Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:02 UTC
FreeBSD Th first release candidate of FreeBSD 6.0 has been released to ftp. As of yet, there are no announcements or release notes. Be sure to use a mirror.
Order by: Score:
Congrats
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:18 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

This is the best FreeBSD release thus far.
Congrats to the developers! I use it as my
main system and it is far more stable than the
5.x series. It has everything I need and feels
snappy. Couldn't ask for more.

Reply Score: 2

RC with known bugs?
by corentin on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:25 UTC
corentin
Member since:
2005-08-08

Why do not the release engineers wait until all the known bugs are fixed and tested before shipping a release candidate version ?http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html

Reply Score: 1

RE: RC with known bugs?
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:30 UTC in reply to "RC with known bugs?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

That list is probably outdated. It's been like that for a while.

Reply Score: 1

RE: RC with known bugs?
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:31 UTC in reply to "RC with known bugs?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

There will always be bugs and at some point you have say these bugs are not very importante and proceed with the release. If you aim at bugfree then youll never release!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: RC with known bugs?
by corentin on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:38 UTC in reply to "RE: RC with known bugs?"
corentin Member since:
2005-08-08

> If you aim at bugfree then youll never release!

You are correct, complex software can not be bug free (except in a few places, with strict methods).

But I thought the point of a release candidate was to say "there are no *known* bugs in this version, we believe it is stable, try it for a while and let us see if no important bug is discovered, then we will release a final version. Otherwise, we will correct the found bugs and issue another release candidate version until it is ready."

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: RC with known bugs?
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: RC with known bugs?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Maybe but this is how it is. They have a list of desired features and things to fix and they are not always high priority. They don't stop the release for small and not important bugs. But I think, as someone said, the list is not up to date.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: RC with known bugs?
by dylansmrjones on Wed 12th Oct 2005 15:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: RC with known bugs?"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Actually, it's normal to release with known bugs, and it's not a problem, as long as you tell what the bugs are.

However, you should not release anything with severe known bugs - but releasing with known bugs are ordinary. You cannot fix all bugs - not even known bugs.

Every bugfix adds new code - every new code adds possibility for new bugs, so beware when fixing bugs.

Reply Score: 1

v RE[2]: RC with known bugs?
by Haicube on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:43 UTC in reply to "RE: RC with known bugs?"
RE: RC with known bugs?
by Marcellus on Tue 11th Oct 2005 17:24 UTC in reply to "RC with known bugs?"
Marcellus Member since:
2005-08-26

I don't see anything listed as required for 6.0 release on that page that affects the code itself. And no show stopper defects either.

Other things listed look like they require investigations and other things that would take much longer than can be motivated at this point.

"Not done" may also imply that there is a solution for most of the cases that trigger the bug, but a working solution that covers all known cases is not there yet.

Reply Score: 2

Great work!
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:29 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Time to cvsup and make buildworld.

Reply Score: 1

About time
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:34 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

It's about time! I need to get a system up and running and I've been waiting for 6.0 forever!

Reply Score: 1

what's new
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:38 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

So, what's new and cool in this release?

Reply Score: 1

RE: what's new
by corentin on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:43 UTC in reply to "what's new"
corentin Member since:
2005-08-08

> So, what's new and cool in this release?

Much improved wireless support and important performance improvements (among other things).

I hope the overall stability will be better, too ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: what's new
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 17:19 UTC in reply to "what's new"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Mutli-threaded filesystem, network stack & wireless support. Much better support for AMD64 motherboards.

Reply Score: 1

No announcements
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:40 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"As of yet, there are no announcements or release notes."

Maybe they wanted to update the mirrors (which they are not) before people start to download like crazy from the main servers!

Reply Score: 0

v FreeBSD 6.0 RC Released to FTP
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:51 UTC
make world
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 16:51 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Just cvsupped and made world.I was allready pleased with the beta.FreeBSD 6 is a milestone.

kudos to the devs and all who helped.

Reply Score: 1

RE: RC with known bugs?
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 18:05 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Why do not the release engineers wait until all the known bugs are fixed and tested before shipping a release candidate version ?http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html

The lack of some documentation and "desired features" are the only not-dones left. These are very small things, and as said, the list is outdated, Last modified: 2005/10/06 18:19:38.

Reply Score: 1

More info
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 18:37 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Schedule
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/schedule.html

FreeBSD 6.0 Open Issues
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html

This is disconcerting that this is posted before the official annoucement; for a variety of reasons.

1) It could be pulled back
2) Surprise load on servers; be kind to the admins of those box's who donate server space and bandwidth.
3) Give time so that all servers can be syncd so that a few servers aren't taking the brunt of the load.

This has been covered before on OSNews; this cavalier attitude has a lot to be desired.

PS: Typcial responses:
1) It should be posted
2) They could hide the files
3) Blah blah....

Go ahead and
1) Mod down
2) delete post
Its typical of osnews policy and staff.

Reply Score: 2

RE: More info
by Marcellus on Tue 11th Oct 2005 18:42 UTC in reply to "More info"
Marcellus Member since:
2005-08-26

>Go ahead and
>1) Mod down
>2) delete post
>Its typical of osnews policy and staff.

Nah. The big problem is all the slashdotters that find their way here to kick and scream until everyone who has something to say get tired and just shut up.

Reply Score: 1

RE: More info
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 19:33 UTC in reply to "More info"
Anonymous Member since:
---

> This has been covered before on OSNews; this cavalier attitude has a lot to be desired.

C'mon, we already know they are doing it this way BECAUSE of posts like yours. Reasons are two; first, controversy generates posts and ad-hits (and this one is small enough that it is hard to accuse OSNews of trolling). Second, the OSNews persona (the compound "personality" of its staff) is a stubborn five-year-old who cannot take the slightest bit of criticism and refuses to change just in spite.

...or perhaps I am just a bit too bitter about Internet stupidities, and the premature BSD announcement tradition is only a lighthearted running gag like the horrible Slashdot April 1st.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: More info
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 19:49 UTC in reply to "RE: More info"
Anonymous Member since:
---

> mini rant deleted
Bleh. In reply to myself, now that I read that, I DO feel bitter. Had a rough day, no reason to lash out like that. Sorry to waste your mod points, but please remove...

Though I really feel that OSNews are making themselves look a bit sensationalistic with the direct link to ftp while the release is unannounced.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: More info
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 11th Oct 2005 19:57 UTC in reply to "More info"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

This has been covered before on OSNews; this cavalier attitude has a lot to be desired.

We're a newssite, and if there's news, it's news. Unless someone specific with authority from within a company or community emails us and explains us why we shouldn't post an item due to the reasons you listed, then we won't post them. I have some of those agreements already. One of them in particular is going to be interesting at the end of October ;) .

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: More info
by bubbayank on Tue 11th Oct 2005 20:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: More info"
bubbayank Member since:
2005-07-15

--We're a newssite, and if there's news, it's news. Unless someone specific with authority from within a company or community emails us and explains us why we shouldn't post an item due to the reasons you listed, then we won't post them. I have some of those agreements already.--

Just because you CAN do something does not mean you should. If you like to have mirror operators hate you, or if you like to mislead people by offering up news before it's announced, you surely can.

But don't complain if people criticize you for not doing the "right" thing and waiting until the announcement that the release is tagged and out to all the mirrors.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: More info
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 11th Oct 2005 20:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: More info"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Just because you CAN do something does not mean you should.

Look, if someone from the FreeBSD community with authority asks me not to post this sorts of news until they announce them, then I won't do it anymore, as simply as that. I got to hear about this release via email.

For now, I haven't heard a thing, these .iso's are on *public* ftp, and that means people can download them. It is our job as newssite about operating systems to make sure people know that.

But don't complain if people criticize you for not doing the "right" thing and waiting until the announcement that the release is tagged and out to all the mirrors.

I can't recall myself complaining, actually.

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: More info
by Joe User on Tue 11th Oct 2005 21:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: More info"
Joe User Member since:
2005-06-29

Come on guys, Thom is working as a volunteer to give us invaluable news on hi-tech. We have all we need on one good news web site. I don't see the point to bash him. I'd like to see you all do 10% of what he does, and then see if you still have the balls to criticize his work.

These people make me sick, sorry.

Reply Score: 1

SMP Support
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 18:45 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Is SMP supported with the default kernel or do you have to still compile it?

Reply Score: 0

FreeBSD 6 Vs Linux 5.10
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 18:48 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

gotta give credit to FreeBSD, they are already ahead of linux.

Reply Score: 0

RE: FreeBSD 6 Vs Linux 5.10
by yanik on Tue 11th Oct 2005 19:24 UTC in reply to "FreeBSD 6 Vs Linux 5.10"
yanik Member since:
2005-07-13

there is no linux 5.10, the latest linux version is 2.6.13.4.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: FreeBSD 6 Vs Linux 5.10
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 22:37 UTC in reply to "RE: FreeBSD 6 Vs Linux 5.10"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I think the guy meant it as a joke. I love OSNews but people should lighten up a bit ;)

Reply Score: 0

v BSD is dead
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 19:09 UTC
It's announced already
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 20:25 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Here is the announcement (from Scott Long):
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-October/056...

So please chill...

Reply Score: 0

re: RC with known bugs?
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 20:36 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

>Why do not the release engineers wait until all the known bugs are fixed and tested before shipping a release candidate version >?http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/todo.html

Same reason a lot of *nix software never ships a 1.0 version.

Reply Score: 0

Nice!
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 20:58 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

%uname -mrs
FreeBSD 6.0-RC1 i386

Reply Score: 0

more active than Linux
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 20:59 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Is it just me, or FreeBSD (kernel) has seen much more developer activity than the Linux 2.6 series ?

And where is 2.7 and 2.8 ? or maybe 3.0

Reply Score: 1

RE: more active than Linux
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 00:03 UTC in reply to "more active than Linux"
Anonymous Member since:
---

True. Why hasn't the Linux 2.7 project even commenced yet?

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: more active than Linux
by corentin on Wed 12th Oct 2005 06:33 UTC in reply to "RE: more active than Linux"
corentin Member since:
2005-08-08

> True. Why hasn't the Linux 2.7 project even commenced yet?

It has; as a set of patches on developer machines all around the world. But it will take some time to get them to work together and test them.

Reply Score: 1

Still having USB mouse problems
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 21:00 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

How many people here are having issues getting simple USB mice to work with 6.0? Yeah, I know that bugs are inevitable in beta software, but damn. I pop in a 4.8-R CD, and everything works fine. I pop in a 5.4-R CD, and no USB mouse. Same with 6.0. It sees the mouse (there is a /dev/ums0) but niether X.org nor moused can use it.

Changing the moused_port="/dev/ums0" doesn't work. changing it to anything else I can think of doesn't work either. X.org can't start cause it fails to initialize the corepointer. I've tried sysmouse, busmouse, /dev/ums0 I've tried blowing away /dev/sysmouse and replacing it with a link to /dev/ums0. Changing BIOS settings also does nothing. Putting on the PS/2 adapter and going with the FreeBSD defaults works. *blink*

It's a goddamned USB mouse! The FreeBSD OS used to be able to use it, and Open/NetBSD have *NO* problems with it to this day. Linux has no problems with it. Winodws has no problems with it!

WTF is going on here? What good is a multi-threaded operating system going to be to your everyday user if it has such trouble with really basic hardware?

Reply Score: 0

Anonymous Member since:
---

My microsoft usb mouse works under freebsd 5.4 && 6.0 ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Still having USB mouse problems
by celt on Tue 11th Oct 2005 21:35 UTC in reply to "Still having USB mouse problems"
celt Member since:
2005-07-06

WTF are YOU talking about? I've been using 6.x since rock and I have never had an issue with usb mice.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Still having USB mouse problems
by Lazarus on Tue 11th Oct 2005 21:44 UTC in reply to "Still having USB mouse problems"
Lazarus Member since:
2005-08-10

I've had a similar experience with FreeBSD 5.4 and I've got a Logitech USB mouse on my play box (the one I'm using now). It doesn't work under 5.4. USB works on a couple other machines that I've tested it on, and I know that earlier releases of FreeBSD have had no problems with the mouse on this particular machine. *shrug* I couldn't say whats going on.

Shitty hardware? Shitty USB stack? No idea. I'm using a NetBSD live CD on the play box right now, and the mouse works fine.

Welcome to the world of computers. Some things work sometimes ;^)

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous Member since:
---

"It doesn't work under 5.4. USB works on a couple other machines that I've tested it on, and I know that earlier releases of FreeBSD"

Just recompile the kernel with the USB 2.0 option.
That's all.

Perhaps the default kernel should ship with USB 2.0 enabled?

Reply Score: 0

Lazarus Member since:
2005-08-10

"Just recompile the kernel with the USB 2.0 option."

Heh if *thats* the reason, I'd have to avoid FreeBSD like the plague on the grounds that such a requirement is stupid as my play box predates USB 2.0 ;^)

Something to try regardless...

Reply Score: 1

So.. still no hal?
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 23:06 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'd use FreeBSD it's an excellent system but the lack of HAL support sorta makes using my beloved GNOME desktop sorta mood on FreeBSD. I heard several reports of people starting to work on support but ever since it's inception, there has been no effort to succed in bring HAL to FreeBSD.

Reply Score: 0

v ASP headache
by Anonymous on Tue 11th Oct 2005 23:27 UTC
Outstanding
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 00:32 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'm using 6.0beta-3 and it's stable it has no problems with any of my hardware. I've been using Freebsd since the early 5 series so I know about alot of the problems. But I can say the Freebsd team has got their stuff together 6.0 is outstanding. I had no problems installing it on my athlon64 nforce3 mobo. I want to applaud the team for their work.

Reply Score: 0

What about wireless support? Is ok?
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 00:57 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'm just wondering how is the wireless card support in
this version of FreeBSD, I heard that WPA is being
implemented. Anyone try?
(Would like to know your experiences.)

Reply Score: 0

Nice, DVD ISO?
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 02:25 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Looks like for a x.0 Release Candidate. Guess my only request (FWIW) would be a DVD ISO. Thankfully the BSD's don't need half a dozen (or close) to it to get the OS installed, grin.

Hat's off the the FreeBSD RE team. Looks like 6.0 may wind up being more ready to go than the later 5.x version. Appears they've realized that they tried to do too much in the 5.x series and gotten much more focused with 6.x. Granted, they made it clear that the 5.x series was more of a tech preview versus the production grade conservative 4.x versions.

The 6.0 RC and if you find bugs, don't gripe, send them to the developers to fix! It's a release candidate of a x.0 version, keep perspective.

JT

Reply Score: 0

v SMP
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 03:13 UTC
still work left to do...
by kaasboer on Wed 12th Oct 2005 08:57 UTC
kaasboer
Member since:
2005-09-03

I am a long time FreeBSD user (since 2.2.6) and I use it as my favourite desktop/development system. I think the FreeBSD developers have lost the feeling for their users needs when they started to completely redesign the system after 4.x. What is the use in improving SMP etc. when there are not enough developers to keep some of the basic functionality in place?

Some of the problems I see as an average user is:

- I can't use a parallel printer ("interrupt storm") unless I switch to polling mode, which causes unnecessary high cpu load.

- The sound system is broken: depending on your hardware and system load, you can not even listen mp3 files without distortions or stuttering.

- In 6.x Mozilla and Firefox crash unexpectedly.

Let's hope for 7.x.

kaasboer

Reply Score: 1

RE: still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 09:57 UTC in reply to "still work left to do..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

>- I can't use a parallel printer ("interrupt storm") unless I switch to polling mode, which causes unnecessary high cpu load.

Then use an USB cable.

>- The sound system is broken: depending on your hardware and system load, you can not
>even listen mp3 files without distortions or stuttering.

This was solved a long time ago.
(putting: "options PREEMPTION" into your kernel config also helps)

>- In 6.x Mozilla and Firefox crash unexpectedly.

Use opera, it's free ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE: still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 10:38 UTC in reply to "still work left to do..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

Wow it must be something you're doing wrong because I don't have any of those problems. I'm listening to Mp3's right now and use Firefox 1.07.

Reply Score: 0

RE: still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 11:18 UTC in reply to "still work left to do..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

am a long time FreeBSD user (since 2.2.6)
What do you mean "since 2.2.6"? That looks more like Linux version numbering. Did FreeBSD have a different numbering scheme back then?

Also I dont recognise the problems you have. But then I have only used FreeBSD since 4.x.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: still work left to do...
by kaasboer on Wed 12th Oct 2005 11:34 UTC in reply to "RE: still work left to do..."
kaasboer Member since:
2005-09-03

The 2.2.6 release was announced in March 1998:

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/2.2.6R/announce.html

2.2.6 : 03/1998
2.2.8 : 11/1998
3.0 : 10/1998 (yes, slightly before 2.2.8)
...
4.x : 03/2000
...
5.3 : 11/2004
...
6.x : est. 10/2005

kaasboer

Reply Score: 1

RE: still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Thu 13th Oct 2005 18:34 UTC in reply to "still work left to do..."
Anonymous Member since:
---

"I can't use a parallel printer ("interrupt storm") unless I switch to polling mode, which causes unnecessary high cpu load."

I also had that problem. Setting

hw.intr_storm_threshold=5000

in sysctl.conf fixed that for my Laserjet 6P.

"The sound system is broken: depending on your hardware and system load, you can not even listen mp3 files without distortions or stuttering."

Broken? Did you try to adjust the relevant system variables? E.g. adding

hw.snd.pcm0.buffersize="65535"
hw.snd.targetirqrate="48"

in loader.conf fixed that "problem" for me.

As for complaining about 6.x - you do understand that release candidates are there for people to find bugs and give feedback to the project? Have you filed bugreports on your crashes?

Reply Score: 0

re:still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 11:02 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

>- The sound system is broken: depending on your hardware and system load, you can not
>even listen mp3 files without distortions or stuttering.


No problem here.So i don't think the sound system is broken.It's more likely a broken driver for your particular hardware.

My nforce3 250 motherboard plays mp3's on FreeBSD 6 better than on many linux distros.

Reply Score: 0

RE: still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 21:12 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I don't have any problems at all. What makes you think your problem is representative for whole FreeBSD?

Reply Score: 0

RE:RE: still work left to do...
by Anonymous on Wed 12th Oct 2005 21:21 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

What do you mean "since 2.2.6"? That looks more like Linux version numbering. Did FreeBSD have a different numbering scheme back then?

Also I dont recognise the problems you have. But then I have only used FreeBSD since 4.x.


So then you must remember 5.2.1. What do you mean, different versioning scheme?

Reply Score: 0