Due to an installer/fdisk bug there is an update available. Current Dragonfly version is 1.0A.
DragonflyBSD 1.0A Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
http://www.shiningsilence.com/dbsdlog/archives/000522.html
http://www.gobsd.org/
Why don’t they give into the superior naming scheme and call it DragonflyBSD SP1
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.
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.
luck was with me
had it installed it on a spare machine
“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.
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!”
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.
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.
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