LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > LinuxQuestions.org > Linux - News
User Name
Password
Linux - News This forum is for original Linux News. If you'd like to write content for LQ, feel free to contact us.
All threads in the forum need to be approved before they will appear.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 05-23-2008, 07:23 AM   #16
vadkutya
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: slackware 10.2
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 16

i was just thinking about getting NetBSD installed on my linux box--i just downloaded the iso's yesterday--when i came across this thread. after reading the posts i am now rather disinclined to do so. the NetBSD website however gives the impression that NetBSD is a full featured modern OS like linux just much more secure by default. now this has been proofen wrong. so i'm continuing to use slackware--which i like very much--and wait how it goes with the NetSBD project. i'd like to say otherwise but even if it is somewhat sarcastic...thank you Kristijan for clearing the matter.

vadkutya
 
Old 05-23-2008, 07:51 AM   #17
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,118
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya View Post
the NetBSD website however gives the impression that NetBSD is a full featured modern OS like linux just much more secure by default. now this has been proofen wrong.
Maybe I'm blind but where exactly are these security deficiencies you find "proven wrong" explicitly mentioned in any of the above? And if you haven't experienced it yourself, wouldn't your opinion have the same value as say, hearsay? Maybe just try it for some time, *then* form an opinion.
 
Old 05-23-2008, 08:18 AM   #18
vadkutya
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: slackware 10.2
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 16
it must be my english that i'm constantly understood wrongly . proven wrong was in my opinion that it's full featured like modern linux. read the first post and you see what i mean...or better i'll cite it for you:
Quote:
5) There are a number of aspects of the NetBSD architecture that are
flat out broken, and need serious rehabilitation. Again, the
leadership needs to recruit people to do these things. Some of them
include:

* serious problems with the threading architecture (including the
user-kernel interface), as mentioned earlier;
* terrible support for kernel modules;
* the horrible mess that is 32/64-bit compatibility, resulting in
32-bit apps often not working right on 64-bit kernels; and
* unbounded maintenance work due to inappropriate and rampant use of
"quirk" tables and chip-specific tables; e.g. in SCSI, ATAPI, IDE,
ACPI and SpeedStep support. (I actually did much of this work for
SCSI, but am not currently able to commit it.)
the website gives the impression that NetBSD has no such issues and it's comparable with linux or any other modern os except that it is more secure/portable then these _by default_.

now, i'm sry for my bad english but before picking on spelling mistakes try switching between three languages constantly. sometime this happens...i was mislead by "proof". nomen est omen? than unspawn...

cheers vadkutya

Last edited by vadkutya; 05-23-2008 at 08:20 AM.
 
Old 05-23-2008, 08:53 AM   #19
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,118
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787Reputation: 2787
Thanks for the quote but that would be like saying Linux has no problems because the kernel.org front page doesn't state them in bold. The list is not like "glaring security errors" and if you check netbsd.org/changes/ or nvd.nist.gov you'd see security fixes are rolled out OK...
BTW your english is not that bad.
 
Old 05-23-2008, 12:15 PM   #20
vadkutya
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: slackware 10.2
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 16
i was just trying to say that if the project is almost dead it has probably no future and it would be a waste of time to install NetBDS. then i'd rather install OpenBSD if i want to have a unix os. it was not about security issues.

vadkutya
 
Old 05-23-2008, 03:20 PM   #21
JMJ_coder
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 478

Rep: Reputation: 30
Hello,

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya View Post
i was just trying to say that if the project is almost dead it has probably no future and it would be a waste of time to install NetBDS. then i'd rather install OpenBSD if i want to have a unix os. it was not about security issues.

vadkutya
NetBSD is far from dead. Take a look at the community (i.e., mailing lists) and you'll see it has a thriving community - albeit not as large as some other OS's. So it has some bugs - so me one program, especially one as large as an OS that doesn't. *BSD Unix does, so does Linux, so does MAC OS, so does Windows.

You say that you think it is not true that NetBSD is secure by default - one reason it can make that claim is that most (if not all) daemons are turned off by default. You have to individually enable them - so there aren't any possible open doors there that you aren't aware of. That is also a feature of OpenBSD, as far as I know.

Charles Hannum while making some valid points goes off, in my opinion, into a bit of a juvenile rant no doubt caused by his termination from the project. It is certainly a loss for NetBSD to lose a talented programmer such as Hannum, but his opinion is just one and one that is not shared by the vast majority of NetBSD users.

So why just listen to one opinion - install NetBSD and see for yourself.
 
Old 05-23-2008, 03:37 PM   #22
vadkutya
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: slackware 10.2
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 16
hey JMJ_coder,

thanks for the advice:
Quote:
So why just listen to one opinion - install NetBSD and see for yourself.
well of course, one should always listen to more opinions than just one but since the guy is one of the four starting members/developers i gave his opinion more credit than i normally would/should(?) have.

but what is it with the security matter? i _never_ said it's not secure, i said it is secure but far from a full featured modern OS. look at the *serious* problems that were pointed out. of course they don't go housing with it but these problems and the managment problems sound rather serious.

i heard some good things about OpenBSD that convinced me to give it a try. remember, i am interested in linux/unix and willing to learn, yet i am no computer scientist. so i can't hack the kernel according to my likings...

vadkutya

Last edited by vadkutya; 05-23-2008 at 03:38 PM.
 
Old 05-23-2008, 03:48 PM   #23
anomie
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Texas
Distribution: RHEL, Scientific Linux, Debian, Fedora, Lubuntu, FreeBSD
Posts: 3,930
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya
i said it is secure but far from a full featured modern OS.
Seems like impressive security for a full-featured, modern OS to me:
Agree?

NetBSD is alive and kicking. This whole thread started over what I perceive to be a political battle.

Last edited by anomie; 05-23-2008 at 03:50 PM.
 
Old 05-23-2008, 06:04 PM   #24
KenJackson
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Distribution: Fedora, Arch
Posts: 572

Rep: Reputation: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya View Post
i was just trying to say that if the project is almost dead it has probably no future and it would be a waste of time to install NetBDS.
NetBSD is my favorite BSD. I used it on one of my desktop PCs for two or three years.

I switched to PCLinuxOS because I ran into a problem that I didn't know how to fix and I absolutely had to have a functioning system the next day when Verizon showed up to install FiOS. It has been my intention to switch back to NetBSD ever since, but PCLOS is so stable (uptime 244 days now) and wonderful that I haven't gotten around to it.

No future? While it's clearly not rivaling Windows anytime soon, it still has a very loyal following that seems to be thriving. One of the things I love about it is pkgsrc.
 
Old 05-24-2008, 05:24 AM   #25
vadkutya
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: slackware 10.2
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by anomie View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya View Post
i said it is secure but far from a full featured modern OS.
Seems like impressive security for a full-featured, modern OS to me:
Agree?
are you guys trying to kid me ? i write it in capitals maybe someone is acutally reading what i wrote...I NEVER SAID IT'S NOT SECURE. TO THE CONTRARY I SAID IT IS SECURE BY DEFUALT BUT THERE ARE MANY THINGS PLAIN BORKEN. SO YES anomie, I DO AGREE. i repreat: I DO AGREE. you guys are really funny . please RTFP (Read The Friendly Post)

ok, as i said before, i might have spoken too soon but i decided to try OpenBSD for reasons i have read in the first post. reading it made me feel unsure about NetBSD in general. since Kristijan is one of the four founding memebers, i still give him more credit than you guys. he has the inside a normal user most probably lacks. he doesn't sound like he wants to see his project dead. his points about leadership etc. are good. linux has it's problems as well but i doubt that any of it's developers would say that it has such serious issues or bugs. if there is/were such a thing there were people working on it just for the reasons Kristijan mentioned. on the other hand i don't know the management of NetBSD but what Kristijan said sounds like a typical management board to me so it's a fair bet to say he's right . and i repeat it again; since i am no CS i decided to go for OpenBSD. period.

cheers vadkutya

damn, i somehow always get into trouble

Last edited by vadkutya; 05-24-2008 at 05:28 AM.
 
Old 05-24-2008, 11:12 AM   #26
anomie
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Texas
Distribution: RHEL, Scientific Linux, Debian, Fedora, Lubuntu, FreeBSD
Posts: 3,930
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya
BUT THERE ARE MANY THINGS PLAIN BORKEN.
If you're baffled about why people question what you write, perhaps you should read your own posts sometime. What are the "many" things in NetBSD that are "plain borken"?

I don't think NetBSD is necessarily for the faint of heart, but my experience with it has been exactly the opposite: it seems to be really well written and maintained. I'm posting from an old laptop running NetBSD now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya
since Kristijan is one of the four founding memebers, i still give him more credit than you guys.
Huh? It looks to me like the OP (Kristijan) posted a quote from Charles Hannum, taken from the netbsd-users mailing list.

It's fine if English is not your first language -- no one is (or should be) faulting you for that. But this is a case where it appears you completely misunderstood the thread from top to bottom. And now you're arguing about it. Let me recap: Mr. Hannum apparently had a falling out with the rest of the NetBSD gang, and they chose to "part ways". Afterwards, Mr. Hannum decided to write a rather negative email about the status of the NetBSD project. Draw your own conclusions.

Finally, I wouldn't waste too much time hemming and hawing over your perception of the health of a major FOSS OS project. Go ahead and use FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, or GNU/Linux. They're all good, and expertise in one is highly valuable and partially transferable among all of them.
 
Old 05-24-2008, 01:33 PM   #27
vadkutya
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: slackware 10.2
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 16
ok this is my last comment to that because this is ridiculous. you are right, they are not plain broken...i was wrong they are "flat out broken" [see quote #18]. they are not according to my opinion broken but to Mr. Hannum.

Quote:
It looks to me like the OP (Kristijan) posted a quote from Charles Hannum, taken from the netbsd-users mailing list. [...] But this is a case where it appears you completely misunderstood the thread from top to bottom.
the quote is from charles hannum and not from Kristijan. ok, mea culpa. but for [goodness] sake what does it matter? are you trying to tell me that i completely misunderstood the thread because i didn't realize that the quote is from Charles Hannum and not from Kristijan. now, let me recap: the thread is about the future of NetBSD and about a $GUY (assign your own value to it cherry picker) who is/was a founding member of this project so--as i said before--i give his opinion credit.

Quote:
Finally, I wouldn't waste too much time hemming and hawing over your perception of the health of a major FOSS OS project
1.) i just thanked the OP--go and look for yourself--for bringing this matter to our/my mind. it changed my opinion towards it. it actually doesn't matter what you think. i was not judging a major FOSS OS project. we could have left it with that but some of you didn't like the thought that i turned against the idea of installing NetBSD. thins leads ma to my second point...

my perception is the only important one in this matter. everything i do, i do it according to my perception of the world...as you do. so if my perception is that the health of NetBSD is not good and therefore decide not to install it because i don't like the thought that e.g. kernel modules support is flat out broken and on the other hand i know i am not an expert so i can't hack the kernel, i better let it be. if you don't like this attitude...well, it's your problem buddy. also, do not ask for my perception if you don't want to hear the answer. i was not going around telling everybody how much NetBSD sucks. i was just glad i could share the view of an insider. i am aware that one opinion is not enough to judge but sry, i have other things to do. i tried to take a shortcut .

Quote:
I don't think NetBSD is necessarily for the faint of heart
ahw, come on...do you really need this for your self esteem? should i tell you that you are right and that i don't deserve NetBSD because i am not as tough as you are. "it takes real men to have NetBSD running, hahaha". fu

now i'm really done with this forum. [please leave me alone]
vadkutya

Last edited by XavierP; 05-27-2008 at 10:14 AM. Reason: tidied up the bad language
 
Old 05-24-2008, 02:40 PM   #28
anomie
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Texas
Distribution: RHEL, Scientific Linux, Debian, Fedora, Lubuntu, FreeBSD
Posts: 3,930
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadkutya
are you trying to tell me that i completely misunderstood the thread because i didn't realize that the quote is from Charles Hannum and not from Kristijan. now, let me recap: the thread is about the future of NetBSD and about a $GUY (assign your own value to it cherry picker) who is/was a founding member of this project so--as i said before--i give his opinion credit.
No, I'm saying you completely misunderstood this thread because you still don't realize that Mr. Hannum is biased. He had a falling out with the NetBSD gang. He wrote a scathing review about the NetBSD project afterwards. Cause and effect? Motives in question? Get it?

If not, I can't help you. Good luck on your FOSS OS adventure.
 
Old 05-24-2008, 07:20 PM   #29
JMJ_coder
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 478

Rep: Reputation: 30
Hello,

Quote:
Originally Posted by anomie View Post
No, I'm saying you completely misunderstood this thread because you still don't realize that Mr. Hannum is biased. He had a falling out with the NetBSD gang. He wrote a scathing review about the NetBSD project afterwards. Cause and effect? Motives in question? Get it?

If not, I can't help you. Good luck on your FOSS OS adventure.
Indeed, that is the point. Certainly Charles makes some valid points that can be taken to heart by the NetBSD community, and should be to improve itself. But, he isn't exactly an impartial observer. It would be analogous to asking an ex-band member recently kicked out of the band what he thinks the band's future will hold. I wonder what he'll say?
 
Old 10-22-2008, 09:33 PM   #30
empcrono
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2008
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 110

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ_coder View Post
Hello,



Indeed, that is the point. Certainly Charles makes some valid points that can be taken to heart by the NetBSD community, and should be to improve itself. But, he isn't exactly an impartial observer. It would be analogous to asking an ex-band member recently kicked out of the band what he thinks the band's future will hold. I wonder what he'll say?

A out side view of this thread is liken to that of hind site (though not 100% so) it is as if I have 20/20 vision (in a way not.. yet not entirely.

Still I think the old adage "You'll catch more files with honey" or like I some times say... "It may be wise to leave the vinegar at home... the flies like honey much better" applies very well to this...

I think to a certain degree, no one was listing...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ_coder View Post
It would be analogous to asking an ex-band member recently kicked out of the band what he thinks the band's future will hold. I wonder what he'll say?
To pick at this.. I understand that some people thought this way... And I can see that it is possible. Still I have one advantage to my disadvantage of not knowing much about NetBSD, namely, The guy in question who is supposed to be being kicked out claimed that NetBSD was "couped"? Can any one prove that is not the case... and further more when one government is taken over by anther its not usually in the interest of the victor to keep around such people as old founders.. that is what he was claiming to be.

Just some thoughts... I have not formulated a real stance yet, (I may never)

Last edited by empcrono; 10-22-2008 at 09:36 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future of Linux, Future of BSD ? tarballed Linux - General 28 01-01-2012 04:04 PM
NetBSD tylor *BSD 5 05-13-2005 11:26 AM
NetBSD 2.0 and WPC11 v.3 halo14 *BSD 4 12-27-2004 11:08 AM
NetBSD and bootselector mikz *BSD 1 12-13-2004 01:40 PM
NetBSD-Live twilli227 General 3 09-17-2003 11:03 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:07 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration