Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BHyVe: A New Hypervisor Coming To FreeBSD 10.0

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by dante View Post
    Bsd loose in some things and beats Linux , for example firewall application BSD today is better , PF packet filter is much better and easier to maintain than iptables ,
    Oh, standard BSD fanboys mumblings detected.
    1) When it comes to maintanance it's a matter of taste and preference and it's very subjective view what is better or worse. It haves nothing to do with "better" (something that BSD guys fail to understand all the time). It's just a matter of preferences. From my standpoint, it's highly debatable if it's "easier to maintain". Look, when I want to catch some data packet with known data at known offset, in Linux there is module which would do exactly that for me. With reasonable simple commands. Now your turn. I've seen how BSD guys implement things like this in BPF assembly language. Because there was no other ways to do so. And it has been a clear winner in "unobvious firewall rules contest" . OTOH in Linux you can have string matching rule in more or less human readable form. And features like this is what I would expect from more or less advanced firewall for sure.
    2) Netfilter/iptables also would not make any discounts for these "wanna be a cool firewall". You see, there are really powerful and cool features. Say, ipset could ban a huge numbers of IPs without getting horribly slow. And it's better in terms of features than anything BSDs could offer.

    but openbsd is not so good something like MySQL, postgres, performance in Linux is better for this, people here should have to recognize advantages of both systems and stop this stupid discussion.
    And if I remember correctly, openbsd also unable to use more than 1 CPU core for firewall. Let's say, guys like vyatta are declaring 10Gbit routing and so on on Linux - in software. So it would be pretty lame to mumble that "1 core is enough" or something like that. In fact, Linux is strong competitor in networking and would not offer any discounts. So just some mumbling does not counts. If you can think some OScould work better, you have to try.
    Last edited by 0xBADCODE; 03-03-2013, 01:05 AM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View Post
      And if I remember correctly, openbsd also unable to use more than 1 CPU core for firewall.
      I believe that's no longer the case since rthreads replaced pthreads.

      Comment


      • #48
        I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
        Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
        There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

        Comment


        • #49
          richard stallman only wgets pages and doesn't use a browser


          nice try troll


          also spidermon is copyrighted

          Comment


          • #50
            really intelligent and meaningful discussion going on here. funny how gpl advocates have all the time in the world because they don't believe in earning money. and so opinionated never taking the time to contribute constructively. all while bsd users and contributors are too busy with a real life than to talk absolute non-sense on a 2-bit alternative tech news website forum.

            I've accomplished more in 12 months with BSD's than I did in 15 years with GNU/Linux.

            GNU/Linux is an absolute mess. The GPL is an unsustainable license that gets violated on a daily basis of which who's license holders can't sue or do anything about because they have no money.

            There is a reason the likes of Apple, Juniper, Yahoo! and Netflix are so successful, because of great software and licensing.

            What ever happened to the GPL rule of distributing the source code with the product? I don't see google sending you a copy of GNU/Linux every time you load their webpage or do a search.

            Talk about resource management, why the hell does every major GNU/Linux distro have 8 ramdisks loaded into the kernel by default?

            The thing about this stupid debate is in all my years I've never seen someone from the BSD community bad-mouth Linux, rather sit there and observe this bullshit that occurs constantly. And if it's not BSD, it's Microsoft, or apple or whatever. This all stems from the stupid idea that it's wrong to make money from software. Hating Microsoft or the alike is a disease or a mental disorder.

            Why bitch about iOS being the only BSD based phone OS and not being able to hack it? Don't you have the proficiency to jailbreak an iPhone? It just shows your lack of skills. BSDs runs on a range of phones and embedded devices. I've ported numerous GPL and BSD software to ARM and MIPS.

            Debating which OS is better for a desktop is bullshit. Linux sucks at it, only just got a decent scheduler. Windows is by far the greatest desktop in the world, followed by MacOSX. Gnome and KDE are always behind and always will be, the only decent alternative GUI is Enlgihtenment DR 0.17, which is, guess what... BSD licensed.

            Virtualization.. Xen was bought by Citrix, nVidia drivers taint the kernel, very few games support OpenGL, Cedega is commercial. KVM is backed by IBM.

            You guys don't know what the fuck you're talking about, come out from under the rock you've been hiding behind because it's the elephant in the room.

            Linux can die in a hole. You're sick, mentally ill people.. I invite you to join us in the real world.

            If you want to get serious about virtualization, you'd realise that it's stupid to run xen or kvm on a bloated gnu/linux distro. talk about wasting resources. Joyent's SmartOS is where it's at.

            I could go on and on...

            Comment


            • #51
              you're painting yourself into a corner. in a nutshell BSD is just another Unix clone like Linux. It uses the same exact libraries that come with every distro. The performance is absolutely s*** and you know it. What do you expect from bunch of greybeard Unixtards who use Macbook Pros as their real machine to get work done. So to bring up BSD as a good alternative to Linux is crazy. It's really stuck in 1970s and is basically a research OS that has produced some useful things (firewall, sandboxing, security).
              Quite ironic that BSDs are 1337 hax0r server systems and yet UEFI which started in the server world (for Itanium, specifically) is not even barely working on FreeBSD.

              Comment

              Working...
              X