Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Jan 2012 22:54 UTC
FreeBSD Some people already submitted this news last week, but it wasn't until today that it became official: the FreeBSD team has announced the release of FreeBSD version 9.0. As you may expect from the major version number change, this is releas eis packed with new stuff.
Thread beginning with comment 503241
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: FFS :ASD
by sbergman27 on Fri 13th Jan 2012 18:11 UTC in reply to "RE: FFS :ASD"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

Whenever I watch demos, what I really find myself envying ZFS users are the slick command line tools that very simply and easily manage the partitioning, the lvm, the raid layer, and the fs, all at the same time.

There's no reason that Linux's current stack couldn't have such an elegant solution.

At this point, I usually get recommendations: Oh! Just apt-get this or that. But I've never found anything as elegant as what I see in ZFS.

I've not been keeping as close an eye on btrfs as maybe I should. It might have such tools. Or might get them. It seems to lend itself more to such an integrated approach, concerns about "rampant layering violations" aside. ;-)

Edited 2012-01-13 18:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: FFS :ASD
by Soulbender on Sat 14th Jan 2012 10:50 in reply to "RE[2]: FFS :ASD"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

But I've never found anything as elegant as what I see in ZFS.


http://bit.ly/ytTJHd
I'm not saying it's as good as ZFS feauture-wise (because it isn't) but it does highlight one thing I really like about the BSD's (and OpenBSD in particular): there's an integration and coherence in tools and configuration files that isn't quite there in Linux.

Edited 2012-01-14 10:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: FFS :ASD
by phoenix on Mon 16th Jan 2012 17:54 in reply to "RE[3]: FFS :ASD"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Just curious: why do people insist on using URL obfuscation (aka shortener) services on websites, instead of just posting the complete URL? Is it really so hard to just paste:

http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=bioctl

At least then we can see what you are talking about, instead of having to blindly click the link, hoping it's not taking us to some horrible cracker site or rick-rolling us.

I understand the use of URL obfuscation services in print, as you have to manually type the URL into the web browser, so the fewer characters the better. But on a website? Where the pasted URL is clickable? What's the point of obfuscating it?

Edited 2012-01-16 17:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2