Home > FreeBSD > FreeBSD 6.0-BETA3 Released to Mirrors FreeBSD 6.0-BETA3 Released to Mirrors Submitted by James Hopton 2005-08-25 FreeBSD 53 Comments FreeBSD 6.0-BETA3 has been released to ftp. You can select a mirror near you from this list. There’s no announcement yet, however, the release has been uploaded on August 24th. About The Author Thom Holwerda Follow me on Twitter @thomholwerda 53 Comments 2005-08-25 8:10 pm Better not use it though! #freebsd people don’t like it when you use anything but -STABLE. I wonder why these announcements are public. It’s not meant for everyone anyway. 2005-08-25 8:16 pm Thom Holwerda I’m no FreeBSD guru, but according to the FreeBSD handbook 6.0 *is* -STABLE. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-s… 2005-08-25 8:18 pm Thom Holwerda Then again it cold also be -CURRENT. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-s… Okay, I really shouldn’t comment on FreeBSd. 2005-08-26 10:37 pm anand78 And why can’t you be modded 2005-08-27 10:12 pm japail Just being wrong isn’t sufficient grounds for moderation anyway, so what is your best-case point? The number of administrators is quite small and can self-regulate genuine abuse, while any factual errors or innocent misunderstandings can be easily corrected at no harm to the discussion. 2005-08-25 8:23 pm That’s probably one of the dummest things I’ve heard…..ever. 2005-08-26 2:07 am Your new here. 2005-08-26 4:12 am Joseph It’s you’re. Speaking of dumb things.. 2005-08-26 3:19 pm English is not everyones first language. You might comment on dumb, but I am commenting on ignorance 2005-08-26 6:17 pm English is not everyones first language. You might comment on dumb, but I am commenting on ignorance But is it your first language? 2005-08-25 9:52 pm Dr_J Don’t use it? That’s absurd. I don’t speak for the entire FreeBSD community (nor do you) but I think that they might say to use the FreeBSD version that is appropriate to your needs. Some people need -STABLE; other simply do not. 6.0 has a LOT of improvements, particularly for wireless, and the ULE scheduler now works for SMP systems. That makes it a pretty attractive upgrade for many people. I’ve been using 6.0 since its first Beta, and it works pretty well. I found one bug in the Beta2, which was addressed and fixed within hours of its being reported. I like it a lot, particularly for a desktop system. I also have seen no announcement yet (and it is not on the FreeBSD site) so I appreciate seeing it here. I’ll cvsup and update over the weekend. Dr_J 2005-08-25 8:24 pm In my cvs-supfile I use: *default tag=RELENG_6 and that’s all you’ll need until the tree branches after 6.0 release. Note that technically both -CURRENT and -STABLE are still development branches, and always will be. 2005-08-25 8:35 pm Has anyone tried the AMD64 version? Quite a few of the programs won’t compile including GRUB? Is this due to the lack of a compatable 32 library? 2005-08-25 8:59 pm judmarc There’s quite good information available at the freebsd-amd64 mailing list – this week’s posts are at http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/current/freebsd-amd64.html if you just want to get a general flavor, and there’s also a very nice search page at http://freebsd.rambler.ru/ . 2005-08-26 10:28 am I installed -BETA2 on my amd64 system and it appears to compile things correctly. I haven’t tried grub, but I don’t really have a need to. I’ll give it a a shot and come back. 2005-08-26 11:32 am judmarc Searching re grub and amd64 with the page I gave above – http://freebsd.rambler.ru – one gets some very good information about grub’s inability to boot a freebsd amd64 kernel directly, so even if you manage to compile it, I’m not sure it will do you much good. See http://freebsd.rambler.ru/bsdmail/freebsd-amd64_2004/msg00852.html . 2005-08-26 11:38 am judmarc Sorry, that last may have been bad information – see this more recent post from the same author: http://freebsd.rambler.ru/bsdmail/freebsd-amd64_2004/msg01757.html 2005-08-26 11:57 am I have no problem booting FreeBSD 6.0-BETA3 for amd64 from grub, however my grub was installed from a linux partition. I have no idea whether it compiles on FreeBSD for amd64, but it can boot and amd64 system and should be able to boot just about any OS that can be installed on PC hardware. 2005-08-26 12:48 pm judmarc should be able to boot just about any OS that can be installed on PC hardware Unless, in my experience, that OS is installed on a RAID-0 array. GRUB doesn’t seem to ‘see’ RAID-0 arrays in order to be installed on or boot from them – at least it hasn’t during several times I’ve tried from years back to as recently as a month ago. So I just use GAG, which has always worked for me without any fuss. Apologies for going off-topic. 2005-08-25 8:54 pm judmarc -CURRENT users now see 7.0 as their version number; I guess that -STABLE is now at version 6; and the most recent -RELEASE is 5.4. 2005-08-25 9:08 pm 6 is still -CURRENT 5 was still -CURRENT until 5.3, long after 6 existed, so the existence of a later -CURRENT branch does not automatically make an earlier branch -STABLE. However, 6 should reach -STABLE status much sooner than 5 did, since there will be less of a leap from 5 to 6 as there was from 4 to 5. 2005-08-26 11:15 am judmarc Lotta confusion here, and I’m not sure the point is important enough to merit all the discussion, but here goes one more time: -CURRENT, which I’m running at home, is 7.0. It’s the HEAD or “trunk” of the CVS tree, the latest development version. -STABLE is also a development version, but not as bleeding edge as -CURRENT. New stuff from -CURRENT that doesn’t cause the system to be, umm, unstable 😉 gets moved to -STABLE. It’s a branch on the CVS tree that you can pull down by asking CVS for RELENG_6, hence it’s version 6. -RELEASE is a snapshot of -STABLE that’s been specially tested for stability and other bugs. The latest -RELEASE snapshot was the fifth one from version 5 (beginning with 5.0), hence version 5.4. The impending -RELEASE will be the first from -STABLE version 6, hence 6.0. 2005-08-26 2:24 pm Thanks for the posting, as I stated above I’m running RELNG_6 for my server, and that’s the ‘stable’ version that I’m comfortable with. Can’t believe how much FUD I’ve seen on this article, makes me think I’m on /. Perhaps more people will give *BSD a shot and learn for themselves. 2005-08-26 3:14 pm Dr_J You almost got it right. All of the FreeBSD releases are -RELEASE, whether they are -STABLE or not. They become -STABLE once the team guarantees the API will stay stable (that’s what -STABLE means). 6.0-RELEASE will become -STABLE soon (how soon is speculation) but when it is released, it will simply be a -RELEASE of the current branch. So when it is released, there will be two products at -CURRENT (6.0 and 7.0), one -STABLE release (5.4, soon to be 5.5) and one legacy release (4.11). You do get used to the designations after a while. Dr_J 2005-08-25 9:17 pm is freebsd better than linux? 2005-08-25 9:23 pm ulib > is freebsd better than linux? Yes. (The depth of the answer reflects the depth of the question.) 2005-08-25 9:29 pm Emil Don’t feed trolls. Holy wars are for lamers. 2005-08-25 9:41 pm ulib > Don’t feed trolls. Holy wars are for lamers. Very true. I really wouldn’t call *that* feeding, though. 2005-08-25 9:22 pm Tried it, but still my ps/2 mouse on my compaq presario cant be detected due to buggy driver.. (so the /dev/psm0 device wont get created ) a crappy bug. Works great under linux though. Gives me the feeling that driver-wise freebsd isnt as mature as linux.. 2005-08-26 12:26 am rm6990 Tried it, but still my ps/2 mouse on my compaq presario cant be detected due to buggy driver.. (so the /dev/psm0 device wont get created ) a crappy bug. Works great under linux though. Gives me the feeling that driver-wise freebsd isnt as mature as linux.. And this got modded down why???? “Gives me the feeling” means that he is stating his opinion, not trying to prove an unsubstansiated fact. I know I would get the same feeling if I ever had a mouse driver issue, since I have never in my life had one. I think OSNews should hold an online seminar. “User Based Comment Moderation : A Guide For Complete Retards”. So much for the moderation system….just as a lot of people thought, it doesn’t work. People just use it to mod down comments they don’t like, as opposed to off-topic, insulting or troll posts. Unless of course stating your opinion in a non-trollish way (in my opinion) is deserving of being modded down. I will mod this post up, as I always do with posts I feel were unjustly modded down (even if I don’t agree with the post). I’m a Linux user, but I find it funny people can say similar comments about Windows and not get modded down. Or is it OK to express your dismay at Microsoft products and make total guesses about the quality of the code, but not to do the same with Open Source products? 2005-08-26 1:06 am Tom K Look … most GNU/Linux/Open-source trolls are very pro-choice — unless that choice is Microsoft. They don’t care if by choosing GNU/Linux/OS they’re choosing something inferior, what matters to them is that they’re not choosing Microsoft. I choose what works best. All other intelligent people do so as well. 2005-08-26 12:19 pm Moulinneuf Seeing as you hate GNU/Linux why is your site running on GNU/Linux ? http://searchdns.netcraft.com/?host=http%3A%2F%2Ftomchu….. “I choose what works best.” Na , professional make the choice for you 😉 2005-08-26 1:28 am Dr_J I’d say it got modded down (but not from me) simply because it has very little to do with the thread. This is not the place to debug an installation, and even if it were, there is no information given that would help fix the problem. To begin with, hardware detection is different than the driver. The author mentions no usable hardware information. We don’t even know if this is a problem with the OS or with X11, which is not part of FreeBSD. I tire of people who evaluate a system based exclusively on the basis of ease of installation. How many OS “reviews” are, in fact, just a review of the install? So the 6.0-Beta is junk because it can’t find a lousy mouse that the user is too lazy to install? Really? In any event, while FreeBSD hardware detection is generally superb, once in a while FreeBSD takes a bit of fiddling with to get devices like the mouse to work. I went through that in 4.8, but I did get it to work. FreeBSD assumes that you have the knowledge and the patience to do get a desktop going. If you don’t, then use PC-BSD or DesktopBSD. FWIW, FreeBSD 6.0-Beta2 detected my wireless optical mouse and all the rest of my hardware, and the drivers worked fine. On that basis, does that mean this is a great operating system for me? Dr_J 2005-08-26 6:42 am Angryanderson We don’t even know if this is a problem with the OS or with X11, which is not part of FreeBSD. This is a moot point. X11 comes packaged for FreeBSD on the official FreeBSD installation disks, the FreeBSD Handbook has a chapter dedicated to X11, and FreeBSD also has a special mailing list for the maintenance and support of X11 on FreeBSD systems. Linux distros take responsibility for all the software they provide, even if it isn’t programmed by the distro makers, and so does the FreeBSD project. And this is how it should be. It’s a fundamental error to say that Linux is just the kernel and FreeBSD is just the operating system. They are both much, much more. 2005-08-26 2:43 pm Dr_J The point is hardly moot. FreeBSD is not a “distro” that is packaged for ease of use. Sure, the FreeBSD team makes a lot effort to ensure that software is ported to their OS. But they does not really ease the set-up: the user is responsible for that. Indeed, that’s one point of PC-BSD and DesktopBSD: to ease the initial set-up of the Desktop. The FreeBSD team gives you the tools, but you have to know how to set them up. That includes things like mice. And while X11 is used, it is NOT part of the OS. This is important to understand how FreeBSD works. If you are expecting everything to come with a ribbon tied around it, you will be disappointed. To go back to the original point, yes it does matter whether it is the OS or X11. The FreeBSD installer will do most of the former. It will help you with the latter, if you like, but it really takes no responsbility for its installation. It will run right, but you have to set it up. Dr_J 2005-08-26 1:40 am Firstly, a driver not detecting something does not make it buggy or crappy; it just means that particular piece of hardware is unsupported. Now, PS/2 mice are pretty generic and it’s quite unusual for one not to work, so one has to wonder what kind of obscure issue the original poster ran into. Secondly, a single piece of hardware isn’t grounds to question the driver maturity of an entire operating system. That’s just plain faulty logic. There are numerous devices that aren’t supported on Linux, or even Windows for that matter. Or, they are supported but the drivers actually are buggy causing the entire operating system to crash, which is just as bad if not worse. Thirdly, a mouse is probably the cheapest and easiest to replace hardware item there is. To not use an operating system based on one particular model of mouse alone is just downright idiotic. It would be cheaper (at least by value of opportunity cost) to replace the mouse then to install a different operating system. In short, maybe the original poster was trolling and maybe he wasn’t. However, it’s quite clear that his ignorant comments did not contribute anything positive to the discussion. 2005-08-26 2:15 am Well stated. 2005-08-26 6:51 am kaiwai 1) It is off topic – this thread is about the discussion of the article at hand – the availability of FreeBSD 6.0 Beta 3; this is neither the time nor the place for software support. 2) The tone of his post was rude and provocative – may I suggest that he actually take a more consolatory approach when he wishes to call upon FreeBSD users to help him. Had he said; “Although this is a little offtopic, I have been experiencing some difficulties configuring my mouse with FreeBSD – the machine configuration is a standard Compaq Presario; has anyone experienced this before? is there a possible work around? Many thanks in advance”. Show a little humility, and you’ll find people willing to help. 2005-08-26 8:32 am well said – thank you 🙂 2005-08-26 10:31 pm Well Blame it on the dumb system that OSNews has. 2005-08-25 9:25 pm Actually, in the past I have seen that there is a way to compile both 32 and 64 bit (and run them) on the same system. Sorry, I don’t have the link; but from what I have read, its possible. 2005-08-25 9:31 pm Sorry about the broken english. What I really wanted to state: You can run FreeBSD 64 bit system and run 32 bit binaries. I had previously seen that somewhere on the mailing lists. 2005-08-25 11:00 pm Asking if FreeBSD is better than Linux is like asking if an entire car from one company is better than a car engine from another company. FreeBSD is an operating system. Linux is a kernel. A more appropriate comparison would be between FreeBSD and a specific Linux-based OS distro like Debian. Both are fine OS by the way, especially for servers. With FreeBSD 6 and Debian 3.1 coming out this year, it looks like 2005 is a fantastic year for free OS. Best of luck to both (we need both non-GPL and GPL OS to continue improving). 2005-08-26 6:47 am ValiantSoul “With FreeBSD 6 and Debian 3.1 coming out this year, it looks like 2005 is a fantastic year for free OS. Best of luck to both (we need both non-GPL and GPL OS to continue improving).” In 2006 Vista is supposed to come out and Mac OS X Leopard is coming out so it looks like your year of free OS will be followed by year of commercial OS. Will be interesting. 2005-08-26 1:42 am Can’t register 2005-08-26 1:59 am safekali FreeBSD Current is at 7 FreeBSD 6 now is Beta-3 soon RC and so on FreeBSD 5.4 is Stable These values consider a cvsup from “CVS” with q right values on the file For 1st example – Releng_current 2nd example – Releng_6 3rd ——— Releng_5_4 for specific 5.4 version But thats not all, you can even put Releng_6_0 Releng_5 1st for specific 6.0 Version only 2nd for keep head on all 5 Releases to CVS 2005-08-26 2:34 am Can not wait untill 6.0 is released along with a new logo and website. 2005-08-26 3:43 am Well, it installed this time. I guess whatever was broken in the previous Beta’s are fixed now. Cool! Now I can give it a try, although it doesn’t seem much different so far. Then again, I haven’t done anything yet. 2005-08-26 5:12 am Peter Grehan has made available the PowerPC ISO on: http://people.freebsd.org/~grehan/6.0-BETA3-powerpc-disc1.iso 2005-08-26 9:20 am And this is how it should be. It’s a fundamental error to say that Linux is just the kernel and FreeBSD is just the operating system. They are both much, much more. Not true. Linux is a kernel, userland is called GNU. FreeBSD is a kernel and userland together. That third party stuff is sometimes supported somehow does not say it’s part of the OS. 2005-08-26 3:22 pm Tom K It is all developed as one, tested as one, and released as one. It is an entire operating system, just like Windows. You can’t get FreeBSD 5.4’s libc and install it on FreeBSD 5.2.1, nor can you grab FreeBSD 5.1’s kernel and run it on FreeBSD 5.4 (at least safely). FreeBSD is not a mish-mash of various components — it’s a whole. 2005-08-26 8:23 pm Show a little humility, and you’ll find people willing to help what planet are you from? 2005-08-27 12:10 am i hope this one works with vmware – none of the 6-series pre-releases have worked. 5.4 and 4.x work fine.