FreeBSD 5.3 Released 328
cpugeniusmv writes "FreeBSD 5.3 has been released! This release marks a milestone in the FreeBSD 5.x series and the beginning of the 5-STABLE branch of releases. For a complete list of new features and known problems, please see the
release notes and
errata list. Bittorrent Download."
*BSD is dying, et al... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:*BSD is dying, et al... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:*BSD is dying, et al... (Score:2)
Re:*BSD is dying, et al... (Score:3, Insightful)
Uh.. yeah. Aren't you happy with it? That's pretty much the BSD spirit: academical, not political.
Anyway, since you insist, there are some OS's that *should* get better at copying:
About FreeBSD's Network Stack [slashdot.org]
Quote:"FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
And since there have been cases where GPL programmers *stole* BSD code (here [feyrer.de]), let me add that
Re:*BSD is dying, et al... (Score:2)
FreeBSD uses gcc 2.4.2? (Score:5, Informative)
I know, it's a mistake. 3.4.3, or 3.4.2?
Anyway, FreeBSD rules. I'm glad they waited to make 5.3 great.
Re:FreeBSD uses gcc 2.4.2? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FreeBSD uses gcc 2.4.2? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FreeBSD uses gcc 2.4.2? (Score:2)
Excellent OS (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Excellent OS (Score:3, Interesting)
In october, the 3 topmost reliable sites were all FreeBSD (4th was either Net~ or Open~ and 8th was again FreeBSD).Read More [netcraft.com]
Re:Excellent OS (Score:2)
The number 4 (SecDog [secdog.com]) is most likely running OpenBSD as can be seen from the alliances [secdog.com] page. The SecDog ISP has been named many times as the most reliable host by Netcraft, and now all their infrastructure servers has moved to OpenBSD [undeadly.org].
Re:Excellent OS (Score:4, Insightful)
But if you want security, go OpenBSD, it's the world leader. A close second is NetBSD, which right now is much faster and more stable than FreeBSD 5 (even in many SMP cases, too). FreeBSD is okay for many users but it has slowed down tremendously, lost a lot of cleanliness too. It's a shame to see such a great system degenerate, but it happened.
In my opinion, NetBSD is a good half-way between Linux and OpenBSD. It has a lot of Linux-like performance (sometimes better, sometimes worse) and design, but security isn't far behind OpenBSD in practice. It doesn't have anywhere near as many randomization-of-kernel-data features though, which you might find handy. You can still use cgd for any storage including swap, if you're really paranoid
Re:Excellent OS (Score:2, Interesting)
How is it on the desktop? Not a flame, I'm really curious, haven't tried NetBSD in like 6 or 7 years, and for
Re:Excellent OS (Score:4, Interesting)
But as for hardware support, what most consider the defining point of desktop use, it's great. All hardware it does support, it supports basically to full capacity, and the range is good. Right now you'll want standard hardware though, because the NVidia driver is not officially ported (there's an unofficial port I'll have to try) and the xorg one is flaky (but I'm using it now), and there is no NDIS wrapper so standard network cards are your best choice (i.e. nForce networking might not be an option). Fetch a good Realtek and you're set for life. Sound is good, doesn't do software mixing like FreeBSD nor hardware mixing (for most at lesat) like ALSA, but quality is good.
It has good server applications too, not only because it can run on server-centric architectures really well, but more because it is very solid, secure and good at handling load (haven't tried under ultra-high load, but it survived a thrasing from stress(1)). This doesn't affect you since you since you're after desktop, but it's nice to know that it can scale up.
Worth a try, installs quickly, easy to manage and all... not like it'll take a long time or a lot of effort
Re:thanks for the info (Score:3, Interesting)
Definitely worth considering too, it's an extremely solid system that I have a lot of faith in.
Re:Excellent OS (Score:3, Interesting)
pkgsrc might be smaller in numbers but in quality it just smokes ports (don't even argue)
No matter what, the *BSDs are on
Re:Excellent OS (Score:2, Interesting)
What irks me about pkgsrc is the lack of configurability. In Ports there were values you could set that would often be used to define functionality, like WITH_VORBIS and so on. pkgsrc has these but there are very few of them and they aren't always consistent between packages. Try compiling xmms without esd, for instance... is it possible wi
NetBSD faster than FreeBSD??? (Score:4, Interesting)
Traditional folklore said OpenBSD is focused on security, NetBSD on portability, and FreeBSD on performance (on x86). How can NetBSD be faster than FreeBSD now? Heck, if NetBSD is about correctness and portability, and on top of that they manage to beat FreeBSD in terms of speed, then there's something really really wrong with FreeBSD.
So I guess my real question is, is it really true that NetBSD is surpassing FreeBSD at heir own game?
Yes (Score:3, Interesting)
FreeBSD always achieved performance through best-case-everywhere optimization and scalability of algorithms for everything. Out of nowhere NetBSD beat it in scalability after two weeks' work (everyone knows this now). NetBSD had always focused on making things simple, portable, solid and logical. This kept it slower (much slower) for a long time, but now in 2.0 it's made huge headway with Scheduler Activations (even known to be faster than NPTL!). This makes a huge difference on it
Re:pity the fools (Score:3, Interesting)
I am hoping to see Java and SMP perform better with FreeBSD 5.x and I want to see how DragonFly performs.
Re:NetBSD faster than FreeBSD??? (Score:4, Insightful)
The issue the grandparent is alluding to is that we've had some performance hits in early 5.x versions compared to our own 4.x branch. This is due to introducing a wider SMP model, and the necessity for locks for this. However, this is infrastructure for a overall speedup, and we are continually moving more of the code over to the higher performance model.
As far as I know (from what numbers I have seen), we're still faster than NetBSD overall in 5.x, but not in all subcases.
Apart from that, the folklore is a simplification. FreeBSD has several platforms, and we have generally had good performance, but it isn't a really specific focus. It's just something we are good at (compared to the other BSDs, and in many cases compared to Linux). We're also good at general support of software (there are over 11,000 packages for FreeBSD), documentation, etc.
FreeBSD, NetBSD, and DragonflyBSD has taken a number of different routes for optimization lately. It is not clear which of these will lead to be the best performance over time; it may be that FreeBSD will keep a lead, or it may be that one of the others will overtake us. Speed is a game everybody plays.
Eivind.
Re:Excellent OS (Score:5, Insightful)
You my friend, are a Troll. As an avid user of FreeBSD 4,5, 4.10, 5.1, 5.2.1, and now 5.3RC2, I can personally guarantee that you have no fucking Idea what you are talking about. Lost cleanliness, my ass! The improvements in 5.3 are awesome. The integration of BIND 9 into the base inside a chroot jail is excellent. The separation of Perl from the base also helped to clean it up. The user experience is awesome in 5.3... My Ghz athlon server has 500+ ports installed, every service you could imagine, and runs X.org with OpenGL flawlessly. I notice a distinct increase in performance and functionality after CVSUPing from 5.2.1 to 5.3 RC2. With a streamlined kernel and good old SCHED_4BSD what exactly is so "unclean"? Have you had a personal experience with 5.3 or are you just spouting mindless zealotry? Why are you on a personal quest for schism in the BSD community?
Calling anything so massively successful "crap" is just pure ignorance. Are Linux and Windows, or anything that's not NetBSD also crap? Please share.... The /. mods obviously can't get enough of your idiotic pontification.
Re:Excellent OS (Score:2, Insightful)
You are the one who have no idea of what you're talking about.
FreeBSD 5's SMP model is a performance hog on UP systems. This is a well known side effect of the heavy mutex approach. However, fell free to live in denial. FreeBSD 4.10 is still a lot faster than 5.3 on any UP box I've tried. And SMP performance on 5.3 is nothing to write home about. DragonFlyBSD is faster on SMP boxes, which is funny, since they did in 1 year what FreeBSD hasn't done in 3.
I like FreeBSD, I've used it since 2.2.8, but it
been a while (Score:3, Interesting)
ummm although it would have been nice to see a new installer
Re:been a while (Score:2)
FWIW, of the three, FreeBSD is the easiest to install... Throw in a floppy disk and do a base ftp install including source code and ports tree. CVSup the ports tree and then install from there so you don't need to update any ports afterwards. I find fdisk to be a real pain if you've not used it much, so I find OpenBSD and NetBSD a bit more of a pain than FreeBSD...
Re:been a while (Score:3)
Re:been a while (Score:4, Funny)
Re:been a while (Score:2)
beer just shot out of my nose.
Re:been a while (Score:2)
Let alone a new install app.
Re:been a while (Score:2, Insightful)
A few questions... (Score:4, Interesting)
Why do you prefer it over other Unix-like OS's?
Have you encountered many problems with hardware compatibility, particularly USB, RAID, and audio?
Have you had difficulty finding applications that will run on it?
In general, will software written for Linux compile and run on FreeBSD without too much difficulty?
Re:A few questions... (Score:4, Informative)
I mainly like it for the ports system. The only things I know of that can compare with it would be Debian's apt-get and Gentoo's portage. However, I was never able to get a Debian or Gentoo system to install. YMMV
Have you encountered many problems with hardware compatibility, particularly USB, RAID, and audio?
I tried to get USB to work in 4.x, and failed, but USB support is supposed to be much better in 5.x. Audio has worked fine for me.
Have you had difficulty finding applications that will run on it?
That's the best thing about it: the ports system.
In general, will software written for Linux compile and run on FreeBSD without too much difficulty?
Well, first check if it's in the ports system. If it's well-known software, it probably is, so you're all set. Otherwise, it really depends on the software. If it's small and simple, and wasn't written with lots of Linuxisms, then it should be no problem. If it's 10^7 lines of code, and was written by people who assumed it would only be used on Linux, then you may have a long, hard road ahead.
Re:A few questions... (Score:2)
Re:A few questions... (Score:2)
USB support worked great for me in 4.10 as soon as I rebuilt the kernel with support for it. Then again, this was a much older machine, so it was obviously 1.1, not a newer version. Did you have problems with 2.0 or just USB in general?
Re:A few questions... (Score:2)
Actually, even then your road is not usually that hard. You can even run Linux native binaries, such as RedHat RPMs. Just install the Linux compatibility ports, read the basic documentation, and you will find it's not that hard to get a Linux binary running. For example, I use this to run certain proprietary CUPS printer drivers that were written only for RedHat. (Yes
Re:A few questions... (Score:3, Informative)
Only time its been noticably slower than on windows was when I left a make buildworld running in the background.
Re:A few questions... (Score:2, Informative)
Ports would be the first and most important thing. It seems easier to administer than Linux: pf is a good firewall, and the startup scripts are very logically organized. Built-in ACLs have come in handy; soft-updates and filesystem snapshots are very nice too.
Have you encountered many problems with hardware compatibility, particularly USB, RAID, and audio?
It auto-configured most stuff on my Mini-ITX box (small/low-power file/web/whatever server, and soo
Re:A few questions... (Score:5, Informative)
Software: most software written for linux would compile without much change on FreeBSD. In fact, that's how the ports system work. Check out freshports [freshports.org] to see if your favourite app is included or not. You can also have binary packages, which can be installed similarly to debian packages (pkg_add -r blah is ~ apt-get install blah). If you put linux_enable="YES" into your rc.conf, you'll have linux 'emulation.' Don't worry, it's not really an emulation, linux-apps run with native speed on FreeBSD. Really. (you can try it yourself if you don't believe me, for sometimes there exists both a native freebsd and a linux version of the same program). Finding an app is as simple as cding into /usr/ports and typing "make search name=[progname]" if you know the name of the application you need or "make search key=[whatever]" to search in the short descriptions of each port. Installing that app is as simple as entering it's directory, and typing make install clean (or if you have portupgrade tool installed, you can simply say: portinstall mplayer. Details in the handbook :)
I also have slack on my puter btw (with kernel 2.6.7), and now that ULE is turned off, slack seems to be slightly faster on the desktop (KDE on both), but only if the system is heavily loaded. I think, even for someone who is new to FreeBSD, tracking -STABLE (look up what that means in the handbook [freebsd.org] is pretty safe, and hopefully they will reenable the new ULE constant time scheduler (whatever that means, I just read this fancy description on OSNEWS :o)) soon.
Hardware compatibility: FreeBSD supports standard pc hardware. There are accelerated binary native nvidia drivers for freebsd. USB support is excellent (my USB mouse worked out of the box, just read the installation messages carefully - you have to say no to mouse configuration if you have an usb mouse) ... except for USB 2.0. So USB 2.0 devices work in 1.1 compatibility mode. Discussion, however, is already started for fixing USB 2.0 support (EHCI driver), and I'm sure it will be ready soon. I also have a tv card (PlayTV MPEG2, an el cheapo card) which works nicely under FreeBSD and with mencoder (and FreeBSD's own native tv app, fxtv). In fact, I have much clearer picture than on windows, thanks to better filters in mplayer I think. This is the command I use to get the best quality btw:
Re:A few questions... (Score:2)
Re:A few questions... (Score:2)
A few answers (Score:2)
Because it works for everything I need to do and it does so predictably. I need to know very few things to just admin my desktop.
* Have you encountered many problems with hardware compatibility, particularly USB, RAID, and audio?
No. generally hardware is very well behaved if you have normal mainstream or (in sectors) corporate hardware that "everyone has" it will work just fine in both those segments.
* Have you had difficulty finding applications that wil
FreeBSD on Compaqs (Score:5, Interesting)
FreeBSD, dead at 5.3 (Score:2)
So how is the PPC port coming along? I was hoping it would make it into 5.3.
Re:FreeBSD, dead at 5.3 (Score:3, Funny)
Enjoy
Re:FreeBSD, dead at 5.3 (Score:2)
-Jem
Re:FreeBSD, dead at 5.3 (Score:3, Informative)
Most people know that MacOS X is not FreeBSD, and that it's based on NeXtStep, with the entire userland (almost) out of the FreeBSD 5.xx branch (10.4 anyways) (not just "some", a good bit)
Lighten up, it's the weekend
Re:FreeBSD, dead at 5.3 (Score:3, Informative)
Tangent-Rant: I am sad that Linux produces a new event waiting interface with every minor version but none of them come anywhere near being as complete as kqueue. In Linux, if you want to wait on file descriptors and signa
Re:FreeBSD, dead at 5.3 (Score:2)
You might or might not consider those "cool features", but they're features in FreeBSD 5.x that are not in Darwin. There are proba
Re:Tangent rant (Score:2)
Yup, longjmp()ing out of signal handlers sucks. We finally gave up on SIGALRM+longjmp() as a timeout mechanism for IP address to host name lookups in Ethereal, because, in additiona to not being able to use it on Windows (which is where the timeout problem is worst, thanks to inverse NetBIOS-over-TCP lookups), we also can't use i
FreeBSD 5.0 for Alpha? (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought they were going to relegate Alpha to Tier 2, but I see ISO images on the servers? Thank you FreeBSD team!!!!!
Re:FreeBSD 5.0 for Alpha? (Score:2)
Re:FreeBSD 5.0 for Alpha? (Score:2)
Easy there, it might not be that solid. They haven't done much testing outside of x86 and even that is flaky and/or slow for a lot of hardware (including hardware every machine has).
As I understand it a pretty large amount of testing has gone into amd64 too. A decent number of developers have amd64 boxes, and that helps a lot.
Alpha support was in 4.x, but has been going down for a while now, especially in 5.x. Port build testing on pointyhat isn't even done for Alpha anymore (according to Kris the Alp
Mmmmm... Easy network dirvers (Score:2)
Switch? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm also helping my girlfriend with Suse 9.1 on her Hewlett-Packard laptop. She has problems with ACPI, stability, and the linksys wireless card we bought for it. Is there any way she could benefit from a switch to this new BSD release?
Re:Switch? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Switch? (Score:3, Insightful)
Try out FreeBSD on a live CD (Score:5, Informative)
obiligatory scriptage (Score:2, Funny)
Re:obiligatory scriptage (Score:2)
Not needed if he runs bash (which I do on my 4.9 box)
BT (Score:2, Informative)
upgrade 4.10 to 5.3 stable (Score:2, Insightful)
Tejas Kokje
Re:upgrade 4.10 to 5.3 stable (Score:5, Informative)
2) read http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/h andbook/current-stable.html
3) and this: http://home.nyc.rr.com/computertaijutsu/FreeBSD53. html
Re:upgrade 4.10 to 5.3 stable (Score:2)
3 Upgrading from previous releases of FreeBSD Users with existing FreeBSD systems are highly encouraged to read the ``FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE Migration Guide''. This document generally has the filename MIGRATE5.TXT on the distribution media, or any other place that the release notes can be found. It offers some notes on migrating from FreeBSD 4.X, but more importantly, also discusses some of the relative merits of upgrading to FreeBSD
Re:upgrade 4.10 to 5.3 stable (Score:2, Flamebait)
Ever since I fell from "Sun God" (Score:5, Interesting)
After leaving the university environment and getting a real job, I wanted to re-live the Sun environment at home, but goodness, were Sun systems ever pricy. Linux looked like a viable alternative, but FreeBSD had just released 2.0 at the time.
I went with FreeBSD.
It was a pretty easy decision: FreeBSD was the more Sun-like of the two PC Unix-like systems. Specifically, Linux used the System V style of runlevels, and Sun had jaded me against System V ever since they stopped bundling the compiler and called their OS "Solaris."
That was awhile back. Today, I've got rackmount hardware at home running a variety of operating systems. I get most of my stuff done on Linux. But FreeBSD has run, now runs, and will most likely continue to run my firewall and NAT. It doesn't do much else; but what it does, it does with efficiency and grace.
Cheers, Chuckie.
Slackware junkies should give BSD a try.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Slackware junkies should give BSD a try.. (Score:3, Informative)
I was in the same boat. I'd been running Slackware since 8.0 on a Pentium 133 home server, and recently switched to a BSD - NetBSD.
Installation went smoothly. The installer rivaled Slackware's and was easier to tweak to minimize the amount of stuff being installed.
The documentation is good, and I had a custom kernel built within an hour or two.
I haven't used FreeBSD, but if it's anything like NetBSD it's a good alternative to Slackware.
Crazy period?! (Score:4, Funny)
Look at everything that's happening since.
- New releases of *BSD variants.
- Bush re-elected
-
- Half life 2 released in about a week.
What next? Flying pigs? (Name that Simpson episode!)
Re:Crazy period?! (Score:2)
"And now the pig de resistance"
Re:Crazy period?! (Score:2)
What next? Flying pigs?
With enough thrust, even pigs can fly...
Re:Crazy period?! (Score:2)
s/With enough thrust/With enough upward thrust/
Encrypted gbde swap! Finally! (Score:3, Insightful)
Now playing: (Score:2, Funny)
Upgrading from RC2? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Upgrading from RC2? (Score:5, Informative)
pkg_add -r cvsup-without-gui
edit the example cvsup file:
so that:
*default release=cvs tag=.
becomes
*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_5_3
Then, do the following (quoted from
make buildworld
make buildkernel KERNCONF=YOUR_KERNEL_HERE
make installkernel KERNCONF=YOUR_KERNEL_HERE
make installworld
You can omit the KERNCONF business if you just want to use the GENERIC kernel.
Re:Upgrading from RC2? (Score:3, Informative)
-Use RELENG_5, not RELENG_5_3. The latter is just errata/security fixes, the former is the true 'stable' branch for 5.x. It is going to get a lot more attention and MFC's.
-'make world kernel' works just as well, since you don't need to be paranoid about library changes this late in the release cycle.
-You can set KERNCONF=foo in make.conf to never have to type it on the command line. Same goes for every make variable you find yourself passing - this especially appl
Re:Upgrading from RC2? (Score:3, Informative)
Trolltalk is trolltalk, facts are facts. :) (Score:3, Informative)
Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD [netcraft.com]
"FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Re:The torrent link is not working (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The torrent link is not working (Score:2)
Currently uploading about 2x as fast as downloading.
BitTorrent is an _excellent_ tool and sure is helping in so many legitimate ways.
Re:Doesn't Matter (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Doesn't Matter (Score:2)
Compare this say to the way submitting bug reports to other groups yields dead silence.
Consider this:
The original problem report:
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive / kernel/20 04-11/msg00037.html
The latest from Matt:
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/ke rnel/20 04-11/msg00056.html
Mind y
Re:Doesn't Matter (Score:3, Interesting)
I for one, never did or said anything adverse, and you still call me an asshole and lunatic, simply because I use and develop DragonFly BSD.
*claps hands* Great logic!
Re:great news! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:great news! (Score:2)
I love BSD, but without a software RAID on which you can rely on it is not useable for anything but small near-embedded single purpose stuff and ultra-huge systems where you can afford proper hardware RAID.
Re:great news! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:great news! (Score:2)
Re:great news! (Score:3, Informative)
1. Vinum was released working in 5.0, broken in 5.1, fixed temporarily around patch level 9 of 5.1 and broken since.
2. 5.3 has been released with broken vinum and a half working replacement called gvinum which "may cause system panic on boot". That is quoting from the errata.
3. I have a few systems with vinum around and I am extremely pissed off after recovering them from extreme filesystem corruption three times - twice in 5.1 and once in 5.2.
Does that answer your question?
Re:Future FreeBSD releases (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Future FreeBSD releases (Score:3, Informative)
I didn't. The post was a clever troll.
Re:Future FreeBSD releases (Score:4, Informative)
http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD
You'll notice an extra sentence in the above post that doesn't seem to belong.. Rather hypocritical attacking post editing with post editing - maybe they need to look down and see what shoe's on their foot?
Re:it could be worse (Score:2)
For all of those who still don't believe me when I say FreeBSD 5.3 is a lousy release, see these links and decide for yourself:
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/errata.html [freebsd.org]
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cg [freebsd.org]
Re:Should have released it on Monday (Score:2, Flamebait)
November second is Day Of the Dead (all souls day).
If you're going to troll, at least do it with some intelligence... If not, you're just another stroke (pun intended) repeating the same warmed over hash.
Re:Dead? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Who still uses *BSD...? (Score:3, Insightful)
I have tried it. OS X is a great desktop/workstation, but it is not the definitive Unix server. I had the pleasure of administrating on XServe running a very large and busy website, and I will take plain 'ol FreeBSD any day, hands down. Apple just tends to overcomplicate many aspects of the server, with non-standard system layout, elaborate extra configurations for standard services, making it hard to turn off services, and for Cthulhu's sake
Re:Who still uses *BSD...? (Score:3, Insightful)
What sort of "everything" are you thinking of here? I certainly don't do my compiles in a GUI - and, heck, I even move stuff to and from the desktop using mv> from a Terminal window.
Re:In Other News (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Off Topic Slightly (Score:3, Informative)
Re:compatibility (Score:3, Informative)