Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Announcements Operating Systems Upgrades BSD News

NetBSD 2.1 Released 109

Posted by CowboyNeal from the new-and-improved dept.
jschauma writes "NetBSD for everyone! Lots of news regarding new NetBSD releases: On October 31st, 2005, NetBSD 2.0.3, a source-only security update of the NetBSD 2.0 release, was announced. Since many people are still somewhat confused by the new versioning scheme used in NetBSD, this release was preceeded by an explanation of the NetBSD branches. Only two days after the 2.0.3 announcement, on November 2nd, 2005, NetBSD 2.1 was released. NetBSD 2.1 is the first maintenance release of the netbsd-2 release branch, and was announced with binary distributions for 54 architectures. Primary means of distribution include bittorrent."
jschauma continues, "Not entirely by coincidence, a number of security advisories was released almost simultaneously, which for the most part have been fixed in these two latest releases. However, since the release engineering process could not be delayed even further, there are three advisories that affect even NetBSD 2.1 -- a security update on this branch (ie NetBSD 2.1.1) is expected to be released very soon as well. Finally, the NetBSD release engineering team also released an update of revised estimate for the release date of NetBSD 3.0, the next major release which will bring a number of new features. Please consider making a tax-deductible (in the US) donation to support NetBSD."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NetBSD 2.1 Released More

NetBSD 2.1 Released

Comments Filter:

  • NetBSD 3.0 (Score:4, Informative)

    by chrysalis ( 50680 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @07:41PM (#13946200) Homepage
    NetBSD 3.0 is also coming in a few weeks (end of November).

    • Re:NetBSD 3.0 (Score:2, Funny)

      by ploss ( 860589 )
      No, give me a more obscure time reference, since that is after the milk in my fridge expires...

      Is that before the bananas on the counter spoil? Or maybe when my bread starts growing mold?

      Get with the program, concrete date references are out of style now!
      • I just submitted a bug to Google regarding their calculator. Apparently dividing libraries of congress by hogsheads per fortnight isn't supported.
         

  • You know this is a lame article when... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    nobody can think of anything to qualify as +5 Funny..
    • Is it more time-effective to work on security patches for NetBSD or to upgrade the three or four affected machines to Gentoo?
    • I guess. It's really a press release - not much to comment on.

      I find a hard time keeping track of all the *BSDs. There's

      OpenBSD

      NetBSD

      FreeBSD

      I also see DeadBSD a lot here on /. Can't find the website to download.

      • *BSD (Score:4, Informative)

        by onetruedabe ( 116148 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @08:57PM (#13946726) Homepage
        I find a hard time keeping track of all the *BSDs.

        There are THREE (not counting DragonFly BSD [dragonflybsd.org])

          OpenBSD = Secure
          FreeBSD = Feature-Rich
          NetBSD = Portable (54 Architectures?!)

        Contrast that to the seventeen-jillion Linux distros out there; I hardly think folks can complain about being confused by the overwhelming multitude (NOT!) of BSD derivatives.

        Seriously, though. I like to tell people BSD stands for "Better Stripped Down" 'cuz if you need a small server, running on commodity (read: "used") hardware, BSD will serve you very well.

        You don't want your firewall running OOo, or come standard with seven different mail readers. Lean and mean, that's BSD's selling point.
        • You don't want your firewall running OOo
          You could theorectically, if you used NetBSD/Xen.
      • This is Slashdot. You should also see: OpenBSD NetBSD FreeBSD OpneBSD NetBDS OpeBSD FreeBSD FreeBSD Oh, and don't forget OpenBSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD.
    • BSD zealots are moderating this thread, and nothing is funny about it. They are more serious about being open than anyone else. Nothing is or ever will be more open than BSD; it seriously is the only completely open UNIX anywhere. (Because Linux and GNU are NOT really UNIX; seriously, they are just less open clones of UNIX specs). So let's all take this very seriously, and not joke about it, OK? I'm feeling some "serious" flames already.
  • the crickets on this thread....who loves BSD! I still do!
    • Heh. Yes but which flavour?
      • OpenBSD, I don't own a toaster or nightstand that I could load net on. But if I did, you'd be sure netbsd would be there!

        I used to run NetBSD on my dreamcast. Why? I don't know....
      • Linux.org lists 415 Linux distributions. Four hundred fifteen! Just take the most common ones, like Suse and Red Hat, and exchange executables or configuration files between them. At least you can do that with the listed BSD distributions.

    • Re:You can almost hear... (Score:4, Informative)

      by kv9 ( 697238 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @09:21PM (#13946871) Homepage

      who loves BSD! I still do!

      me too! but seriously, i run 2.0.2/current at home on a couple of boxes (along with slackware and *gasp* w2k) and its great. small, stable, elegant, has a wide selection of packages (with stellar management, i might add) and a whole array of nice toys to play with. its strongest point, imho, is the separation of the base system from the extra software, which also goes for the other younger bsds out there.

      in other news pkgsrc on SFU updated [netbsd.org], the new pf from obsd/3.8 is getting ported [net-server3.de], there is also a kernel emulator for fbsd/5+ [netbsd.org] and a smbus implementation [netbsd.org]. matlab works [netbsd.org] too and some people might be interested in a list [dnsalias.org] of translations for the `of course it runs netbsd' motto.

      what else can be said, its great that *the* bsd is still alive

      • Several people have reported instability in 2.0.x on mac68k [netbsd.org], growing worse with uptime. But not everyone - some say it's stable as a rock. I was really looking forward to 2.0, with the native threading, but this has made me hold on to 1.6.2 for my more recent installs. I'm hoping 2.1 has fixed whatever the problem was.

        Two things I love about NetBSD: pkgsrc, and the ease of upgrades. Pkgsrc is the best package manager I've ever worked with. And the "unpack the tarballs and reboot" upgrades don't get

      • Any free OS that can be a Xen guest [xensource.com] is okay in my books. Linux, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Plan9... All good stuff.
    • the crickets on this thread....who loves BSD! I still do!

      You can hear the crickets, because many of the reasonable people who see the wonderful value in the BSD's, have left /. and are conversing in a positive "common goal" manner in mailing lists, etc.

      The in fighting and dick measuring contests which often go on in here are unproductive and unpleasant. /. is a urine soaked sand pit.

      I love the three main free BSD's. /. is still sometimes good for a heads-up though and I still sometimes get caught up in the
  • I hope my usb keyboard and my netgear nic are supported.

    I may have to wait for netbsd 3.0. Its fustrating and my nic worked with linux 2.0.

  • Poor Bastards (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 03, 2005 @08:08PM (#13946415)
    Just think, they get laid about as offten as they reboot. Never.

  • compared to linux? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by johansalk ( 818687 ) on Thursday November 03, 2005 @11:10PM (#13947419)
    I'm a linux newbie, I'm still learning bash and gnu/posix; what's the advantage of netBSD/BSDs over linux?

    • Re:compared to linux? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by fyoder ( 857358 )
      For servers I can install a minimalist FreeBSD setup very quickly and administer it from the command line. The main OSS server stuff installs on FreeBSD with little if any problem. Perhaps there is a 'Lean Linux' distro that would be similarly suitable. I prefer a popular linux distro like Fedora or Mandriva for the desktop.

    • Re:compared to linux? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 04, 2005 @12:52AM (#13947876)
      The advantage is simply the philosophy difference between the BSD world and the GNU world. For some things, BSDs are faster and more secure. Linux tends to have more hardware support for low end hardware and therefore is good for the 300 dollar dells that people buy. The cheaper your hardware the better. Another oddity with linux is that it runs on really expensive IBM mainframes. Anything in the middle and you're better off with another OS.

      NetBSD's goal is to run on everything but they tend to not include drivers sometimes. Its the fastest OS i've ever used on sparc hardware. I've used linux, netbsd, and often run freebsd. I can tell you that BSDs are administered a bit differently and the ports (pkgsrc i think in netbsd) collection is a god send. Its like gentoo's portage and gentoo is heavily influenced by BSD based oses. If you like gentoo, you'd love to step up to the real thing. Now if you're a redhat GUI i want it to do everything kind of guy stick to fedora, ubuntu, mandrake or the like. They are for the masses. DesktopBSD or several other bsd for the masses projects may someday yield a similar bsd offering.

      In open source land, there's now a selection. Linux (distro list here), FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, OpenDarwin/Darwin, DragonFlyBSD, DesktopBSD (although just freebsd with a gui not a real fork), Solaris/OpenSolaris. Pick based on your needs: hardware support, ease of use, features and how you think. Some people just get system v unix and others prefer bsd. I think most linux distros lean toward system v minus gentoo and solaris is in that camp obviously. Everything else listed is a bsd style os with darwin being the freak mach (richard stallman wishes) version. In case you haven't noticed its a holy war. To summorize, its like asking why linux is better than windows to me. (linux is obviously better) But, there are select few things that windows excels at like running your local game store's games.

      Oh not to confuse you, richard stallman is the guy that made this all possible. His vision is to give everyone NEXTSTEP by duplicating software from 1988 that steve jobs had and rebranding it GNU/Mach GNU/Hurd and using the GNUSTEP and windowmaker software to accomplish his task. Someday we'll have free NEXTSTEP. For now he settles for the Linux kernel which he can't control. If he didn't, he'd have no kernel for his lovely GNU userland.

      So you see the linux system is flawed in one sense.. the kernel is not tied to the userland (software that you run). The advantage is portability and the down side is speed and integration. Its the tossup between linux and every other OS i've listed. Strictly speaking linux is just a kernel and the GNU supplies the rest. There's an effort among the BSD zealots to replace every GNU program with a BSD licensed replacement. Its a big pissing match. You can love linux and not like the GNU and i think most people fall into this category that give kudos to linux. If this weren't true, everyone would be working on GNU/Hurd right now.

      If you have more questions, look at www.gnu.org, www.netbsd.org and www.freebsd.org for more information.

      I have six computers in my home and 4 run bsd derived operating systems. I couldn't be happier with them.

      • Re:compared to linux? (Score:3, Informative)

        by Morth ( 322218 )
        Hrm, I sort of agree, but I wouldn't say linux is slower, because it depends very much on what you do. The extra hardware support might also matter, if you have something unusual.

        However, a big advantage of BSD is the base distribution where you get libraries and base tools together with the kernel. There's no risk of a system call existing in the libraries but not in the kernel, and there's no risk of the basic tools being out of sync. Some linux dists are sort of like this too, but it's usually more cumbe
      • Linux is only useful on either a $300 crap box or a high end mainframe? WTF are you talking about? Anything in the middle and your better off with another OS?

        "To summorize, its like asking why linux is better than windows to me. (linux is obviously better) "

        Really? I guess you must own one of those crap walmart boxes then.

        Your post has a few truths and a lots of BS. It's really unhelpful for someone truly interested in the differences between netbsd and linux.

      • So you see the linux system is flawed in one sense.. the kernel is not tied to the userland (software that you run).

        You don't know what you are talking about. Both BSD and Linux interface with 'userland' the same ways, through device drivers and the C library.

        There's an effort among the BSD zealots to replace every GNU program with a BSD licensed replacement.

        Such people are in the minority. The GNU Core Utilities are generally regarded as superior to their BSD counterparts. Indeed it was the built

      • ... The cheaper your hardware the better. Another oddity with linux is that it runs on really expensive IBM mainframes. Anything in the middle and you're better off with another OS.

        You don't know what you're talking about. I've installed and run Linux on probably 70 different machines from el-crappo PCs, high end PCs, laptops, low and middle end servers... Runs beautifully on all of them. You should try it some time.

        richard stallman is the guy that made this all possible. His vision is to give everyone N

  • abcd (Score:1)

    by pkplex ( 535744 )
    Two of most my favourate OS released in close proximity to each other. Yay :)

    Anyone else here find they often switch back and forth between BSD's ?

    • Re:abcd (Score:3, Informative)

      by laffer1 ( 701823 )
      I don't switch exactly, but each bsd seems to have a niche on certain hardware. NetBSD is the fastest os i've ever used on sparc hardware and openbsd runs great on g3 macs. I tend to run FreeBSD on ia32 hardware.
  • I've been using FreeBSD for many years, and I admit to having never tried NetBSD. Could anyone convince me of a reason why I should try it, why it may be better than FreeBSD, what advantages it holds over other BSDs?

    • Re:NetBSD over FreeBSD? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by laffer1 ( 701823 ) <luke@@@foolishgames...com> on Friday November 04, 2005 @01:01AM (#13947927) Homepage Journal
      NetBSD is very fast for certain operations and is often used in networking research (internet2, ipv6, etc). If you don't have an SMP box or hyperthreading its quite fast and in my opinion the best os on sparc architectures. The ports system is a bit different. They have something called pkgsrc thats portable across operating systems. All bsds have a twist on the ports collection really. Its a big factor in choosing.

      I'm a FreeBSD user primarily and I think NetBSD has some good points like major portability. I think they do more testing and its generally a more stable OS. FreeBSD 6.0 release should fix most of the recent problems. Think of NetBSD like a continuation of FreeBSD 4.x more. There are a lot of differences, but mostly small things. FreeBSD 5 and 6 are attempts to improve dual core, SMP, and hyperthreading based computers in the long haul.

      NetBSD and FreeBSD people don't tend to get along simply becuase there's real competition lately between the two projects. Both are great operating systems and I think both are good at different tasks. If you plan on running a bsd on non ia32 hardware, definetely check out NetBSD. It might be worth trying it just to see if there are any unique features. If you are a programmer and like freebsd more, you can help out and add some of the great netbsd features to freebsd or vise versa.
      • "Think of NetBSD like a continuation of FreeBSD 4.x more" No, no, no, no. The continuation of FreeBSD 4.x is DragonFlyBSD.
      • 4.3 BSD Reno -> BSD Net/2
        BSD Net/2 -> NetBSD 0.8
        BSD Net/2 -> 386BSD -> FreeBSD 1.0
        4.3 BSD Reno -> 4.4 BSD Lite
        NetBSD 0.8 + 4.4 BSD Lite -> NetBSD 1.0
        FreeBSD 1.0 + 4.4 BSD Lite -> FreeBSD 2.0

        (skipped some versions and connections)

        Related? Yes, but NetBSD has essentially nothing to do with FreeBSD 4.
        Matt Dillon started DragonflyBSD as the continuation of FreeBSD 4. FreeBSD 5 is is some ways more advanced than 4, but it is most clear that 4 is more stable, so there one *might*
        • What features does FreeBSD 5 have over FreeBSD 4 that make the former "simply more easy to use" ?

          If it's features such as rc.d as rc(8) [freebsd.org] or rescue(8) [freebsd.org], then those features were obtained from NetBSD, even if the history section in those two manual pages neglects to mention this heritage.
          • I use FreeBSD 5.3/5.4/6 as my desktop at home, at work and on my laptop. I find it easier to deploy there because of the vast amount of software available on it. That's the only reason really. I use it too on a few servers at work, I chose it there because of UFS2, and the easy installation of the needed software (from ports, yes, not from packages)

            anyway, YMMV, I just plain like it. It's not as stable as FreeBSD 4 though, nor as robust as NetBSD/i386. I've just upgraded world and kernel on my workstatio
    • While this is not a reason for most people, NetBSD has much better ext2 support (for mounting Linux disks). At least under FreeBSD 5.3, ext2fs partitions would not unmount properly upon shutdown, causing ALL partitions to be fsck'ed next boot (workaround: have the shutdown script manually unmount them earlier), and worse, they cannot be NFS-exported. This made my file server rather useless.

      NetBSD has no such problems, and so works better for me. My /home is on a separate disk that was originally created
  • It looks [netbsd.org] like they're still using XFree86. Are they planning to change?

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Close