DragonflyBSD 1.0A Released
Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 15th Jul 2004 19:52 UTC, submitted by Lani
BSD and Darwin derivatives Due to an installer/fdisk bug there is an update available. Current Dragonfly version is 1.0A.
E-mail Print r 0   11 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/5xu
Order by: Score:
Add Comment Post a Comment
wow..
by Lovechild on Thu 15th Jul 2004 20:27 UTC

Why don't they give into the superior naming scheme and call it DragonflyBSD SP1 ;)

Hosed Me
by Haldir on Thu 15th Jul 2004 23:13 UTC

I decided to download and try the 1.0 release. Having used FreeBSD and OpenBSD before without a problem and numerous linux installs, I guess I have become a bit lackadaisical in backing up. The installer used the partition/slice that I told it to (my FreeBSD slice) but it also wiped out my linux /home partition. So years worth bookmarks, notes, files, all wiped out.Serves me right, I know, but still it pisses me off.

re: Hosed Me
by A.K.H. on Thu 15th Jul 2004 23:43 UTC

Yeah, that was a baaaad bug. I don't really think they should have called it 1.0, maybe "preview release" or something else to get the idea across that it is not yet a mature system.

That said, DFBS look to be *very* promising. ;)

ha
by xedx on Fri 16th Jul 2004 00:31 UTC

luck was with me
had it installed it on a spare machine ;)

<modesty>I was right all along.</modesty>
by CaptainPinko on Fri 16th Jul 2004 01:57 UTC

"Yeah, that was a baaaad bug. I don't really think they should have called it 1.0, maybe "preview release" or something else to get the idea across that it is not yet a mature system. "

Mentioning something along those lines got me modded Flamebait on Slashdot

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=114399&cid=9693037

and I said something similar here even earlier:

http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=7660&offset=15&rows=29#25...

feels *SO* good to be right! ;)

Anyways I still wish the best of luck for them and definitely looking forward to see how they innovate with the package management. Being in some way compatible with RPMs (at least the source ones) would be a *HUGE* usuability advantage for the desktop. So then even if you have only a few prescreened quality DBSD packages you could still risk it with some random RPM if you needed to.

Yes, so?
by Lars on Fri 16th Jul 2004 03:00 UTC

You're waaaay to hung up on the '1.0', as if it meant anything magical.

Besides, the README states clearly "NOTE!!! DRAGONFLY IS UNDERGOING DEVELOPMENT AND IS CONSIDERED EXPERIMENTAL!"

v &#1073;&#1083;&#1103;
by vs on Fri 16th Jul 2004 19:15 UTC
1.0 & the bug
by James on Sat 17th Jul 2004 00:27 UTC

If anybody took the time to read anything about 1.0, they would have read that it was a developer preview.

With the price of cheap old boxes there is no reason why one can't pick up a 2nd hand machine to test OS's on. A p2-450 can't be more than ~$100 now.

I wouldn't test experimental OS's on my main workstation, that's a recipe for disaster.

@James
by A.K.H. on Sat 17th Jul 2004 05:03 UTC

I wouldn't test experimental OS's on my main workstation, that's a recipe for disaster.

Which is why the fact that it is experimental should be in the release title. People don't read, and calling it 1.0 implies non-experimental usually. I knew it was experimental, but then I follow the DragonflyBSD blog.

Most people don't read. You expect too much.

Proposed Changes
by Bill on Thu 22nd Jul 2004 00:18 UTC

I think[1], this fork of BSD has some serious potential to do some really cool things[2] with the kernel. They are planning a message passing sub-system to be integrated throughout and are moving a lot of things to userspace to ease development efforts. The SMP support aims to be far superior to anything FreeBSD is cooking up. I'd like some greybeards to weigh in on how all of these changes compare to the equivalent in the Linux kernel..

[1] http://strathearns.org/wds/blog/2004/07/innovation-in-operating-sys...
[2] http://www.dragonflybsd.org/goals/caching.cgi

Add Comment Post a Comment