Linked by Trent Townsend on Wed 18th Jan 2006 22:03 UTC
BSD and Darwin derivatives DragonFly BSD 1.4 is the third major release of Matthew Dillon's fork of the FreeBSD operating system, and significant progress has been made towards reaching many of the project's numerous goals. New in this release include a more up to date version of the GNU Compiler Collection (required due to the incread use of thread local storage in DragonFly), an import of NetBSD's Citrus code (Comprehensive I18N Framework Towards Respectable Unix Systems), major reworking of all core subsystems in preparation for removing the MP lock, rewrites of various VFS related code and many updated drivers, frameworks and contributed programs.
Thread beginning with comment 87278
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
where's the beef
by estrabd on Wed 18th Jan 2006 23:28 UTC
estrabd
Member since:
2006-01-18

I am personally getting sick of OS review articles that simply discuss how to install something and that it has few packages, yada yada yada.

DragonFlyBSD is supposed to be targeting some truly remarkable goals, one of which is becoming a distributed OS.

It is not supposed to be your grandmother's desktop. Personally, I would've loved to have seen a discussion of the status of the project's stated goals and how things seem to be moving along as compared to FreeBSD 6.x and 7.x.

Another thing to note is that traditionally the *BSDs share with each other, and I think this is great. Any improvements in scalability and scheduling achieved through the DFlyBSD project will surely make its way to the other BSDs.

Reply Score: 5

RE: where's the beef
by Lazarus on Wed 18th Jan 2006 23:51 in reply to "where's the beef"
Lazarus Member since:
2005-08-10

"I am personally getting sick of OS review articles that simply discuss how to install something and that it has few packages, yada yada yada."

It was written from the POV of someone who simply wants to use DF as a day-to-day desktop system, and noting some of the more irritating aspects of the system in regards to that.

"DragonFlyBSD is supposed to be targeting some truly remarkable goals, one of which is becoming a distributed OS. "

Yes, and this is in fact one of the things that has attracted me to this OS. But guess what. It does not have those capabilities yet, and won't for some time (a year or three are my uninformed guesses), so there is nothing for me (or anyone else) to have said about setting it up to do such things.

"It is not supposed to be your grandmother's desktop."

I never claimed nor imagined it to be, and of course by "desktop" I mean a typical UNIX fan's desktop machine.

"Personally, I would've loved to have seen a discussion of the status of the project's stated goals and how things seem to be moving along as compared to FreeBSD 6.x and 7.x. "

There is also not much to say about this at the moment, as the system still runs under the MP lock, making comparisons with other systems (like FreeBSD 6) pointless, as those systems will likely outperform the current version of DF on MP systems.

"Another thing to note is that traditionally the *BSDs share with each other, and I think this is great. Any improvements in scalability and scheduling achieved through the DFlyBSD project will surely make its way to the other BSDs."

I would certainly hope so, but like I said, it's too early to tell with certainty if this will indeed be the case. Personally, I believe that DragonFly will be the top performer once the MP lock is largely gone, but beliefs without evidence to back them up are pointless, so nothing of the sort was mentioned.

Edited 2006-01-19 00:02

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: where's the beef
by CaptainPinko on Thu 19th Jan 2006 06:23 in reply to "RE: where's the beef"
CaptainPinko Member since:
2005-07-21

It was written from the POV of someone who simply wants to use DF as a day-to-day desktop system, and noting some of the more irritating aspects of the system in regards to that.

But that's not it's intended goal!

Why don't you run some benchmarks? Find a root exploit in a common package and see if it works on DragonFly BSD(I believe OSes like OpenBSD have extra protection against that)! Comment on various drivers. Look at various administrative tools? Run them versus previous versions of DragonFly BSD?

Instead we have yet another "newb approaches desktop" article. Really, I'm sick of reading these "Well, I was trying to eat soup with a fork and it SUCKED!!!!!111!" articles.

I know I don't have to read them but I'm trying to raise the bar here: get a little bit more depth here on OSNews.

Really there is a lot more to an OS than it's desktop usage. Why not write about it's scheduling algorithm, or it's driver infrastructure? I'm sure many people would be interested in an in-depth article about an actual OS how it compares to another.

On the desktop it's practically all the same. The installer might be different, and the package manager (the only useful thing covered) might be, but Gnome/KDE is always Gnome/KDE on Solaris or FreeBSD or Linux.

Really, did anyone _learn_ anything new from this article?

How is it Ars Technica can have in depth article about proprietary microchips while we get shallow tripe about an open-source OS?

Hell, did I even mention if DFBSD was SV init or RC scripts?

Frankly the author was unqualified to write anything. This is bad as the Jem Report on Solaris a while back. Please, if you agree with me mod me up: not for vanity but to try to encourage a little more from a site I love and have learned a lot from in the past.

Frankly, I think the most educational bits now are Rayner (sp?) comments.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: where's the beef
by Tweek on Thu 19th Jan 2006 05:37 in reply to "where's the beef"
Tweek Member since:
2006-01-12

I HEAR YOU!!!

and i hate the reviews that involve desktop screenshots.... they are all basically the same...linux, freebsd, netbsd. its the same desktop minus a few icons diffs.

okay, if the desktop has a custom app for making the system easy, that is always great to see, i love that type of inovation, but who cares how easy it is to install. its not a desktop OS, hell there isnt ANY desktop that is easy to install that some random person can just get the cd and go with. they let their neighbor computer guy do that...the important thing is how easy it is to maintain and USE....forget the install, that is trivial, it takes 30minutes to an hour, after that, for the unix desktops, it is done, you dont ever have to do that again.

i want to see in these reviews the innovation, not how easy it is to install... for this case it is an offshoot of BSD, aka you have to know what you are doing to some extent to use it. that is the target audience...PCBSD is targeting linux users and making a general desktop that any OSS convert can do (instead of a linux desktop) thats great. install is more important but not that important as long as the IT guy can do it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: where's the beef
by kaiwai on Thu 19th Jan 2006 08:00 in reply to "where's the beef"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, considering that DragonFlyBSD takes a completely different approach to the issue of SMP and scalability, I'd say that yes, this project does warrent a little time in the limelight.

With that being said, however, I hope that when the big parts are complete, and we have a scalable system with a nice packaging infrastructure, there will be someone from the project who can really go into depth into how the whole thing ticks when compared to the conventional approaches that most operating systems take when it comes to multiprocessor capabilities.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: where's the beef
by Tyr. on Thu 19th Jan 2006 11:37 in reply to "where's the beef"
Tyr. Member since:
2005-07-06

I am personally getting sick of OS review articles that simply discuss how to install something and that it has few packages, yada yada yada.

It's a quick review. It raises awareness about what Dragonfly is. Gives a couple of tips to get going, points out some problems and offers a conclusion.

It was lucid and well done for what it offered, which is why I rated it 8.

You can write your own uber-leet review with indepth analyses, benchmarks and such if you want you know.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: where's the beef
by estrabd on Thu 19th Jan 2006 14:35 in reply to "RE: where's the beef"
estrabd Member since:
2006-01-18

It's a quick review. It raises awareness about what Dragonfly is. Gives a couple of tips to get going, points out some problems and offers a conclusion.

Herein lies the problem. It seems that all the reviews are "quick". I am sick of "quick" - perhaps because I take the time to read about the project. Furthermore, the article is full of assumptions, for example:

Setting up 1.4 to do anything useful (as a desktop system for example) of course requires a number of third party packages, which currently are in short supply.

I think most *nix users can get a long fine for most tasks without a GUI - infact the only reason I usually have a GUI is for the convenience of having multiple terminals open.

I also have to point out that just saying DFly is "a logical extension of FreeBSD 4.x" does not mean it is supposed to be the Ubuntu. It simply means that Dillion felt that plans regarding the internals of 5.x were not the way to go - and when I say internals I speak of things like scheduling, SMP, internal APIs, etc. It has nothing to do with creating a fool proof GUI platform for grandma.

Lastly, I applaud the author for sticking his neck out, and I hope that he sees these criticisms as a way to improve future attempts. Will I put my money where my mouth is? I just might do that because it is easier to illustrate what I would like to see by doing it myself.

Reply Parent Score: 1