Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: DragonFlyBSD 3.4 Coming Soon, Focuses On DPorts

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,652

    Default DragonFlyBSD 3.4 Coming Soon, Focuses On DPorts

    Phoronix: DragonFlyBSD 3.4 Coming Soon, Focuses On DPorts

    The DragonFlyBSD 3.4 release is anticipated for release in mid-April and one of the features to this next BSD operating system update is the formation of DPorts, a derivative of the FreeBSD ports collection...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTMzODk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Funny,

    On one cares about BSD much DragonflyBSD today. They can't even match Linux and Linux is now far ahead in capability, security, code quality, virtualization and others. It's funny to watch those BSD nutcases try to add useless or out of date features to thier worthless operating system just to delay the inevitable death of BSD.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lesterchester View Post
    Funny,

    On one cares about BSD much DragonflyBSD today. They can't even match Linux and Linux is now far ahead in capability, security, code quality, virtualization and others. It's funny to watch those BSD nutcases try to add useless or out of date features to thier worthless operating system just to delay the inevitable death of BSD.
    Both Linux and BSD learn from each othet, Linux is ahead of BSD in n many things but not security, just look at OpenBSD, no other system can match him in terms of security, his packet filter implementation PF is years ahead of iptables

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dante View Post
    linux is ahead of bsd in n many things but not security, just look at openbsd, no other system can match him in terms of security, his packet filter implementation pf is years ahead of iptables
    hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

    what bullshit, Linux is more security cause more people give a fuck about it.

    No one gives fuck about BSD so no checking of code
    Last edited by killing BSD; 03-31-2013 at 10:59 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dante View Post
    Both Linux and BSD learn from each othet, Linux is ahead of BSD in n many things but not security, just look at OpenBSD, no other system can match him in terms of security, his packet filter implementation PF is years ahead of iptables
    Linux doesn't have to learn from BSD, because it has all that BSD has and more. BSD on the other hand has to learn a lot from Linux but they always resist and thus are never catch up with linux. examples: package management and visualization. BSD goons keep saying it's irrelevant and ports and jails are superior. Well now they are scrambling to implement pkgng and Bhyve in 2012. More then 10 years after Linux equivalents. And both are just crap and don't live up to their promise.

    Linux is far ahead of BSD. In fact I'd say BSD is use securely designed then windows, no kidding. First of all Linux code is heavily audited by many people. BSD code is not, so little people care about it and those who do are bias and ignore most flaws they found. OpenBSD is the prime example. In fact in December 2010, OpenBSD has allowed the FBI to place backdoors in Both OpenSSH, OpenBSD itself and PF. Linux has in-built security mechanisms such as SELinux, AppArmor etc. *BSD has non of that. They claim, their code is so audited that they don't need those. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

    PF is totally lacking in features and usable security compared to IPTABLES. It's virtually useless. You either block out access to the internet totally or you leave your system wide open. PF and OpenBSD is useless
    Last edited by lesterchester; 04-02-2013 at 07:52 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lesterchester View Post
    First of all Linux code is heavily audited by many people. BSD code is not, so little people care about it and those who do are bias and ignore most flaws they found. OpenBSD is the prime example. In fact in December 2010, OpenBSD has allowed the FBI to place backdoors in Both OpenSSH, OpenBSD itself and PF.
    Wrong
    http://arstechnica.com/information-t...e-of-backdoor/

    Wrong
    http://it.slashdot.org/story/08/05/1...keys-guessable

    If you're going to troll, at least put some effort in first.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    Wrong
    http://arstechnica.com/information-t...e-of-backdoor/

    Wrong
    http://it.slashdot.org/story/08/05/1...keys-guessable

    If you're going to troll, at least put some effort in first.
    http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/...rs-may-be-true

    No, you are a troll

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lesterchester View Post
    Linux doesn't have to learn from BSD, because it has all that BSD has and more. BSD on the other hand has to learn a lot from Linux but they always resist and thus are never catch up with linux. examples: package management and visualization. BSD goons keep saying it's irrelevant and ports and jails are superior. Well now they are scrambling to implement pkgng and Bhyve in 2012. More then 10 years after Linux equivalents. And both are just crap and don't live up to their promise.

    Linux is far ahead of BSD. In fact I'd say BSD is use securely designed then windows, no kidding. First of all Linux code is heavily audited by many people. BSD code is not, so little people care about it and those who do are bias and ignore most flaws they found. OpenBSD is the prime example. In fact in December 2010, OpenBSD has allowed the FBI to place backdoors in Both OpenSSH, OpenBSD itself and PF. Linux has in-built security mechanisms such as SELinux, AppArmor etc. *BSD has non of that. They claim, their code is so audited that they don't need those. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

    PF is totally lacking in features and usable security compared to IPTABLES. It's virtually useless. You either block out access to the internet totally or you leave your system wide open. PF and OpenBSD is useless
    On the begining Linux learned a lot from BSD. BSD is missing some features Linux has, but it's definitely not package management.

    OpenBSD devs responds far faster then Linux devs, when it comes to vulnerabilities. But they are very slower when it comes to hardware incompatibility or features.
    Security mechanisms like SELinux, AppArmor ... are not protection for vulnerabilities in kernel and they said that they won't implement them, because they are hard to configure correctly.
    Anyway FreeBSD has such mechanism: http://www.trustedbsd.org/sebsd.html.

    PF and iptables are pretty much the same, but PF has nicer syntax and PF is probably faster on single processor (most firewalls) than iptables.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Funny

    On one cares about BSD much DragonflyBSD today. They can't even match Linux and Linux is now far ahead in capability, security, code quality, virtualization and others. It's funny to watch those BSD nutcases try to add useless or out of date features to thier worthless operating system just to delay the inevitable death of BSD.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    391

    Default

    BSD also lives in Linux.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •