Linked by ddc_ on Thu 5th Jun 2014 22:50 UTC
BSD and Darwin derivatives

The new release includes new USB stack (USB4BSD), which supports USB3; updated video drivers for Intel and AMD cards (although latter are still disabled by default); binaries in /bin and /sbin are now dynamic, allowing for PAM and NSS. The HAMMER2 filesystem is also included, but not ready for general use just yet.

Order by: Score:
Last 32bit release
by ameasures on Fri 6th Jun 2014 09:15 UTC
ameasures
Member since:
2006-01-09

The 32bit edition is now deprecated. Reflects that they are targeting newer server roles.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Last 32bit release
by SeeM on Fri 6th Jun 2014 18:22 UTC in reply to "Last 32bit release"
SeeM Member since:
2011-09-10

The 32bit edition is now deprecated. Reflects that they are targeting newer server roles.


Reflect that is extra work to maintain x86 that a few cares of. I'm personally still working on x86 OS-es, but lets face it: it's nearly over.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Last 32bit release
by gods_design on Fri 6th Jun 2014 18:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Last 32bit release"
gods_design Member since:
2005-07-06

Sadly this is making all of my old PC servers slowly obsolete.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Last 32bit release
by charlieg on Fri 6th Jun 2014 18:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Last 32bit release"
charlieg Member since:
2005-07-25

Why? There's tons of stable software that will run on them, surely. Just because the latest-greatest tech doesn't run on your servers any more, it does not mean they are obselete.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Last 32bit release
by Alfman on Fri 6th Jun 2014 19:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Last 32bit release"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

charlieg,

Why? There's tons of stable software that will run on them, surely. Just because the latest-greatest tech doesn't run on your servers any more, it does not mean they are obselete.


Hmm, isn't that exactly what it means? Old hardware can still be useful, particularly for running old software, but without the ongoing support of software venders, it becomes obsolete even if it still technically works. Now saying that DragonFly BSD is the nail in the coffin would be a bit silly, but I would agree with gods_design's statement that "Sadly this is making all of my old PC servers slowly obsolete."

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Last 32bit release
by tidux on Fri 6th Jun 2014 19:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Last 32bit release"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Well OpenBSD still supports freaking VAXen from the 1970s, so your 32-bit x86 servers will have a nice Free *nix for many years to come.

Reply Score: 6

RE[4]: Last 32bit release
by Alfman on Fri 6th Jun 2014 21:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Last 32bit release"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

tidux,

Well OpenBSD still supports freaking VAXen from the 1970s, so your 32-bit x86 servers will have a nice Free *nix for many years to come.


Yea, 32bit x86 has more years in it yet. It will continue disappearing slowly though, the majority being trashed/recycled, others will end up in storage (aka attic) like commodores/atari/bbc/etc.

I find the OpenBSD dev's commitment to VAX fascinating. I had read how they themselves have a great deal of trouble getting VAX hardware for internal testing. Although it is a cool novelty to have these old machines that are still running, it would be insane to actually rely on said hardware for anything at all.

Edited 2014-06-06 21:18 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Last 32bit release
by tylerdurden on Fri 6th Jun 2014 21:23 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Last 32bit release"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17


I find the OpenBSD dev's commitment to VAX fascinating. I had read how they themselves have a great deal of trouble getting VAX hardware for internal testing. Although it is a cool novelty to have these old machines that are still running, it would be insane to actually rely on said hardware for anything at all.


It's also a silly waste of time and effort IMO, given how resource-constrained these type of projects are. But hey, it's their own time and effort, so they should do whatever it is they want with it really.

Edited 2014-06-06 21:23 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Last 32bit release
by Alfman on Fri 6th Jun 2014 21:58 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Last 32bit release"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

tylerdurden,

It's also a silly waste of time and effort IMO, given how resource-constrained these type of projects are. But hey, it's their own time and effort, so they should do whatever it is they want with it really.


Spot on. I don't mind in the least that they want to work on it. If they are able to bankroll the operation, then that's entirely their prerogative. On the other hand, given their recent financial difficulties, I can't help but think it is irresponsible to divert resources to archaic platforms that so few will benefit from.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Last 32bit release
by IsakWatertroll on Fri 6th Jun 2014 22:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Last 32bit release"
IsakWatertroll Member since:
2014-05-01

tylerdurden,

"It's also a silly waste of time and effort IMO, given how resource-constrained these type of projects are. But hey, it's their own time and effort, so they should do whatever it is they want with it really.


Spot on. I don't mind in the least that they want to work on it. If they are able to bankroll the operation, then that's entirely their prerogative. On the other hand, given their recent financial difficulties, I can't help but think it is irresponsible to divert resources to archaic platforms that so few will benefit from.
"

Back when OpenBSD asked for money to keep that great operating system going, many people, instead of donating, contributed worthless ideas about how the project could save money (including building their own power plant). One of the ideas was to drop VAX support. As I remember it, the project's response was basically this: 1. VAX doesn't actually incur significantly more expenses than any other platform. 2. Even though few people may actually use the Vax or other esoteric ports, it benefits everyone because it lets the developers find bugs that are only easily seen on these architectures. Also, for what it's worth, the OpenBSD project has dropped a few unused and unneeded ports over the last year or two; it's not like they are incapable of change or something.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Last 32bit release
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sat 7th Jun 2014 13:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Last 32bit release"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Well, 32 bit has been obsolete in my line of work for a good 7 years or so. That 4 GB memory limit is killer. PAX or no PAX.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Last 32bit release
by Alfman on Sat 7th Jun 2014 18:03 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Last 32bit release"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Bill Shooter of Bul,

Well, 32 bit has been obsolete in my line of work for a good 7 years or so. That 4 GB memory limit is killer. PAX or no PAX.


What is your line of work?

Personally my desktop only has 4GB and it rarely uses that because I don't need much for web development. However I realize visual studio / eclipse are real memory hogs, 8GB would be better for those applications, or large multimedia projects obviously.

I do provision servers with a lot more ram though in order to run many VMs. To be honest I think 32bit + PAE could do the trick there since the VMs are < 4GB anyways. I even think running 32bit OS in a VM may be slightly advantageous in terms of getting more to fit in ram and CPU cache. But never the less I migrated all my client VMs to 64 bit because running a homogenous 64bit environment is just easier.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Last 32bit release
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sat 7th Jun 2014 21:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Last 32bit release"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

For servers, I do think 4 GB is too low for non trivial work. If you are just running a simply proxy server or SMTP server, then that would probably be fine. But if its part of an application cluster or database of some sort, add memory. Its a quick, easy, and cheap dramatic performance enhancer for most things. You'd be shocked at how cheap you can get a multi processor multi core 32 GB server from dell/HP. I still am.

I understand this is just a general rule of thumb, but if someone told me they were going 32 bit it would raise alarms* in my head.

* although I have a dream about building a cheap 32 bit arm farm for research/educational purposes. I think it could be great for prototyping.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Last 32bit release
by zima on Tue 10th Jun 2014 19:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Last 32bit release"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

NetBSD will never abandon you ;p

Reply Score: 2