Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
BSD Operating Systems

NetBSD 2.0 RC5 Tagged 74

ulib writes "NetBSD 2.0_RC5 has now been tagged. Changes since RC4 include fixes to various COMPAT_ emulations, IP Filter backward compatibility fixes, XFree86, pax(1), rsh(1), hp300 boot blocks, pthread fixes for amd64 and i386, documentation updates. Binary snapshots of NetBSD 2.0_RC5 are available in the daily builds directory on the main FTP site."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NetBSD 2.0 RC5 Tagged

Comments Filter:
  • by HighOrbit ( 631451 ) on Saturday November 27, 2004 @02:51PM (#10932077)
    Does NetBSD have any plans to migrate? Or do they have a good reason for sticking with XFree86?
  • I understand the OpenBSD has its origins in NetBSD. I've been using OpenBSD for some time now and was curious if anyone knew any pros/cons of one versus the other. Thanks.
    • by Piranhaa ( 672441 ) on Saturday November 27, 2004 @11:05PM (#10934856)
      Well I am a big fan of Open and Free BSD's. As soon as I get my iBook back in from warantee I will be dualbooting OSx with netbsd. I tried Openbsd and it simply never had the support. Understand the BSD goals. Openbsd tries to be the most secure/stable OS. FreeBSD likes to be rich with features. NetBSD tries to get on as many architechtures as possible. It's all about flavors, just like various flavors of linux. There, I hope that helps you :)
      • You sure about that? Last hackathon there was a metric assload of improvements to the macppc port from what I hear; a fair number of developers use PowerBooks.

        I realise that iBooks and PowerBooks use some different hardware, but the support should be there I'd think.

    • by Nimrangul ( 599578 ) on Saturday November 27, 2004 @11:06PM (#10934864) Journal
      First, here are a few fundamental differences between the two operating systems, all the while I will list perceived pros and cons of NetBSD and OpenBSD in random spots.

      OpenBSD broke from the NetBSD base over 9 years ago, that is nine years of code divergence in small ways even in the most similar of parts of the codebases.

      NetBSD has a great deal of platforms that are supported, including architectures untouched by most other operating systems. OpenBSD supports only 14 platforms, with several discontinued ones as well. NetBSD's supported platforms however are not up to the same standard as OpenBSD's; OpenBSD requires that the port be compilable on it's given platform and many of NetBSD's cannot. This makes the overall codebase of NetBSD more portable and stable at the price of properly supporting it's platforms.

      OpenBSD has in the past audited the codebase for it's entire system in order to remove as many programming errors as possible, this has lead to increased security as well as stability.

      OpenBSD has in the past removed system tools and ports that it deems to be too insecure or bug ridden. NetBSD does not have this policy. Such as rlogin.

      OpenBSD has in the past fought over licenses which they do not believe in having within their system; trying to relicense or replace code which does not conform with their level liberal code. NetBSD does not find this to be a priority. Such things include SSH/OpenSSH, IPF/PF, XFree86/ and GnuTAR/TAR.

      OpenBSD integrates security minded protection into it's system whenever possible. NetBSD does not. Stack protection; stackghost on Sparc and propolice on I386 as well as taking them to other platforms in the future.

      I honestly see no major pros to using NetBSD over OpenBSD on any of the overlapping platforms, but NetBSD is on more platforms.

    • as one point of comparison, in the time NetBSD 2.0 has been in beta, OpenBSD has managed to ship two releases out the door.

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.