Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Features Coming For FreeBSD 10

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic Features Coming For FreeBSD 10

    Features Coming For FreeBSD 10

    Phoronix: Features Coming For FreeBSD 10

    Here's a look at some of the planned features that are being worked on for the FreeBSD 10 release...

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

  • ninez
    replied
    Originally posted by Sydney View Post
    Off course, FreeBSD still has too very very interesting tools linux doesn't has, DTrace, CARP & pfsync, etc..
    https://github.com/dtrace4linux/linux ...Dtrace for linux has been available for some time.
    Last edited by ninez; 11-03-2013, 10:02 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JX8p
    replied
    Originally posted by wilbert-vb View Post
    Here is a change that is very significant for me, recently I upgraded my desktops to Intel chipsets and graphics because I got frustrated with Nouveau/nVidia.
    Intel is known for best documented support for open source.

    I have spent the last two days trying to get FreeBSD 9.1 and 10 beta running on my hardware and I found out that my Ivybridge Intel Graphics is not supported.
    The processor is an Intel g2020 with builtin graphics. Compared to nVidia is a true pleasure to install Linux.

    I have used FreeBSD a decade ago (release 4.*) and I wanted to use it again.
    Hardware support was a problem then, and it still is!

    Today I found out that Xorg-server is three years old and here I show you what that means to me.
    No desktop effects for FreeBSD and poor picture drawing (VESA):

    FreeBSD Xorg.log.0:

    Code:
    X.Org X Server 1.7.7
    Release Date: 2010-05-04
    X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
    Build Operating System: FreeBSD 10.0-BETA1 amd64 
    
    (II) intel: Driver for Intel Integrated Graphics Chipsets: i810,
    	i810-dc100, i810e, i815, i830M, 845G, 852GM/855GM, 865G, 915G,
    	E7221 (i915), 915GM, 945G, 945GM, 945GME, IGD_GM, IGD_G, 965G, G35,
    	965Q, 946GZ, 965GM, 965GME/GLE, G33, Q35, Q33,
    	Mobile Intel? GM45 Express Chipset,
    	Intel Integrated Graphics Device, G45/G43, Q45/Q43, G41
    
    (II) VESA: driver for VESA chipsets: vesa
    
    (II) UnloadModule: "intel"
    (II) Unloading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so
    Debian Jessie Xorg.log.0:
    Code:
    X.Org X Server 1.14.3
    Release Date: 2013-09-12
    [  2081.682] Build Operating System: Linux 3.10-2-amd64 x86_64 Debian
    
    [  2081.685] (II) intel: Driver for Intel(R) Integrated Graphics Chipsets:
    	i810, i810-dc100, i810e, i815, i830M, 845G, 854, 852GM/855GM, 865G,
    	915G, E7221 (i915), 915GM, 945G, 945GM, 945GME, Pineview GM,
    	Pineview G, 965G, G35, 965Q, 946GZ, 965GM, 965GME/GLE, G33, Q35, Q33,
    	GM45, 4 Series, G45/G43, Q45/Q43, G41, B43, HD Graphics,
    	HD Graphics 2000, HD Graphics 3000, HD Graphics 2500,
    	HD Graphics 4000, HD Graphics P4000, HD Graphics 4600,
    	HD Graphics 5000, HD Graphics P4600/P4700, Iris(TM) Graphics 5100,
    	HD Graphics 4400, HD Graphics 4200, Iris(TM) Pro Graphics 5200
    You have disobeyed the instructions on using KMS graphics with FreeBSD.

    Per the FreeBSD Wiki instructions, you need to set WITH_NEW_XORG and WITH_KMS to TRUE in /etc/make.conf.
    Following this you can install the X.Org port and get your graphics working.

    It is an expectation, and a very reasonable one, that FreeBSD users should know how to use Google to solve their problems, before complaining.

    Leave a comment:


  • wilbert-vb
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    Can you name changes in Xorg that actually made a difference in how you use your computer? Making a bunch of changes to be able to increase its version number is pointless unless its capabilities improve. While I am certain that there are improvements there, I am not certain that you can notice them. I have been through several Xorg versions in Gentoo Linux. Having had those upgrades was nice, but I have yet to see any obvious benefit.
    Here is a change that is very significant for me, recently I upgraded my desktops to Intel chipsets and graphics because I got frustrated with Nouveau/nVidia.
    Intel is known for best documented support for open source.

    I have spent the last two days trying to get FreeBSD 9.1 and 10 beta running on my hardware and I found out that my Ivybridge Intel Graphics is not supported.
    The processor is an Intel g2020 with builtin graphics. Compared to nVidia is a true pleasure to install Linux.

    I have used FreeBSD a decade ago (release 4.*) and I wanted to use it again.
    Hardware support was a problem then, and it still is!

    Today I found out that Xorg-server is three years old and here I show you what that means to me.
    No desktop effects for FreeBSD and poor picture drawing (VESA):

    FreeBSD Xorg.log.0:

    Code:
    X.Org X Server 1.7.7
    Release Date: 2010-05-04
    X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
    Build Operating System: FreeBSD 10.0-BETA1 amd64 
    
    (II) intel: Driver for Intel Integrated Graphics Chipsets: i810,
    	i810-dc100, i810e, i815, i830M, 845G, 852GM/855GM, 865G, 915G,
    	E7221 (i915), 915GM, 945G, 945GM, 945GME, IGD_GM, IGD_G, 965G, G35,
    	965Q, 946GZ, 965GM, 965GME/GLE, G33, Q35, Q33,
    	Mobile Intel? GM45 Express Chipset,
    	Intel Integrated Graphics Device, G45/G43, Q45/Q43, G41
    
    (II) VESA: driver for VESA chipsets: vesa
    
    (II) UnloadModule: "intel"
    (II) Unloading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so
    Debian Jessie Xorg.log.0:
    Code:
    X.Org X Server 1.14.3
    Release Date: 2013-09-12
    [  2081.682] Build Operating System: Linux 3.10-2-amd64 x86_64 Debian
    
    [  2081.685] (II) intel: Driver for Intel(R) Integrated Graphics Chipsets:
    	i810, i810-dc100, i810e, i815, i830M, 845G, 854, 852GM/855GM, 865G,
    	915G, E7221 (i915), 915GM, 945G, 945GM, 945GME, Pineview GM,
    	Pineview G, 965G, G35, 965Q, 946GZ, 965GM, 965GME/GLE, G33, Q35, Q33,
    	GM45, 4 Series, G45/G43, Q45/Q43, G41, B43, HD Graphics,
    	HD Graphics 2000, HD Graphics 3000, HD Graphics 2500,
    	HD Graphics 4000, HD Graphics P4000, HD Graphics 4600,
    	HD Graphics 5000, HD Graphics P4600/P4700, Iris(TM) Graphics 5100,
    	HD Graphics 4400, HD Graphics 4200, Iris(TM) Pro Graphics 5200

    Leave a comment:


  • Sydney
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post

    Maybe someone (you?) could port or clone DTrace, CARP & pfsync, etc?
    I would, if i could. But unfortunately, i am so far away from being able to deliver a quality of code like the linux- or bsd-kernel developers do, that i'm struggling of even dreaming about it

    But somehow, i`m so happy that things are like they are. Imagine the perfect OS. How boring would it be, if we couldn't achieve anything anymore. It's like life, you can't have all of it and somehow i think, it is a good thing.

    But as the post above cites correctly, that people (often management) are simply unable to "see the truth", and therefore unable to paying tribute to people, who have done great things.

    Take these kernel for instance, made by people who put sometimes their life efforts in what they do and companies make millions and billions of their work and still, to the most people, they are just "the nerds from the end of the road". So i cant tell you, how much respect i have for the people who make it even possible for us, to have something to discuss about in the first place.

    So stating, x is crap and y is king or whatever, feels kind of "short minded" to me.

    Heck, what do i love the oss community

    And N.B: Oracle Linux is so much better than Red Hat's Linux, because it's made by a bigger company.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alex Sarmiento
    replied
    Originally posted by Sydney View Post
    To me, in the End, Linux wins, Today. But one has to admit that what the *BSD Community is accomplishing, with their Budget and their Reachability, is a small wonder. At last, they gave us openssh, right?
    Absolutely, people shouldn't , and i think in most cases is not, arguing against BSD quality. The problem of BSD is the same problem that linux suffers but just worst.


    quote from Pirates of silicon valley :

    Steve Jobs:
    We're better than you are! We have better stuff.

    Bill Gates:
    You don't get it, Steve. That doesn't matter!

    Leave a comment:


  • uid313
    replied
    Originally posted by Sydney View Post
    Off course, FreeBSD still has too very very interesting tools linux doesn't has, DTrace, CARP & pfsync, etc..
    Thanks for a very informative post!

    Linux has ptrace, Systrace, SystemTap, strace, LTTng.
    I don't know much about tracing, so DTrace probably is better because I have heard that it is good.
    Tho, Linux have some alternatives.

    Maybe someone (you?) could port or clone DTrace, CARP & pfsync, etc?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sydney
    replied
    Despite my love for FreeBSD and the sympathy towards the, imo, more "mature" and "canny" user base, i have started to fade away from *BSD towards Linux, from a "server-side"-point of view, for the following, pure technical, reasons:

    - Virtualization: While the year-long well-matured BSD Implementation of a OS Virtualization is to me, without question, one or the best there is, FreeBSD has fallen short in almost every other Discipline. E.g. KVM and Xen, while Linux has even support for "native" Block- and Net-Devices built-in the kernel, FreeBSD runs barely as a Guest under Xen, for Instance under Amazons EC2 (See work of C. Percival?!? about bringing FreeBSD to EC2). Meanwhile, the Linux Kernel has received it's Implementation of OS Virtualization in the form the "wonderpatch" cgroups and LXC. And has Resource Management built in to, even a fully virtualized Network-Stack. In Conjunction with e.g. OpenvSwitch, the Lights go completely out, which leads me to my next Point.

    - Software: Wether we like it or not, but Linux has a for wider reachability, thus it is only consequent to start your Projects with a Focus on Linux. Wether it's the development of OS SW like netatalk or OpenVSwitch, or partly prorietary SW like Java, Alfresco or Zarafa. As a FreeBSD-User you are always limited in choice and almost by nature, falling behind.

    - Filesystems: Surely FreeBSD's ZFS is a bullet point. Still, the default FS is and will probably be for the next future, UFS2. I'am not saying one could or should compare ZFS with Btrfs, because Btrfs has still a very long road on front of it, remember how long it took ZFS to the point where it is today, or every other FS, which is no part you switch every 2-3 years. But ZFS Development, at Oracle, well, it's a Oracle, so thats that, and in the Illumos Community i have not too much confidence, that there will be rising much. On the other hand, Btrfs is very much in active development and has since it is bound to the GPL a real future. And under the non-COW-Filesystems ext3-4 is far more advanced than ufs2. Apart from "just" the filesystem, you have tools like lvm or drbd, which could for instance compared to HAST stretch its cluster over more than 2 nodes.

    - Many, many other little things: faster arm development, availability at hosting-services, Userland Filesystems, lack of drivers, etc..

    Off course, FreeBSD still has too very very interesting tools linux doesn't has, DTrace, CARP & pfsync, etc..

    But at the end of the Day and since i have to make a living of it too, and since i cant eat freedom, i have started to slip over more and more, even tough when i read stuff like this: "Are you a kid? Why are you complaining to me about bugs?", my heart is bleeding.

    To me, in the End, Linux wins, Today. But one has to admit that what the *BSD Community is accomplishing, with their Budget and their Reachability, is a small wonder. At last, they gave us openssh, right?

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by ryao View Post
    I have also yet to see an explanation as to how a protocol that ran smoothly on hardware from the 1980s could be a performance bottleneck on hardware today.
    Well, let me do that for you, it's easy.

    First, the protocol from the '80s isn't really the same one used today, after all the extensions that have been added on to it.

    Second, and more importantly, the way that protocol is being used is completely different. GTK and Qt use the protocol completely differently than any toolkits did in the '80s, and most apps are built on top of those toolkits.

    Then there is the extra layer of complexity caused by adding a compositor on top of the old system, and having to sync everything correctly between all those different processes that are running.

    Leave a comment:


  • vertexSymphony
    replied
    Originally posted by Alex Sarmiento View Post
    One could start by saying that at least Linux doesn't need a freebsd api or layer compatibility emulation.
    God i love geek flamewars
    The linuxulator is no emulator ... inform yourself → http://www.leidinger.net/blog/2010/1...lopers-basics/
    Well, it's there to allow more software to be available in FreeBSD, that for one reason or another can't be ported or as an inmediate way to have access to a software that's there for linux.

    Linux needs no FreeBSD compat layer, in general people at FreeBSD writes in a fairly portable manner (unless we talk about a very specific OS thing), so there's no need =)

    An outdated Xorg, no wayland in the horizon , outdated and less drivers, lack of a modern init system like systemd, no pulse audio, only one distribution... etc
    FreeBSD is not trying to compete with Windows like linux does, by trying to get into the desktop
    Some desktop things are implemented, but they are not a priority, at all ...

    Originally posted by a2r-l View Post
    That should be promoted as a feature
    Actually there's pulseaudio support (despite lennart's biased bitching), but it's not shoven down to everyone's throats ... I could perflectly have a system without using it (and, in fact, I was happier that way, honestly)
    systemd is irrelevant, we need a simple init system that works for production systems ... honestly, you don't restart a production system often, do you?

    On the topic of Wayland, video games like Unigine Oilrush have no problems drawing at the refresh rate with the right hardware and driver combinations while Xorg performs extremely well on my system. In the few cases where Xorg does not, I have found flaws in software, such as usleep() being used in konsole's draw routine. While Statements from users claim that Wayland is some wonder cure, statements from Wayland developers say that any improvements would likely be imperceptible. I have also yet to see an explanation as to how a protocol that ran smoothly on hardware from the 1980s could be a performance bottleneck on hardware today.
    I'ts mainly a change for developers, thing that will benefit indirectly the users ... allowing to have newer stuff implemented elegantly, having a simpler and cleaner code base and such.
    Again, the Desktop OS argument.

    The features that are comming to FreeBSD 10 are already present in Linux.
    Michael didn't post a lot of stuff that people suscribed to mailing lists knows ... ignoring the fact that things like ZFS is on the list (and the possible support for boot enviroments too), and libc++ too (last time I checked, no linux support), I grant the others, of course.

    Yes, there are some nice features of BSD that Linux lacks. I think there are more nice features in Linux that aren't in BSD, but that's my opinion so fuck off if you feel like countering this point.
    Ok, "fuck off" granted .... *rolleyes*

    The one thing I hate about the BSD's is that you can't mix and match your system, if there is a new driver for FreeBSD you cant just get a new kernel version and compile it,
    Actually KBI is VERY stable and you can actually do it ... in fact, you can use the old kernel with new driver if it does not change a subsystem or an old driver in a newer kernel (in fact, I used in 9-CURRENT a driver I compiled in a previous version of FreeBSD, same file, no recompile).
    A lot of people actually backports drivers, and it's not much of an issue, honestly ...

    And again, you can manage kernel and userland (world) on their own and manage different revisions to a certain point, naturally ...and those 2 things separated from system software like firefox.
    That flexibility in linux simply doesn't exist.


    Regards.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X