MicroBSD 0.6RC2 Released 30
RooTchO writes "Included in this release is the new Extended Security Features, Improved/Additional sysctl parameters. New binaries in this release are: pfradix, pfsyncd, aclctl, netacl, getfacl, setfacl and cgdconfig. We have added chrooted sshd, apache, bind. Special files to also see are /etc/sysctl.conf, /etc/acl.conf and /etc/sshd/sshd_conf. And many new other goodies :)))"
What is it? (Score:1)
Having said that could someone explain a bit about microbsd and what it is compared to something like freebsd? Is this something where I would use in an embedded style application or what? I've got some home projects in mind where a small light standards based os would be beneficial.
Re:What is it? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What is it? (Score:1, Informative)
Best of all, it's BSD licenced rather than the restrictive GPL.
Re:What is it? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What is it? Where is it.... (Score:1)
"Actual Release" or an "Almost release"? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:"Actual Release" or an "Almost release"? (Score:1, Informative)
we dont need yaBSD. (Score:2)
Yet Another BSD??
IT claims securiy. I thought OpenBSD did fine. It claims small footprint. I though NetBSD did that job. It claims best features of Freebsd+Net+Open but I didnt find the token ring driver in it...
FreeBSD unifying with NetBSD and OpenBSD would be news, but this really isnt.
Look Ma! I glued this to that, and have a new OS. At the risk of sounding like a troll, I'll say this isnt a useful OS and its goals [microbsd.net] arent convincing at least to me. These developers can better spend their time enhancing the existing BSD's and moving features from one BSD to another. That wouldnt make news but would be more useful.
Re:we dont need yaBSD. (Score:1, Interesting)
True enough, however I think that person was essentially on the money. These energies are probably better spent on enhancing one of the existing BSDs. As both a BSD user and contributor, I know I would prefer to see the forks of BSD stop and either stay as they are, or unify for mutual benefit... than wither on the vine as these separate projects.
But then part of me says that's just how it goes. People might have philosophical differences between themselves and the core developers of the existing BSDs, so they make their own fork to satisfy themselves... if not to serve people like them.
We can only hope that the BSDs learn how to do more code-sharing than they have been. And hope that the developers become more friendly and find new ways to encourage people to make code contributions.
I'm not suggesting that they should all homogenize, but they should try to offer the same features, perhaps presented and managed differently. Then people can pick the best subjective fit for them, and it doesn't matter which one they choose, because it's BSD, and they all more or less universally do the same exact thing...
That'd be the perfect-picture scenario, but alas.
I'm hedging my bets on FreeBSD, particularly with the 5.x branch. The only thing the FreeBSD project needs is more platforms, and some improvements to the ports system. (Yes, I believe that they have been leapfrogged by Gentoo's implementation of ports).
Chrooted? (Score:2)
Or was that refering to Privlidge Severation, and the author is clueless?
Re:Chrooted? (Score:2)
Re:Chrooted? (Score:2)
Re:Chrooted? (Score:2)
Sounds like you need to do a little homework yourself.
Re:Chrooted? (Score:2)
ATTN: Web Pages That Suck (Score:4, Interesting)
The first thing I see when I go to the FreeBSD [freebsd.org] website is this:
In my 15-second perusal of the FreeBSD site, I get a good idea of what FreeBSD is. The only impression I get from the MicroBSD site is that they care more about blogwhoring than about writing any real software.Frankly, branching a new distro for some petty reason (I'm going to assume that's what it is since it is so damn hard to find out) instead of contributing tools and patches to an existing BSD seems just a tad too reminiscent of that other large free OS community.