far. The updated release schedule lists Jan 17, 2003 as the anticipated release date."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 Almost Ready More

FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 Almost Ready

Comments Filter:
  • The story body isn't worded very clearly... Jan 17th is the anticipated release date of 5.0, not 5.0RC2

  • just a troll (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    don't report it till it is done please.
  • Wait a minute, isn't FreeBSD some satan worshiping distro??

    But in all seriousness I'm going to say it again and again, if you get a chance to check it out, installing FreeBSD is definantelly worth a try. It's enough like linux where the linux user can feel comfortable, but different in many ways (try it out, you'll figure out what the differences are).

    I would be the happiest man alive if debian would use the FreeBSD kernel.

    • why don't you ask them?

    • Re:Just in time for Christmas!! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You mean, Linux is enough like BSD, that FreeBSD is still usable for the average Linux user.

      Personally, I think everyone would have been a lot better off if FreeBSD had been adopted as the 'standard' 'unix' rather than linux.

      ah well..

    • Re:Just in time for Christmas!! (Score:4, Informative)

      by jon787 ( 512497 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:16AM (#4939395) Homepage Journal

      I would be the happiest man alive if debian would use the FreeBSD kernel.

      They're working on it [debian.org]

    • Re:Just in time for Christmas!! (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      From http://www.debian.org/ports/freebsd [debian.org]:

      Debian GNU/FreeBSD is a port that consists of a FreeBSD kernel, kernel-related utilities, C Library and a few specific utilities, coupled with the "regular" Debian (GNU) userland.

      It's not the stable, well-tested FreeBSD we know and love, but if that's what you want, it's there for you to use and improve.

      • Nothing is sacred from RMS slapping GNU on it is there?!

        Let me guess what's next GNU/Disney? GNU/GNU? GNU/Microsoft? GNU/Solaris? GNU/Coke? (oh wait, coke tried that in the 80's :-). ...see where i'm going? What is the point of having a bsd kernel for a linux userland? that's like the red-headed bastard child of the mailman.

        sheeh!

      • So I'm reading about RC2 and a thread about Debian breaks out.

        Why is this topical? Does apt do something FreeBSD ports doesn't, or is this just another example of people being militant and off topic? Preference is great until it fills my browser window with my pet peeve.

        "Oh this is great, now if only it were !"

        Sigh

    • Re:Just in time for Christmas!! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cymen ( 8178 ) <cymenvig@gmail. c o m> on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:53AM (#4939502) Homepage
      I would be the happiest man alive if debian would use the FreeBSD kernel.

      I'd be the happiest man if a decent distribution was put together with the FreeBSD world and the linux kernel. Why would you want the opposite? I guess I can see it, but not really. make world + linux kernel == wahooO!
      • I'd be the happiest man if a decent distribution was put together with the FreeBSD world and the linux kernel. Why would you want the opposite? I guess I can see it, but not really. make world + linux kernel == wahooO!


        Its called gentoo [gentoo.org] linux.
        • FreeBSD:
          • BSD is dying: not popular; not enough of critical mass in the user base to attract new users; ignored by commercial vendors;
          • FreeBSD not really mutliplatform: Mac OS X is not FreeBSD, they just share few utils and tools; you cannot install FreeBSD exactly same way on x86, PPC and Sparc and have the same (99%) set of applications and same stability;
          • BSD was traditionally for servers: there is no such thing as BSD desktop geeks;
          • FreeBSD is technically only for small servers: cluster and SMP support is either week or unstable; commercial cluster vendors ignore BSD;
          Linux, especially Gentoo:
          • Gentoo is the most prospective free OS: the best of FreeBSD (Portage is like ports but even better); the best of Linux (many drivers out of the box); attractive for already "poisoned" by Linux IT managers;
          • Linux, especially Gentoo, is really multi-platform: Linux kernel is multiplatform; Gentoo Portage even improves it (architecture keywords, CFLAGS); insalls and works exactly same (99%) way on x86, PPC and Sparc;
          • Linux is desktop enhanced: there are many Linux desktop geeks playing with DVD, video cameras, TV/FM tuners and so on;
          • Linux has a "big server" support: SMP and clusters are already stable; commercial vendors love Linux for clusters;
          Now, the question is: where would you invest your money (if you have one), your skills (if you have one) and your effort time (if you have one)?
          • And this gets a score of 2?. Moderators, YHBT!
          • I shouldn't respond to trolls, but...

            1) In general I find FreeBSD more stable. Evidently so does Yahoo. Hotmail used to, but MS couldn't have a different OS on "their" servers, so they tried to change it. Problem is, FreeBSD just worked better and they had a big problem in changing off of it. FreeBSD tends to be more stable under load than Linux. Though Linux has better SMP, neither Linux 2.4 nor FreeBSD 4.7 have good threading models, which is crucial for stuff my business would use. FreeBSD 5.0 has real threads and better SMP support. I'm going to try to have us look into it, though I don't know where thast going to lead. I don't follow linux enough to see where 2.5 (soon to be 2.6) stands on gettign real threads in, I should look at this, from a pragmatic, not a religious "FreeBSD is better, no Linux is" approach, just find the right tool for the job.

            2) Linux I believe has had some missteps in the 2.4 kernel. In the "stable" series they've changed Virtual Memory, added a new scheduler, and added an optimization to the VFS code that corrupted the default filesystem in some configurations (though not the default one).

            3) Who the f*ck cares about what I think (and by extension you) about points 1 or 2? People make their own damn decisions.

            I think a lot of the problems with the "FreeBSD is dying" crap is that it lacks the sound and the fury of Linux development. Every Linux debate, every RHS quote, every "accidentally" leaked "internal" MS memo, RedHat good news, Mandrake bad news, Caldera no news, gets played out on the front page of Slash and a couple hundred advocacy sites. The FreeBSD camp just sits back and writes good code.
      • No no, it's:

        make world + linux kernel == gentooO! ;-)
        • Does it really? Does Gentoo keep the base system on cvsup or at least make sure it all plays nice? Or do they just toss in the latest versions of everything and hope the haystack doesn't blow away? I know that is a loaded assumption, but I'm still curious. Unfortunately I'm bandwidth challenged at the momemnt--otherwise I would have tried Gentoo again.

          What I absolutely *love* about FreeBSD is the ease of upgrading a remote system. Built into that is a well-maintained base system and a sensible upgrade route. When I say FreeBSD + linux kernel, I mean absolutely that. I wonder how much work it would be...

      • Re:Just in time for Christmas!! (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I agree wholeheartedly. Linux userland is suffering some major bloat, but the kernel supports more hardware, more network funkyness, faster filesystems, and it's SMP code is decidedly non-beta. When I get the time I'm going to port FreeBSD's libc as a starting point and see what I can get working :)

        As a side note, some FreeBSD kernel-land things would be nice in Linux, such as PROPER process accounting and limits, stuff like accept filters and kqueue/kselect... Oh well..
    • For those who don't remember this funny post, I believe the parent was referring to: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/04/22/ 1457225&mode=thread&tid=133
    • I would be the happiest man alive if debian would use the FreeBSD kernel.
      Well, as has been pointed out, a very non-release-quality version of Debian has been made for FreeBSD. A somewhat more mature Debian is available for NetBSD. [debian.org] (My guess for their motivation for porting Debian to NetBSD first is that part of their philosophy is to be available on a lot of architectures, like NetBSD.)

      Personally I prefer to run *BSD without debianising it, pkgsrc/ports rock, and I consider the NetBSD and FreeBSD package and source tree upgrade utilities slightly superior to apt-get and friends. To each his own I guess. :-)

      • It's a strange thing. I think part of their philosophy is to colonize other OSen with the GPL.

        Look at the strange GNU/Darwin project that has just taken a sharp right turn towards abject failure.

        I can't think of any other reason to replace a perfectly good userland with an almost identical, in function, userland.

        • It's a strange thing. I think part of their philosophy is to colonize other OSen with the GPL.

          Look at the strange GNU/Darwin project that has just taken a sharp right turn towards abject failure.

          To be fair, GNU/Darwin was *not* either a Debian or actual GNU project, so their bizzare spin into death via license-fanatacism shouldn't be taken as symtomatic of Debian's approach - though the Debian folks do indeed tend to be too political for my taste.
          I can't think of any other reason to replace a perfectly good userland with an almost identical, in function, userland.
          Agreed. GNU's utilities are largely a superset of BSD Unix, so the result is largely a somewhat more bloated userland with basically the same command structure. Also using a third-party userland means you no longer get the advantage of an frequently updated /usr/src tree. (That includes some GNU utilities BTW, which will probably get updated in -STABLE and -CURRENT faster than Debian updates theirs!)

          If I had a seperate machine just to do useless experiments with, I had thought of just for kicks installing Debian/NetBSD on it; just to see "Debian GNU/NetBSD" on the login screen. ;-)

    • I would be the happiest man alive if debian would use the FreeBSD kernel.

      But then they would have to call it "GNU/BSD", which would cause the universe to implode.
    • ...and Linux is a bestiality (Penguin) fetish.

      - Linux is for people that hate Microsoft; BSD is for people that love Unix.

  • OS X (Score:2, Informative)

    by snitty ( 308387 )
    And the new code should be integrated into OS X sometime in late 2003!

    • Re:OS X (Score:2, Informative)

      by FireBook ( 593941 )
      actually thats dead right, os XI (yes, os eleven) is gonna be built on the bsd 5 system :o) just it may not make it in 2003, seeing as theres another 7 .1 pointreleases apple can use to fleece their userbase
    • But when will OS X code be integrated into FreeBSD? So far they only appear to have received one or two minor patches and some test suites, hardly big contributions.

  • How Insightful (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    FreeBSD is almost ready. That is good to know.



    On the plus side, the article isn't saying FreeBSD is being
    released like the editors love to tell a few weeks before
    the actual release and only make themselves look like idiots.

  • Preemptive Slashdotting (Score:5, Funny)

    by robbyjo ( 315601 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:00AM (#4939336) Homepage

    ... should be available shortly. Check it out ...

    This gives a whole new meaning to preemptive Slashdotting.

  • FreeBSD 5.0 rc2 now and Gentoo 1.4 soon! (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is good news that the BSD is obvioously not dying as has been suspected. With such good news we noe have a BSD 5.0 and a Linux 1.4 (gentto)coming for christmas.

    Obviously The BSD is better OS than the Linux's becuase of the high version number!

  • Oh boy (Score:1, Troll)

    by wray ( 59341 )
    I vehemently defend Slashdot for choices of their articles, because after all, it is their choice. But come on -- we are announcing "almost" releases now... :_)

    I find this _very_ amusing. Its like having a planning meeting for a planning meeting (actually happened to my dad)

    • Re:Oh boy (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      it's been a few months since RC1 so.. how is this not news. there are alot of new and innovative features in/planned for 5
      • a few months?????? errrr not quite that long actually :o) wtf is the point in reporting that a preview is almost ready for release, when the first preview was oooo 5 minutes before :o)
    • For those that modded me as troll... lighten up! Don't you find it the least bit humorous that we are announcing that a RELEASE CANDIDATE is ALMOST ready?!

      Come on, have a little smile on your face... Use your minds and enjoy life... not everyone is trolling to defame Slashdot, or get some stupid remarks, I thought it was funny. :)

  • ahhh nuts (Score:3, Funny)

    by Morgahastu ( 522162 ) <bshel@WEEZERroge ... ve bands n ame> on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:07AM (#4939362) Journal
    I better retract my email to wired that nominated FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 as the biggest vapourware.

    • Re:ahhh nuts (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Vaporware? I'm running it. The fact that
      you need them to make an ISO for you is quite
      telling.

      Second thought, perhaps you shouldn't run freebsd.

      You're not ready.

  • say what? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ldspartan ( 14035 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:11AM (#4939382) Homepage
    Not to join the ranks of the whining /. denizens, but you just announced thate a release candidate is almost ready? Granted its important, but almost doesn't really count, and its not a final release, it just might be.

    "Something that might some day be a final release is almost ready!"
    "Say what?"

    --
    Phil

    • Re:say what? (Score:3, Informative)

      by softweyr ( 2380 )
      Uh, duh, the announcement didn't say it was almost ready, it said it was done. The available shortly part means it was being copied to the ftp mirrors as the post went out. You're really dense about online software, aren't you?

    • but you just announced thate a release candidate is almost ready?

      How about "FreeBSD 5.0 RC2 will probably be available for download by the time you step back into your cubicle this coming Monday"? Is that any better?

  • I was doing fine...until the freeBSD release candidate 2 announcment. Then all the trolls scurry their furry digits over to File Manager and cut/paste C:\ms-advocacy\bsd_dying.txt into slashdot.

    Give me a break. I'm in the moment of downloading freeBSD, now I must stop because all the trolls can organize a slashdotting verry accuratly. They'll announce to their buddies over AIM; "Put up BSD signal! Set up bomb! ha ha..."
  • I'm running 4.7 on my Router/Firewall box right now (with some Apache/PHP/MySQL goodness as well). NATD was a cinch to set up. Looking forward to 5.0.
    • not being troll but seriously dump mysql and give postgres a try

      It's like comparing a motorbike with a limo

      • Yeah, I've been meaning to give Postgres a try. Have not had the time recently to get around to it, though.
        • html format [postgresql.org]

          downloadable inc. pdf & html [postgresql.org]

          Only takes about a day to read the whole thing if you don't try and understand everything.

          I was forced to do it in one sitting once when one of my colleagues got into difficulty and I was drafted in on a "this project was supposed to ship last week and Fred can't get to grips with Postgres, turns out his database skills were copy & paste" scenario and I've never looked back.


  • They're releasing FreeBSD 5.0 on January 17, 2003. According to my sources FreeBSD is scheduled to die the following weekend.


    Yes I'm joking, I'm actually a BSD nut

  • Thats weird.. (Score:2, Funny)

    by PFAK ( 524350 )
    I downloaded FreeBSD 5.0-RC2, and burned it 4 hours ago, this is very weirdly worded. Somethings fishy about this ;)

  • cylinder limit (Score:3, Informative)

    by guile*fr ( 515485 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @01:39AM (#4939460)
    wonder if they worked out the 1024 cylinder limit.
    it's a big show stopper for me
    • 1024 cylinder limit ?

      It is not a problem for 3-4 years, I think.


      Well, just try it ;)

    • wonder if they worked out the 1024 cylinder limit. it's a big show stopper for me
      I'm using NetBSD 1.6 and have used FreeBSD 4.6 on an 80 gig HD. I am booting above the 8 gig barrier of OpenBSD. (OpenBSD supports large HDs fine but you have to boot on the first 8 gigs - a show stopper for me.) Earlier versions of FreeBSD worked too I assume.

      It looks like nothing is stopping you from trying it then, so almost-download, and almost-install the almost-released FreeBSD 5.0 already! ;-) (Actually if you want stability try running FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE first. Upgrading is simple under *BSD, no Linux compares in this respect except perhaps Gentoo or Debian.)

      • I've installed 5.0dp2 on a test server. After recompiling the kernel and world the only problem I've had was when someone threw a circut breaker. Personally I would recommend that you try 5.x instead of 4.x because of all the impovements in almost everything.
        Upgrading is simple under *BSD, no Linux compares in this respect except perhaps Gentoo or Debian.)
        Upgrading within 4.x has been pretty smooth

        4.x to 5.0 may not be however. This from the 5.0-DP2 release notes Warning: Binary upgrades to FreeBSD 5.0-DP2 from FreeBSD 4-STABLE are not supported at this time. This may change by the time 5.0 is released.

        As a clean install it was fairly painless. The debugging level on the 5.0-DP2 iso's was painfully high, so making world and kernel had a huge effect.

        • Re:cylinder limit (Score:3, Informative)

          by MobyTurbo ( 537363 )
          Upgrading within 4.x has been pretty smooth

          4.x to 5.0 may not be however. This from the 5.0-DP2 release notes "Warning: Binary upgrades to FreeBSD 5.0-DP2 from FreeBSD 4-STABLE are not supported at this time. This may change by the time 5.0 is released."

          Yes, but the best way to upgrade if the computer is on the internet and is already running FreeBSD is to CVSup /usr/src, which, with changes documented in the early adopter's guide [freebsd.org], and in /usr/src/UPDATE after the CVSup, should work fine. (Disclaimer, I haven't tried this myself - but since it's not the "binary upgrade" that is warned against it should work, as long as you *read* the UPDATE file and follow it step by step.)

    • Re:cylinder limit (Score:3, Informative)

      by shamilton ( 619422 )

      man boot0cfg

      -o options
      A comma-separated string of any of the following options may be
      specified (with ``no'' prepended as necessary):

      packet Use the disk packet (BIOS Int 0x13 extensions) interface,
      as as opposed to the legacy (CHS) interface, when doing
      disk I/O. This allows booting above cylinder 1023, but
      requires specific BIOS support. The default is
      `nopacket'.

      sh

    • I don't know if it's still there or not, but if it is, it's only a problem with the boot loader. Use another instead, like LILO or Grub.

  • Where's the beef? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Can we stop talking about whether BSD is dying or not, why you use FreeBSD, etc. and start talking about FreeBSD itself?

  • The real story (Score:5, Interesting)

    by shlong ( 121504 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @02:11AM (#4939549) Homepage
    I appreciate the submitter's enthusiasm with submitting this article, but it really doesn't come across well. RC2 is available now, though it probably hasn't reached all of the mirrors yet because I jumped the gun with announcing it. And yes, 5.0-RELEASE is scheduled for Jan 17. There will be an RC3 on Jan 10 in order to verify that some last-minute bug fixes don't cause more regressions. Still, I encourage everyone to give it a try and let us know how it works for you.
    • Will there be any real issues with the change from 4.7 to 5.0, or will I just have to change RELENG_4 to RELENG_5 for cvsup, and then do the typical compilation dance?
      • After cvsupping read the file /usr/src/UPDATING which is always there afaik.
      • you will have to change RELENG_4 to 5-STABLE for cvsup.

        There will be no RELENG_5 until 5.1 (I didn't see the flame fest^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h discussion that caused this change for the 5.x series so I can't comment on why.)

        There may be some files that need to be manualy deleted. Read /usr/src/UPDATING. after you cvsup. It should tell you all you need to know.

        • Re:The real story (Score:2, Informative)

          by jonbelson ( 202365 )
          According to Bruce Mah, the reason for not creating the stable branch until at least 5.1 is to encourage people to work on fixing up the 5.x series. If a 5 STABLE branch was created first, people would more likely keep working on adding new features to HEAD.

          --Jon
      • As others have pointed out, you should always read the /usr/src/UPDATING file if you're going to do an upgrade from source. There is also an Early Adopter's Guide available on the installation media that would be a good idea to read (it might be on the web also, but I can't find it at the moment.). That said, FreeBSD 5.0 has quite a number of experimental features. Some of them, like the new GEOM block layer, are non-optional and change traditional behavior in ways that make upgrading hard. I have successfully upgraded from source, but it's very tricky. My advice would be to back up your data and install fresh.

  • Difference between FreeBSD and OpenBSD? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Eric_Cartman_South_P ( 594330 ) on Sunday December 22, 2002 @02:15AM (#4939556)
    What the diff? Is FreeBSD as secure-luvin as OpenBSD? Does FreeBSD also have cryptographic drivers (need PW to access all content on encrypted partition, etc). I'm choosing FreeBSD unless there is some strong crypto that OpenBSD offers that FreeBSd doesn't have.

    Yeah, I know, RTFM and spend more time searching on Google... just thought I'd pick your smart brain in addition. Thanks!

    • Re:Difference between FreeBSD and OpenBSD? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      As follows:

      * FreeBSD was founded by a group that wanted to make the best damn i386 operating system ever.

      * NetBSD was founded by a group that wanted to make an operating system that would run on every computer ever made.

      * OpenBSD was founded by an asshole who was kicked off the NetBSD project for telling people who asked him questions to 'stop shoving your cock down my throat'.
    • What the diff?

      FreeBSD installs tcsh as /bin/csh . The others don't.

      NetBSD runs on a Cobalt Qube2. The others don't.

      OpenBSD can encrypt swap. The others don't.

  • T-SHERT Alert:

    This is awesome. I anxiously await Slashdot headlines like "FreeBSD to be released in one week!" and "FreeBSD to be released tomorrow!" and the ever classic, "FreeBSD to be released in an hour!"

    Relax, I'm only kidding.

    I know I'll never forget where I was when I heard the news that FreeBSD was released the day before yesterday...

  • uh. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Pros_n_Cons ( 535669 )
    BSD sucks its not "buzzword" compatible. I didn't hear one word about OOP, Linux, or .NET -Managment
    • BSD sucks its not "buzzword" compatible. I didn't hear one word about OOP, Linux, or .NET
      Actually, Microsoft themselves released a bare-bones edition of .Net for FreeBSD [ondotnet.com] with a restrictive "shared source" license. C++ and many other OOP languages both well known and obscure run on it as well, many (though not M$'s offering) are in the ports tree.

      Of course, if you really want to avoid the hype, do like me and run NetBSD - we don't have (though NetBSD folks are working on it) Java2 yet in pkgsrc :-(, though we do have a wide variety of other languages with less restrictive licensing and more readily portable code than Sun's. :-)

      • many (though not M$'s offering) are in the ports tree.

        For the Microsoft C# on FreeBSD check out /usr/ports/lang/cli. I played with it, but there is not much there...

        I've went back to Perl and C++ for scripting and compiled work.

        Looked at C#, just about worthless unless your on Microsoft (Sorry, I get paid for results, and the free stuff is not quite up to snuff yet).

        BWP
  • .NET "almost" ready!

    Duke Nukem forever "almost" ready!

    Linux 2.6 "almost" ready!

  • I had just upgraded to FreeBSD 5.0-RC last night.
  • I hate to say I got sick of waiting and installed
    Gentoo. I'm also sad to say that I'm enjoying the
    better compatibility with my kt333 chipset, sound,
    network, etc. I'm also enjoying the serious
    stability and performance increases with the linux
    nVidia drives for my ti500. It's also just a
    workstation/gaming platform. All the machines I've
    done on contract recently have been FreeBSD. At
    some point in the future if I can get AGP 4x with
    all the goodies like page-flipping and whatnot to
    work with the nVidia drivers for FreeBSD, and the
    issues with the kt333 chipset are resolved, and
    I can pry myself away from UT2003 and inferno
    long enough to do it, I'll go back to FreeBSD on
    my workstation. :)

  • FreeBSD has interesting History (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 22, 2002 @09:41AM (#4940203)
    I converted to FreeBSD 3 from RedHat 5 and have not looked back since. It just makes more sense structurally and is more solid than anything I have found on i386. BSD argueably has the most solid TCP/IP stack out there. A few examples:

    - F5 BigIP's converted from BSDi to a modified FreeBSD kernel in v4 (microsoft uses these for Windows update)

    - Also I had to laugh when I found out F5 inserted the BSD TCP/IP stack in one of their "Red Hat" cache appliances (EdgeFX) for performance resons. :)

    - The evil empire also uses FreeBSD for hotmail. You didn't think Winders could hang?

    - Nokia/Checkpoint FW1 and IDS sensors run BSD kernels

    - Can you folks think of anymore on the resume?
    The interesting history is that Bill Joy (went on to help form SUN) was behind the original BSD movement. I heard it used to be called Bills' Software Distro... Wasn't Berkley behind tcp/ip? You folks probably know more of the history than me.

    Anyways, I had a crash and burn attempt at 5.0RC2 last night so I'll probably wait for 1/17/03 and get a new box for 5.0 Release.

    FYI - looks like RC2 is posted. [freebsd.org]
  • This file:

    src/sys/conf/newvers.sh

    Still says "5.0-RC" when it should say "5.0-RC2".

Slashdot Top Deals

"If value corrupts then absolute value corrupts absolutely."

Close