Home > FreeBSD > FreeBSD 5.1 Worth a Look

FreeBSD 5.1 Worth a Look

FreeBSD 79 Comments

“New tech” release supports more platforms but is less stable than 4.8, says eWEEK for FreeBSD.

About The Author

Eugenia Loli

Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.

Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli

79 Comments

  1. 2003-07-08 3:59 pm
    Anonymous

    One thing that I noticed about BSD when I tried it is that it’s WAY faster than linux…things would boot up a lot quicker, especially X. But the thing I didn’t like is how unconfigured the graphical environment was. Plus it didn’t work with my sound card. But I might try BSD again if I want to set up a server. I was thinking of running an Unreal Tournament linux server, since BSD can run linux stuff. But would this be faster in native linux, or running it under BSD? Hmmm…

  2. 2003-07-08 4:07 pm
    Anonymous

    They only repeat what is said by FreeBSD itself. But, even if there is probably most chance to have an instability with 5.1 because it is less tested than the 4.X serie, those who have try freebsd 5.X have find it very stable.

  3. 2003-07-08 4:16 pm
    Anonymous

    “But the thing I didn’t like is how unconfigured the graphical environment was. Plus it didn’t work with my sound card.”

    Did you kldload the soundcard driver module or compile it into your kernel. Here is how to compile pcm into the kernel (if you’ve never compiled a FBSD kernel before):

    ——————

    cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf

    cp GENERIC MYKERNEL

    ee MYKERNEL

    — In ee —

    add “device pcm” to end of file

    <control>c exit

    — exit ee —

    cd /usr/src

    make buildkernel installkernel KERNCONF=MYKERNEL

    ——————

    Reboot and enjoy!

  4. 2003-07-08 4:18 pm
    Anonymous

    I run FreeBSD 5.1 on my desktop system at home, and tried 4.8 and 5.1 on my Dell laptop:

    At home:

    The really frustrating thing is that I can run FreeBSD 5.1 for days and weeks without any issues. However, as soon as I go to reboot it, the kernel crashes during it’s shutdown procedure, forcing me to hit the reset button… The background filesystem checks are great, and really speed up boot times, especially after experiencing one of those crashes during the shutdown process. It *feels* much more responsive than Linux does on the same machine (a dual processor 1G. P3, with 512 megs RAM), but I have no figures to back this up. FreeBSD 4.7/8 never had the same problems rebooting but, at the same time, never felt as responsive.

    On the laptop:

    5.1 definately didn’t like this laptop. I could barely get 5.1 installed. 5.1 didn’t seem to like the ACPI implementation on the laptop. When I installed 4.8, I didn’t hit any glitches. I did experience a lockup or two using one specific wireless NIC when using dstumbler, but that was the extent of my problems.

    JSplice:

    It’s been my experience that FreeBSD will run most linux binaries as fast as Linux. Some (ie. the linux jdk) are definately slower, in my experience, but that’s rare.

    Adams

  5. 2003-07-08 4:29 pm
    Anonymous

    I couldn’t get cups or anyother printing to work. I spent a solid week on this. It was very frustraiting. It was a painful move, but I had to install Redhat 9 (checked it out from the library, the only linux book on hand) because I had to print some docs. Other things that forced the move was samba, I couldn’t set that up and make it work, but with RH it was a snap. I read all I found and still no go on either of these. I know it was me and not the OS as I couldn’t set this stuff up on 4.8 or 4.7 (tried it out of desperation). I do still have the 5.1 install on my 20GB HDD, so if any one has some pointers on CUPS (samba isn’t as important) I’m still willing to give it another wack. I’d hate to dump a great os due to self-inflicted printing problems.

  6. 2003-07-08 4:42 pm
    Anonymous

    This oughta help ya…

    http://www.freebsd.org/handbook

    Didn’t see anything on there about CUPS, however, LPD isn’t bad for printing, few people really need printing features beyond LPD.

    As far as samba goes, are you trying to configure it on the server side or client side?

    FreeBSD supports both. I’m not sitting at my FreeBSD box right now, so I couldn’t tell you where in the ports collection it lives exactly for each (I’m thinking it’s something like /usr/ports/net/samba), and there is support for mounting SMB filesystems in the kernel (not sure if it’s in the default kernel, though, I always compile my own).

    Hope this helps.

  7. 2003-07-08 4:45 pm
    Anonymous

    Well, I moved my file / print server from Mandrake Linux 7.0 to FreeBSD 4.8 a month or so ago, and aside from a bit of trouble setting up NFS (it was quite different from the old Linux setup), everything else was a snap.

    I’m currently running Samba, NFS server, Cups and Apache on that machine, with no problems.

  8. 2003-07-08 4:55 pm
    Anonymous

    In the current environment where GNU/Linux grabs virtually all of the Free Software and Open Source publicity it is a VERY good thing eWeek reviewed FreeBSD 5.1.

    However, the extremely cursory nature of the review seemed more of an executive summary differentiating versions 4.8 and 5.1 rather than an actual review.

    By way of testimonial, I’ve been running FreeBSD on all of my production servers since 5.0, and there has been non-stop uptime.

    In fact, my ENTIRE back end has been successfully migrated from Microsoft Windows to FreeBSD because of the results gleaned from my research into non-Microsoft server OS alternatives.

    1.) FreeBSD is incredibly lean in terms of the system resources required to provide the apache and samba services my organization depends upon.

    As a result, FreeBSD runs extremely well on hardware Microsoft seems intent on orphaning with each new version of Windows.

    2.) FreeBSD reboots very quickly into a useable server state.

    3.) FreeBSD is secure by default, and is MUCH easier to convincingly harden, too.

    4.) Because there are few production scenarios which require an actual reboot, system uptime is terrific.

    Anybody familiar with the frequent and repeated patch-and-reboot cycle of Windows maintenance knows that similar uptime is just not possible with any OS purchased from Microsoft.

    Hope this helps.

  9. 2003-07-08 5:09 pm
    Anonymous

    I tried FreeBSD 5.1 the other day and got a reboot while playing my first (and only) sound. Maybe FreeBSD didn’t like the combination of my hardware (KT133/Duron/SBLive) but it certainly got me off FreeBSD and back Linux. I have never had Linux crash on me, even when running the 2.5 tree. I know it seems kind of shallow to dismiss it after the first crash but to me a 5.1 release shouldn’t crash when doing something simple as and easily tested as that and it makes me wonder what else is in there…

  10. 2003-07-08 5:20 pm
    Anonymous

    That’s all it’s worth.

    “If we always go with the most popular, we would all be using Windows.”

    I know that argument. It is crap. I’m talking about the most popular (and best) found in the niche market. That is clearly Linux. So why are we still talking about BSD? The only chance of Windows being dethroned as the leader is for the open source community to standardize on Linux. BSD must be abandoned.

    Think about the good of the community and not yourselves for a change.

  11. 2003-07-08 5:25 pm
    Anonymous

    Todu, to be frank – that’s what’s wrong with the open source movement. Your attitude perfectly encapsulates it.

    Instead of trying to go for what best suits you, your mission appears to be to ‘take down the enemy,’ Microsoft. Why should we abandon something we want to use in favor of toppling something else? Why should we standardize on Linux, which some believe is subpar to BSD? You’re probably the same loudmouth telling me that voting for a non-Democrat or Republican is wasting a vote. You may end up winning, but what have you actually won? Anyway, if you really wanted to topple Microsoft, wouldn’t the logical choice be to move to a Mac?

    Man, some people are clueless.

  12. 2003-07-08 5:26 pm
    Anonymous

    > Think about the good of the community and not yourselves for a change.

    Oh no, another “Abandon BSD, jump on Linux” troll. Why don’t you think for a change? If my only other option was

    Linux I’d have been using Windows.

  13. 2003-07-08 5:30 pm
    Anonymous

    thats just silly…

    the whole point of havin alternatives is well.. errr… having alternatives?

    if everyone “standardized on linux” things would be nearly (though not quite as admittedly its more felxible than windows) as stagnant as it is now

  14. 2003-07-08 5:34 pm
    Anonymous

    Considering the increasing commercialization of Linux, I’d say the BSD folks are doing a far better job of accomplishing the Free Software Foundation’s mission of distributing free software than the FSF’s darling, GNU/Linux.

    Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

  15. 2003-07-08 5:35 pm
    Anonymous

    This is why 5.1 is not considered stable yet. The SBLive drivers are particularly new and untested.

    I’ve had OpenBSD panic on me as well. But all in all, Linux has paniced on me far far more often. Or worse then a panic even, is when Linux works but doesn’t work. Like on my friends dual processor machine, it sites and %30 system time on BOTH processors, even when the machine is idling. No disk activity, and no processes accumlating time. This is on both 2.4.19 and 2.4.20 and 2.4.21-pre.

    I suppose with any OS, some people will just happen to have bad times. I keep givin Linux second chances though. And am running it on one machine. You should give BSD a second chance sometime as well. Mabye around 5.2 though, I think it should be declared stable by then. ;)

  16. 2003-07-08 5:36 pm
    Anonymous

    Well, there is a reason why http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.1R/early-adopter.html exists.

    Apart from that, I’ve been running 5.1 on a development machine and a file server, respectively, ever since 5.1-RELEASE got out. Both machines are “always on” — not one crash and no sign of instabilities.

    OTOH, the file server’s transfer rates have increased by a factor of 5, compared to the same machine previously running 4.6-RELEASE…

    Bottom line, for me, 5.1 most certainly is worth a try.

  17. 2003-07-08 5:36 pm
    Anonymous

    The argument that Linux is the best in the market is somewhat flawed:

    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

    While Linux has found a lot of support from hardware and software makers, you should realize that FreeBSD is a more mature and stable system. It doesn’t have the overwhelming support, but nVidia has even released drivers for it.

    “The only chance of Windows being dethroned as the leader is for the open source community to standardize on Linux. BSD must be abandoned.”

    That argument is crap. If you want a standard, try POSIX compliant. Linux (and all open source) is not there simply to dethrone Microsoft. While it has many other features, one of my favorites is CHOICE. Some people choose to use Macs, and some will use Windows when it is no longer the dominant operating system. I am writing this from QNX (POSIX compliant), ever heard of it?

    I’ve used Linux for years, and I can’t stand it any more.

  18. 2003-07-08 5:38 pm
    Anonymous

    Standarise on linux? What linux? Redhat Linux? Suse? Mandrake? Debian? Slackware? Lindows? Gentoo? Lycoris? Xandros? Knoppix? Yoper? Libranet? Rock Linux?

  19. 2003-07-08 5:43 pm
    Anonymous

    @Adam Scheinberg: I don’t think Todu’s statement perfectly encapsulates what’s wrong with the open source movement at all – because only very few people that actually contribute to open source software will agree with what he said.

    The open source movement *is not* about “taking down the enemy”. Of course, many contributors are motivated by the feeling that there’s need for a freely available alternative to what’s on the (mostly commercial) table right now, but that’s only one motivation out of many. Plus it’s just a side-effect of the general idea. The idea of open-source is making excellent technology available to everyone. To share knowledge. To have choice.

    Both Linux and FreeBSD fit into that concept. I’m happy that they exist. I like the diverse and somewhat chaotic nature of the Linux develoment process a lot: It feels very natural, biological to me. It’s the biggest cooperative project in the history of mankind. Kinda cool, eh? On the other hand, while I like it *a lot*, I don’t think the GPL is necessarily the holy grail in *every* situation: Enforcing source distribution isn’t really compatible to the term “free”. Plus, more coordination has its benefits, like incrased reliability. Both Linux and BSD have their advantages and disadvantages.

    It’s good to have choice.

  20. 2003-07-08 5:46 pm
    Anonymous

    Oh man, I am really, really tired of *BSD supporters.

    They do not like Linux, but they do not care about “general public”. And after they complain their OS is better, but gets much less attention than Linux.

    I have nothing against *BSD, in fact I would like trying it when I have same spare time, but please, the attitude “*BSD is better, I don’t understand why Linux is so widely used. What? A graphical installer? That’s not for real man” is not going to help *BSD to be widespread.

  21. 2003-07-08 5:49 pm
    Anonymous

    >> Todu, to be frank – that’s what’s wrong with the open source movement. Your attitude perfectly encapsulates it.

    >>

    Sorry Adam, the only thing wrong with Open source is people who make your kind of statement. How does Todu’s statement “perfectly encapsulate” open source??? How do you jump from one obvious troll (I laughed and dismissed his statements when I read them), to an entire community? Todu is a troll, that much is immediately obvious. In fact you don’t even know that he is a linux-using person. For all we know, he may be just a simple mischief-maker. Or even a bsd fan trying to undercut the competition. When you jump so hard on open source with so little excuse, one begins to wonder …

  22. 2003-07-08 5:50 pm
    Anonymous

    It’s always funny when people are bringing up this chart. They sure didn’t bothered to read the FAQ:

    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html#whichos

    You’re right that FreeBSD is more mature, but there are better sources to support your claims. ;)

    Talking about nVidia, they released new drivers some days ago supporting -CURRENT offcially.

    Anonymous (IP: —.adsl.easynet.be), I think you just pointed out what I really hate of the Linux community. IMO, the divisions and the wars/conflicts between distros are slowing its development and hurting its adoption.

  23. 2003-07-08 6:01 pm
    Anonymous

    >> I think you just pointed out what I really hate of the Linux community. IMO, the divisions and the wars/conflicts between distros are slowing its development and hurting its adoption.

    >>

    Sometimes, I wonder if that’s the case, but I don’t know that it is for sure. For one thing, the competition in the distribution market drives growth, and that’s what has happened in the desktop. For another, the presence of all the commercial dists ensures that people are working on things that might otherwise be neglected. If you are comparing the linux situation to what happens in BSD, well, the test of the pudding is in the eating: linux has clearly done much better than bsd in terms of development speed and adoption, and certainly in terms of availability in different markets. And I’m just stating facts, not getting involved with that ridiculous linux vs bsd argument.

  24. 2003-07-08 6:05 pm
    Anonymous

    I REALLY want to get into using FreeBSD full time. There are a lot of things about it that I really like. First, and foremost, it just “feels” better. Something about just draws me to it and feels so good when I use it. I don’t realy know what it is, tho… It could be any number of things, I suppose. But, two things keep me from using it full time… first, the SMP stuff feels a little better in Linux. I’m waiting for that to solidify a bit more in the 5.x series of FreeBSD, though. I’m really excited about that one. The other that keeps me from it (for now) is that my purchased copy of StarOffice 6 won’t run on it. Try as I might, I can’t find out what’s wrong, and I can’t find anyone that seems to be able to help. I know I could just run OpenOffice, but I own StarOffice, and I’d prefer to use it than to let that money just go down the drain.

    But I’m still hoping…

  25. 2003-07-08 6:06 pm
    Anonymous

    To these people, like Todu, I point out that strength resides in diversity and adaptation. If everyone was using a single platform across the Internet, it could be brought to a halt with a single bug, glitch, or virus.

    No one platform/OS combination can do EVERYTHING well. Diversification suits different tasks better. Linux is a decent server OS, but it’s not terribly strong with desktop media applications. This is a problem with the schedulers in 2.4 and is well known to the kernel people. It’s also not good at hard real time tasks. The GPL appeals to some companies that prefer openess with the garuntee that other companies using the same system have to be just as open with core changes.

    BSDs are designed with network serving in mind and they are excelent at the task. NetBSD is popular with the embedded device companies that don’t wish to be locked in with the GPL and equally popular with those that desire stability above everything else. OpenBSD directly addresses security issues generally in an unblinking manner. FreeBSD is about sheer performance. The BSD license gives a great deal of leeway in publishing or not publishing source code.

    Solaris and AIX are excelent for high end enterprise production servers with tens to thousands of CPUs.

    Microsoft Windows is good for desktops and games. Microsoft Windows Server is good at groupware application situations.

    Plan 9, *grin*, is good R&D material and showing people what a truly shared network resource environment could be like.

    QNX and WindRiver are for hard RT applications where task scheduling is critical importance.

    I could go on and on about the very diverse computing environment of the current age, but I only have 8k characters to work with. ;) The point is, the more diversification we have, the stronger the world global computing environment is. Use what you want to use, or what you need to use. Just be aware that there are alternatives and don’t flame people when someone is using something different that may fit their wants or needs.

    I realize I’ll probably get flamed about some of my statements, but that’s ok. I only pointed out a few reasons why people choose the OS that they use. It is by no means an exhaustive comparison of tasks and features. This is also not a comment on what people should or should not use.

  26. 2003-07-08 6:08 pm
    Anonymous

    Yep, I installed the new nvidia drivers a couple ‘o days ago and so far they are stable. Finally I can play games. The XFree driver was terrible for 3D and the beta nvidia drivers too flakey.

    @Paride. Some Linux people say exactly the same things you say blanket-claim FreeBSD users say. Personally I don’t really care because I have not felt the need to use Linux in years. But I don’t dislike Linux, different strokes for different folks.

  27. 2003-07-08 6:08 pm
    Anonymous

    The argument that Linux is the best in the market is somewhat flawed:

  • 2003-07-08 6:25 pm
    Anonymous

    Oh, don’t worry, I don’t want to go in a Linux vs BSD argument, but IMO, there are TOO many distros for Linux. Yes, competition does help, but like they say: “Too much is like not enough”. Take a look at http://www.distrowatch.com. There are listing 134 distros, and I’m sure they don’t list all of them. Yes, many, if not most are spinoffs of major ones, but I think that this “partition” of the community isn’t good, especially for the perception of the community in the Real World(tm). It demonstrate a lack of focus. What about the documentation? It’s sad to see some applications with 3 or 4 installation procedures, one for each major distro. I know that many people actually like all the choice available to them. However, the Real World(tm) isn’t used to that many choices. Of course, that’s my humble opinion, and we shouldn’t get this discussion further in a BSD thread… ;)

  • 2003-07-08 6:29 pm
    Anonymous

    >>No one platform/OS combination can do EVERYTHING well

    You would think that the above statement was common sense but sadly it’s not.

    IMHO diversity is the key without it then all O.S would be the same and there would be no reason to try and improve the tools you use.

    from dictionary.com:

    “Charles Darwin saw in the diversity of species the principles of evolution that operated to generate the species: variation, competition and selection” (Scientific American).

  • 2003-07-08 6:34 pm
    Anonymous

    The most issues are have to do with Dell hardwares.. I think, most of stuff in 5.1-CURRENT has been fixed for the Dell hardwares. So, you might want to try it again when 5.2 is releasing or do the buildworld on your laptop to upgrade -CURRENT.

    Anyway, I have been using 5.x since 5.0-dp1.. 5.1-CURRENT has improved a lot of stuff and they are still working on it. It always has been stable to me so far as for desktop with Gnome 2.3.x … Right now, I am planning to setup 5.1-CURRENT on a server to see how it goes.

  • 2003-07-08 6:37 pm
    Anonymous

    I do understand the 497 day uptime limitation. My point, however, was simply to show that FreeBSD has been documented as a long running stable OS. Not necessarily that it was the most stable or more stable than Solaris 🙂

    My best uptimes have been 130+ days UltraSparc 1 with Solaris 9; and 120+ days on a SparcStation 10 with OpenBSD 3.0. On both occasions they were only rebooted as a result of moving.

  • 2003-07-08 6:38 pm
    Anonymous

    HI, I’m thinking about developing a modified FreeBSD Distro that has similarities to the good ol’ BeOS. The idea came when I had a look at XFCE4beta1 and saw the nice BeOS decorators…

    So what are you thinking about modifiying FreeBSD that you’ll get a look and feel of a BeOS (or insert your favourite OS here) ?

    The amount of work would be peanuts compared to the openbeos/cosmoe/FreeBe folks. I don’t want to change anything on FreeBSD. “Just” developing a nice fb boot screen, a configuration GUI for soundcard, xfree, printer, …, tuning some essential applications like mozilla or openoffice with consistent (BeOS-style) buttons and decorators and here it is !

    Here’s a concrete list of what is to do with the core system:

    * Installation like BeOS (no questions, simply install a

    minimal running system)

    * Graphical Boot screen

    * Graphical user logon (or run as singleuser !?!)

    * Configuration app

    After that, a few important apps could be modified.

    The advantages of a BeBSD:

    * all linux apps will run on that system

    * some chosen apps will look and feel like BeOS ones

    * not too much work, could be ready in months…

    * drivers are available (USB2, WLAN, VGA,…)

    disadvantages:

    * no good multimedia capabilities

    * (maybe) slower than a “real” BeOS

    * problems with licenses?

    OK, now tell me YOUR opinion aboutthat!

  • 2003-07-08 6:43 pm
    Anonymous

    Sounds cool to me. Ive got my linux box tricked out to look like BeOS (using XFCE4). And making my fBSD box look better is always good.

    Go for it!

    Are you going to be releasing full source for the modifications?

  • 2003-07-08 6:47 pm
    Anonymous

    I think about releasing all in a binary package as BeOS did or giving the source away

    The clue of the mods would be a simplification of FreeBSD in a great manner. So a binary release would be not bad for endusers…

  • 2003-07-08 7:15 pm
    Anonymous

    Well, my gripe is that there is little to no java support. And no, I don’t want to run linux binaries under BSD. If I want linux binaries, I’ll run linux, which is what I am currently doing.

  • 2003-07-08 7:34 pm
    Anonymous

    Well, my gripe is that there is little to no java support. And no, I don’t want to run linux binaries under BSD. If I want linux binaries, I’ll run linux, which is what I am currently doing.

    Why do people b*tch so much about using the Linux emulation layer. It’s actually more like “system call translation” than emulation.

    I’ve used various Linux JDKs under FreeBSD and they’ve all worked flawlessly.

    Not using FreeBSD just because Java support is lacking is a bullsh*t excuse IMHO. Why don’t you just try it…you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

  • 2003-07-08 7:35 pm
    Anonymous

    HI, I’m thinking about developing a modified FreeBSD Distro that has similarities to the good ol’ BeOS. The idea came when I had a look at XFCE4beta1 and saw the nice BeOS decorators…

    Umm, did you hear of BeFree?

    http://befree.berlios.de/

  • 2003-07-08 7:45 pm
    Anonymous

    BeFree project aims a BeOS layer running on FreeBSD kernel. A very nice project apart from its homepage full of spelling mistakes ;) I hope it makes good progress.

  • 2003-07-08 7:47 pm
    Anonymous

    does FreeBSD 5.x (or Linux) support my:

    (1)nForce2 mobo

    (2)Sil3112A SATA controller

    (3)GigaRAID controller

    (4)GeForce FX 5600

    (5)Logitech Internet Navigator keyboard

    (6)Logitech MX700 Cordless Optical Mouse

    ???

    If not, I’m sticking to Windows XP

  • 2003-07-08 7:49 pm
    Anonymous

    Umm, did you hear of BeFree?

    http://befree.berlios.de/

    They have dropped FreeBSD support in two days ago or so..

    http://cvs.berlios.de/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/befree/befree/ChangeLog?r…

    It’s because, he can’t get threads work correct in FreeBSD and he can’t work two kernels at the same time due to his time. So, he chose Linux and dropped FreeBSD support. He said that he needs more people to help him develope his project if someone want to contiune work on FreeBSD support.

  • 2003-07-08 7:53 pm
    Anonymous

    i love *bsd. ports/pkgsrc is the only way to go when it comes to installing new software. i’m glad to see that portage has brought this to the linux community.

    🙂

  • 2003-07-08 7:56 pm
    Anonymous

    BeFree project aims a BeOS layer running on FreeBSD kernel. A very nice project apart from its homepage full of spelling mistakes ;) I hope it makes good progress.

    Too bad, the only good progress is on Linux; not FreeBSD.. 🙁 He is going to start work on app_server or some high-level work soon when he releases the next version. I had a chat with him by via-email, btw..

  • 2003-07-08 8:04 pm
    Anonymous

    [quote]does FreeBSD 5.x (or Linux) support my:

    (1)nForce2 mobo[/quote]

    Yes.

    [quote](2)Sil3112A SATA controller[/quote]

    Yes. You’ll need the newest -CURRENT for this.

    [quote](3)GigaRAID controller [/quote]

    I don’t know. Ask on one of the mailing lists.

    [quote](4)GeForce FX 5600 [/quote]

    Yes. New nVidia drivers were released about a week ago. See http://www.nvidia.com

    [quote](5)Logitech Internet Navigator keyboard [/quote]

    Yes. If you want, you can even make the extra buttons do something ;) .

    [quote](6)Logitech MX700 Cordless Optical Mouse[/quote]

    Yes.

    Only the GigaRAID I’m not sure about, just ask around ;) .

  • 2003-07-08 8:06 pm
    Anonymous

    I don’t really know for BSD, but I can answer you for Linux…

    1. Yes, I have one.

    2. I don’t know, but the generic driver *should*.

    3. I don’t know.

    4. Yes, BSD too.

    5. Yes, I have one.

    6. Probably, it’s a mouse, after all.

  • 2003-07-08 8:06 pm
    Anonymous

    does FreeBSD 5.x (or Linux) support my:

    (1)nForce2 mobo

    (2)Sil3112A SATA controller

    (3)GigaRAID controller

    (4)GeForce FX 5600

    (5)Logitech Internet Navigator keyboard

    (6)Logitech MX700 Cordless Optical Mouse

    ???

    If not, I’m sticking to Windows XP

    Well, I know 5 and 6 work (they’re just a mouse and a keyboard, at least at the hardware interface level)

    4 should work too, since nVidia has released FreeBSD drivers for their graphics cards

    as for the rest, I bet they will work, however, why don’t you just download the ISO or the floppy disk images and give it a try

  • 2003-07-08 8:26 pm
    Anonymous

    Well, my gripe is that there is little to no java support. And no, I don’t want to run linux binaries under BSD. If I want linux binaries, I’ll run linux, which is what I am currently doing.

    It depends what you’re using Java for. If you are using it for desktop applications and need the JDK 1.4 then yes, you are stuck with an alpha quality patchset, available at http://www.eyesbeyond.com/freebsddom/java/jdk14.html

    There is a set of production quality patches for the JDK 1.3 available at http://www.eyesbeyond.com/freebsddom/java/jdk13.html which I have been using in conjunction with Apache Tomcat for a FreeBSD-based Java application server without any issues.

    Unfortunately you will need to temporarily install the Linux JDK to build a native FreeBSD JDK. This isn’t FreeBSD’s fault, but Sun’s, as they will not allow you to redistribute the JDK after it has been built from modified sources.

    Starting a JDK build takes around 10 minutes and should complete in under two hours on a decently fast system.

    Many people seem to complain that building your own JDK is “too much work.” I suppose there’s a small amount of validity to this argument, but there is absolutely none to your argument that there is “there is little to no java support.” Just look at the ports tree… there’s dozens of Java applications and development tools, including things like Ant and Tomcat.

  • 2003-07-08 8:26 pm
    Anonymous

    Great idea!

    You have exactly said what I thougt a week ago too.

    And for those who say, well, you just need to learn to work with textfiles a bit, you are just used to Windows. Gogo read the Printer Installation section of the handbook.

    However, the KPrinter configuration works on FreeBSD, making this easier. So a little modified installer and more hardware autodetection is all you need, I think, especially with sound support and mouse devices. Preferably a service like Kudzu which is started at every reboot, and which can also be started with a nice icon from the Menu.

    Install KDE+apsfilter by default, and you have a nice system.

  • 2003-07-08 8:42 pm
    Anonymous

    “I’m talking about the most popular (and best) found in the niche market. That is clearly Linux. So why are we still talking about BSD?”

    Why look any further than Mandrake, or Suse, or Redhat? Debian is obviously a waste of time, as are all the BSDs according to that viewpoint. There are what? 4-5 BSDs vs HOW many linux distros? Why even talk about Linux for that matter. If we want to talk about best in niche market, what about Plan 9 or some other OS?

    Troll…

  • 2003-07-08 9:27 pm
    Anonymous

    I run a freeBSD 4.8 server, and i just love ports!

    I was wondering if it is possible for me to upgrade to 5.1 without having to reinstall the whole system? Thanks.

  • 2003-07-08 10:17 pm
    Anonymous

    >> I was wondering if it is possible for me to upgrade to 5.1 without having to reinstall the whole system? Thanks.

    Yes, it is. Just use cvsup. For more info see:

    http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvsup.htm…

  • 2003-07-08 10:24 pm
    Anonymous

    I was wondering if it is possible for me to upgrade to 5.1 without having to reinstall the whole system?

    That’s covered in FreeBSD’s excellent handbook:

    http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/synching….

  • 2003-07-08 10:28 pm
    Anonymous

    Brilliant idea! But please keep it with a BSD license so that there is some future in it….

  • 2003-07-08 10:35 pm
    Anonymous

    … you would still be running the heaping pile of crap that calls itself XFree86.

    The inherent nature of the XWindows protocol prevents it from holding a candle to Be’s elegance and speed.

  • 2003-07-08 10:39 pm
    Anonymous

    Just what bsd needs, lotsa distros. ;)

  • 2003-07-08 11:10 pm
    Anonymous

    TODU,

    Truly there would be no such thing as Linux without BSD or GNU. GNU is BSD based free software. And there would never have been an OS called Linux if GNU/BSD were not part of its evolution.

    another,

    geakazoid

  • 2003-07-08 11:10 pm
    Anonymous

    Can you do encrypted filesystems with BSD? I just spent a week compiling Linux kernels to get a server configured just right. Its working now, but it has its occational quirk, like samba and ssh interfering with eachother. Since I’m too lazy to troubleshoot the quirks at the moment I might consider installing BSD.

  • 2003-07-08 11:35 pm
    Anonymous

    FreeBSD 5.x does GBDE, GEOM based disk encryption.

  • 2003-07-08 11:55 pm
    Anonymous

    this is osnews.

    there are a lot of os enthusiasts here.

    an os enthusiast runs multiple oses. if you don’t run multiple oses then you are:

    a windows enthusiast

    or a linux enthusiast

    or freebsd enthusiast

    you get the point.

    so all you whiners and complainers taking pot shots at freebsd…if it’s too much for you to sit down and learn the basics of an os and THEN post constructive criticism…then perhaps you should remain on the sidelines and refrain from participating. or just stick to your own os subcategory.

    – a user of xp, redhat, freebsd, mac os 9 & X.

  • 2003-07-09 12:28 am
    Anonymous

    All you *BSD users sound like me and my motley crew of Gentoo users.

    We’ll try to persuade every Linux user to switch to Gentoo, because it is ‘the true way forward’, and all you *BSD users will try to convince us that *BSD is better than Linux.

    I ain’t giving up my Gentoo box. ‘Nuff said.

    I will try *BSD at some point in the future, probably when 5.x is declared stable, and even then, only through VMware. Until that time, I’m sticking with my Gentoo.

    So shut up.

  • 2003-07-09 12:38 am
    Anonymous

    So shut up.

    Do what you like troll. No BSD user could care less.

    What kind of attitude is that? “Give up developing BSD because Xiol won’t use it! And so it will die.”. lol.

  • 2003-07-09 12:44 am
    Anonymous

    read the post above yours….it was meant exactly for the likes of you.

  • 2003-07-09 12:46 am
    Anonymous

    To Eike Hein and linux_baby:

    I misplaced a modifier. When I said to Todu “that’s what’s wrong with the open source movement. Your attitude perfectly encapsulates it,” I didn’t mean that that’s what’s wrong with the entire community, I just meant to imply that the problem is that there are people like that who walked around obnoxiously waving the open-source flag claiming to be part of the movement and giving the rest of us a bad name. You two jumped to the conclusion that I somehow misunderstand the open source movement on such a grand scale that I feel as though everyone open source somehow pushes only Linux and wants to eliminate choice. Not so.

  • 2003-07-09 2:43 am
    Anonymous

    Oh man, I am really, really tired of Linux supporters.

    They do not like BSD, but they do not care about “general public”. And after they complain their OS is better, but gets much less attention than BSD.

    I have nothing against Linux, in fact I would like trying it when I have same spare time, but please, the attitude “Linux is better, I don’t understand why BSD is so widely used. What? A graphical installer? That’s not for real man” is not going to help Linux to be widespread.

    Idiot.

  • 2003-07-09 8:51 am
    Anonymous

    Just what bsd needs, lotsa distros. ;)

    Personally I am against tuning the applications. Just a friendlier installer, which by default installs some handy ports for configuring certain things, maybe also an user-friendly X configuration part.

    GUI Bootscreen support — too bad my PC does not support that 🙂

    The installer can just grab the official packages and ports from a FreeBSD mirror, so that it does not fork FreeBSD but only adds some more functionality.

    At least, that’s what I would think of it.

  • 2003-07-09 9:02 am
    Anonymous

    one of the things I do is watch c-span and msnbc,etc. On Suse, Mandrake and Redhat, mplayer takes a full minute or more to load a c-span or msnbc stream, heck most people would give up and never give it a chance. BUT the easy freebsd ports installation gave me a mplayer that loads 5 seconds flat at c-span using mozilla 1.4, heck that may be faster than WMP.

    Now, tell me again who can take down Windows. Like others have said it ain’t about taking down windows anyway. I like windows. Creating an operating system should not be about competition but about fun and play. free the wires and the wireless. Let there be OS’s a plenty and a big hard drive to hold them all. I have ME, BeOS, QNX and freebsd on this machine and 98, freedos and mandrake on the laptop. I have had hours of fun and/or distraction. whatever.

    I’m just a 50 year old POP, never compilled a kernal, but see I must if I am to get this i810 sound to work in freebsd.

  • 2003-07-09 10:42 am
    Anonymous

    Oh, thank you… ;)

    What I really meant was:

    I would really like to see the *BSD people working on some projects to bring *BSD to the masses instead of getting angry with Linux for its media coverage, because I know that *BSD are really good OSes.

    Do you find this less stupid? ;)

  • 2003-07-09 11:09 am
    Anonymous

    For the record, I’ve nothing against Linux or Linux users. Was one myself years ago.

  • 2003-07-09 11:59 am
    Anonymous

    shouldn’t need to recompile. edit your /boot/loader.conf, add this line:

    snd_ich_load=”YES”

    reboot and the system should load the module for the i810 and the pcm module automatically.

    if you haven’t already tweaked your /etc/make.conf, set the CPUTYPE for your architecture, add -O2 to your CFLAGS, then streamline the kernel config and recompile the kernel and mplayer for a little extra speed boost. I like to tweak the priority of X on my workstation, too.

    play with it a little and you’ll be able to pull of even better times. I love Linux, but it’s not been on anything at home for a long time. even with gentoo, I could never get a system even close to the same responsiveness.

    of course, Linux has it’s own charms.

  • 2003-07-09 12:02 pm
    Anonymous

    shouldn’t need to recompile. edit your /boot/loader.conf, add this line:

    snd_ich_load=”YES”

    then

    ‘kldload snd_ich’ and no need to reboot.

  • 2003-07-09 12:08 pm
    Anonymous

    yes, yes…

    easier to say reboot. 8)

  • 2003-07-09 3:02 pm
    Anonymous

    Kingston and wlsb,

    Thanks! Looking forward to sound in freebsd.

    I read in “freebsd unleashed” that there are several apps that will do sound without need for graphical interface, such as mpg123. Is there a comparable app for video at the CLI? afterall, the CLI has those graphical screensavers.

    I work with the mentally handicapped and it seems to me that the CLI could be put to great use as it needs no mouse. I can rig a keyboard for simplicity and with the use of virtual consoles…. Just thinking out loud.

    thanks again.

  • 2003-07-09 3:21 pm
    Anonymous

    Is there a comparable app for video at the CLI? afterall, the CLI has those graphical screensavers.

    actually, yes. was just playing with the SDL stuff the other day. you have to build mplayer with sdl support(`make WITH_SDL=yes install`). it should build SDL as a dependency during the process, if not install it first.

    to setup SDL, recompile the kernel with “device VESA” in the kernel config, then add:

    setenv SDL_VIDEODRIVER vgl

    to your .cshrc or the equivalent for whatever shell you’re using. when you run mplayer, it will look for X, then fall back to SDL if it isn’t found.

    it works, but it didn’t seem to like those goofy MorphOS videos from the top story… so, I guess it’s a bit touchier than

  • 2003-07-09 3:30 pm
    Anonymous

    that’s my bad. you shouldn’t need to recompile, just add

    vesa_load=”YES”

    to the loader.conf, just like with the sound driver. sorry, the instructions at the end of the sdl install said recompile, didn’t even bother to check for a module. guess I’ll be rebuilding my kernel without it tonight, grrrrr

  • 2003-07-09 4:56 pm
    Anonymous

    1) Windows XP/2000 – Kind of a pig but it does everything really well!

    2) FreeBSD – Very light weight and simple. Mindless to configure and tweak.

    3) NetBSD – Very portable.

    4) Windows 9x – Not very secure but super easy to setup and run. Runs fast on old hardware. I use it as a kiosk in the kitchen at home.

    5) Linux – Bloated but very configurable. Still lacks good USB support. (eg try symphony HomeRF USB device, NOT!)

    6) Windows NT 4.0 – Piece of crap.

    nuf said…

  • 2003-07-09 5:41 pm
    Anonymous

    lol, I’m not going to pick on your choices, but seriously. 9X in the top 4??? it’s a giant memory leak.

    NT4 gets judged harshly, but it still has a ton of hardware support and, with a little tweaking, runs in about 12-16M RAM. that’s not the Windows 9X 32M at boot, then slowly bloats itself out to 256M+. 9x never seemed be able to take advantage of a processor faster than about 400MHz, either. I could work on a 400, then switch over to another desktop with a P4 running 9x and couldn’t tell the difference.

  • 2003-07-09 7:46 pm
    Anonymous

    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/reports/performance/Hosters?tn=june_2…

    Netcraft audits and ranks webhosting providers for reliability.

    I think it’s interesting to note that the top five all run FreeBSD.

  • 2003-07-09 9:31 pm
    Anonymous

    One of the main reasons for me to finally choose FreeBSD over win xp and linux is in fact desktop responsiveness. For the first time, my 2.4 Ghz box feels subjectively like a powerful computer to me. It doesn’t take too much to make windows or even linux freeze the ui for a frew fractions of a seconds, but I haven’t yet experienced the slightest ui disturbance in FreeBSD (5.1) yet, even with heavy load.

    The other important aspect the the often praised easy of configuration. The documentation is superb, especially the freebsd handbook, and there are tutorials and how-tos for almost every imagineable aspect.

  • 2003-07-10 1:31 pm
    Anonymous

    I’ve been tempted to try FreeBSD, but it’s totally unclear to me, despite trawling the freebsd.org web site and USENET (via google) whether I would be wasting my time since I have a few CAD (dongle locked) Windows-based packages around that I cannot find an open source equivalent for. As such, running vmware under linux is my solution – it’s not clear if that will actually install and run successfully under FreeBSD. The last mention of a host system based on FreeBSD is for vmware 2.x on the vmware.com web site…. Anyone able to comment on this? ;)