Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:09 UTC, submitted by daniel olsson
NetBSD The ISO of NetBSD 2.0 is currently available here.
Order by: Score:
Yeah!
by Mad Cow on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:13 UTC

Yeah!
FINALLY!

YAY!!!!!!!!
by poundsmack on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:26 UTC

the title says it all :-)

NetBSD 2.0 is not out yet!
by Daniel de Kok on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:39 UTC

Please be aware that NetBSD 2.0 is not officially released yet! The ISOs and binaries are only final when the officiel release announcement is send out.

Besides that I'd like request kindly to download NetBSD 2.0 from a mirror, to allow the mirrors to sync with ftp.netbsd.org.

Have fun with NetBSD :-).

Indeed!
by relaxed on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:39 UTC

Installed 2.0-RC5 last week on my thinkpad and have been very happy with the results. NetBSD is a clean, stable OS with huge amount of modern software in pkgsrc, like Gnome 2.8.1 . But don't take my word for it, install it and see for yourself! ;)

curious
by Snake on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:57 UTC

Apart from the fact NetBsd is ported almost to everything. Whats great about it ? what makes it different from FreeBSD, OpenBSD etc...

Torrents!
by Calroth on Tue 7th Dec 2004 22:59 UTC

Besides that I'd like request kindly to download NetBSD 2.0 from a mirror...

There are torrent files in there! Cool, don't recall seeing them in previous NetBSD releases, but yeah. If you want to take load off the NetBSD servers, use BitTorrent.

portability
by pete on Tue 7th Dec 2004 23:25 UTC

People always say, NetBSD is so damn portable. But then, why doesn't it run on IA64 or PPC64?

portability
by poundsmack on Tue 7th Dec 2004 23:33 UTC

People always say, NetBSD is so damn portable. But then, why doesn't it run on IA64 or PPC64?

all in good time

@pete
by Nate on Tue 7th Dec 2004 23:39 UTC

It isn't on those platforms because noone has wanted them there yet, you don't need to be a jackass about it. If you want it there, feel free to pay a developer to port it or do the porting yourself. It is relatively easy to port using NetBSD or OpenBSD to such systems, but that doesn't mean that anyone has wanted to do it yet.

When a developer wants something they do it, if they don't they don't. This is the way free software works, you get what the developers want, or what people that pay the developers want.

If Intel gave NetBSD a few boxes and some money I am sure it would be ported, but Intel doesn't do that; nor do most users.

nvidia support
by Fork on Tue 7th Dec 2004 23:43 UTC

/* this is not a troll */

There is a NetBSD port of the 1.0-3203 nvidia driver on http://cubidou.nerim.net/
these file are very old. I want to know if nvidia drivers are included in the 2.0 release or if there is a port of a more recent version of the nvidia driver.

I am a 3D programmer. I want to try NetBSD and want to be still able to use 3D hardware acceleration from my Nvidia card.

@Fork
by Nate on Tue 7th Dec 2004 23:56 UTC

It is not a port, but rather a hack. But because of how bad it is, I would not advise using nVIDIA's driver on a Linux operating system, let alone a different one through emulation.

Re: nvidia support
by Quentin Garnier on Wed 8th Dec 2004 00:06 UTC

There is a NetBSD port of the 1.0-3203 nvidia driver on http://cubidou.nerim.net/
these file are very old. I want to know if nvidia drivers are included in the 2.0 release or if there is a port of a more recent version of the nvidia driver.


Answer is no. Both questions. I haven't worked on this for very long. You know, the usual, lack of time, lack of motivation. I only did this in the first time so I could have Xvideo on my secondary card (a TNT2) to output to my VCR while still using my computer. 3D has never really been in my plans, though I had some pretty fun time with glTron and QuakeII with that port ;)

I am a 3D programmer. I want to try NetBSD and want to be still able to use 3D hardware acceleration from my Nvidia card.

And I want 1 million euros (far better than dollars these days). But maybe some day I'll find interest in the NVIDIA video drivers again.

Sorry to disappoint.

Quentin Garnier.

Re: Nate
by Quentin Garnier on Wed 8th Dec 2004 00:09 UTC

It is not a port, but rather a hack. But because of how bad it is, I would not advise using nVIDIA's driver on a Linux operating system, let alone a different one through emulation.

Yes, it is a port, of the official (though beta at the time) FreeBSD driver.

Thank you for your concerned advises.

Quentin Garnier.

Re: Portability
by Howard Harvey on Wed 8th Dec 2004 00:52 UTC

Don't know about the IA64 yet, but we're running it on
PowerPC (Xilinx FPGA core) with the help of the good folks
at Wasabi Systems - a derivative of the 'evbppc' architectural
port. I have to admit to being damn delighted about the
whole process. -*ROCK*- Solid stuff, and running *BSD on
an embedded target (a 64 bit embedded target at that) has
a cool factor that is just off the scale.

congratulaions!
by tech_user on Wed 8th Dec 2004 01:11 UTC

congratulations! myself i have been looking forward to this most significant release for the last 3 years! scalability is the primary jewel in this crown! the other technologies are just icing on the sugar.
i'm looking forward to replacing my development and server systems with a well designed(1), well understood(2), stable(3) platform(4).

(1) - by design, with fore-planning, discussed and hammered out, with academic papers discussing the pros and cons and detailing operating characteristics. not adhoc "patchy" designs and growth a la other OSS OSes.
(2) - see (1). and also the developers and experts can focus one *one* distribution. and in my opinion, the developers are much more insightful, much more academic, much more considered, much more expeert, and less the one-night script-kiddies from other OSes. with significant core developers with links to real and difficult projects such as embedded projects and real-time projects, this is a pleasure and a privilege. and they're friendly - and helpful ifyou ask nicely.
(3) see (1) and (2). importanlt, the APIs are stable comapred to other OSS OSes. you can be sure that you will be working on a platform that doesn't keep shifting the goal posts within the lifecyles of larger projects. oh, and stable as in "graceful under stress" / "uptime" too.
(4) see (1), (2), (3), (4). its a platform. its the promise of BSD as abse for your work, your project, your product. its the core and tools for building what you want out of it.

now if only the new logo could have taken into account some of the well known design principle and visual language and icons to represent what NetBSD is all about ... it seems they went for the least offensive, rather than the most purposeful logo. oh well - its not too bad, the shape and form are well done and i guess it doess reflect the low-publicity attribute of netbsd.

@Quentin
by Nate on Wed 8th Dec 2004 03:12 UTC

Suppose you view a port as a different thing than I. It would need to be a port of a driver, not the port of an interface to a driver for me to agree with you on that.

That would mean nVIDIA would have to do it, or someone would have to steal their code for it.

Semantics I suppose.

The great part about NetBSD
by mattmc3 on Wed 8th Dec 2004 03:14 UTC

The great part about NetBSD is that it's understated, but powerful. No hype, just *nix. Most everything is set up in a way that makes sense, and when it's not there's a darn good reason documented somewhere. It's kind of the forgotten BSD - the one people think you should only run if you have weird hardware. But I'm happily running it on common x86 hardware.

I'm a Windows developer by profession, but I'd been wanting a small *nix server to revive some old hardware (Pentium II) at home. I began using NetBSD 1.6.1 and later 1.6.2 to run four simple services without any of the other fluff - Apache, PostgreSQL, PHP, and SSH. And I wanted to run them with plenty of room to spare on a 2 gig drive. I couldn't get Fedora's minimal install (without x.org) to take up less than 1.2 gig, but NetBSD worked great for me. It was my first foray from Windows into the unix server realm, which is something you don't hear many people claim, but it really wasn't that daunting. It's worth a try if you aren't burdened by any of the desktop Linux hype, and are willing to mentally replace the word "FreeBSD" with "NetBSD" on any pages you google while troubleshooting. It's also a nice alternative if the BSD license is more your style. I can't wait to see how 2.0 pans out.

NetBSD and nic drivers
by TaterSalad on Wed 8th Dec 2004 04:03 UTC

I'm really excited to hear about a 2.0 release. I've tried the 1.6.1 release but due to it not recognizing a generica pcmcia nic card on my laptop I had to get rid of it. I'd like to try netbsd 2.0 on the laptop. Does anyone know if they have a generic pcmcia nic driver?

hmmm
by timh - rack64.com on Wed 8th Dec 2004 07:25 UTC

i know it's been rejected but i want a modular SMP kernel from both netbsd and openbsd!

Times have changed, people

NetBSD 2.0 cd's?
by Geert Hendrickx on Wed 8th Dec 2004 08:25 UTC

If I want to order NetBSD 2.0 cd's, where should I order them so that The NetBSD Foundation benefits? http://www.bsdmall.com/ ?

re: NetBSD 2.0 cd's?
by anonymous on Wed 8th Dec 2004 08:33 UTC

>http://www.bsdmall.com/ ?
Yes. They probably don't get CDs for 2.0 quite yet though.

looking forward ...
by Wolfram Fischer on Wed 8th Dec 2004 09:29 UTC

I'm currently running NetBSD 2.0 RC4 on my Laptop and I'm looking forward for 2.0 stable.

Thanks to the netbsdpeople for making all this possible and for producing my favourite OS =)

By the way: NetBSD is the _only_ OS where I like every aspect how the things are done!

Re: hmmm
by Anonymous on Wed 8th Dec 2004 09:38 UTC

You mean - SMP like NetBSD 2.0 supports, and modular like NTFS and EXT2 support being not in the kernel but in separate modules, like NetBSD 2.0 has?

Easy upgrade
by Anonymous on Wed 8th Dec 2004 10:20 UTC

This is the first time I've done a binary upgrade of the NetBSD base system (1.6.2 --> 2.0). Everything went smootly -- applications work, settings in /etc and files in my home directory stayed intact. Good job! :-)

Compared to?
by Lee on Wed 8th Dec 2004 15:25 UTC

Hi,
I have been following netbsd news lately and see that it's a good and well-thought OS. If you were choosing a high-load web server with high PHP and Mysql usage what you will choose: FreeBSD or NetBSD and why not linux? My hardware is Pentium 4 2800 and also a AMD Athlon 3200+ with IDE drives. I want to maximize my modest hardware resources. Thanks everyone.

ACPI
by Reader on Wed 8th Dec 2004 20:05 UTC

Does anyone know how good is the ACPI support in Netbsd? Is it better worse than FreeBSD. I may install it in my laptop.

@ lee
by aab on Wed 8th Dec 2004 21:56 UTC

For high-load web server choose OS that you know best, that you can configure blindfolded over slow connection with timelimit breathing down on your neck. Don't choose server OS by how good *it* is, choose it by how good *you* are with it.

@tech_user re: congratulaions!
by rebo on Thu 9th Dec 2004 01:48 UTC

"(1) - by design, with fore-planning, discussed and hammered out, with academic papers discussing the pros and cons and detailing operating characteristics."

Interesting, where can I read these academic papers? I'd be very interested in taking a look. thanks.

RE: NetBSD 2.0 cd's?
by Daniel de Kok on Thu 9th Dec 2004 18:52 UTC

If I want to order NetBSD 2.0 cd's, where should I order them so that The NetBSD Foundation benefits?

Just download the ISO and burn it ;) . The best way to help The NetBSD Foundation is to make a donation. More information can be found at:

http://www.netbsd.org/donations/

Donations are particularly welcome at this moment. The release engineering team was experiencing hardware failures on the build machines, so the project could really use donations to replace this equipment.

academic papers
by tech_suer on Thu 9th Dec 2004 22:06 UTC