FreeBSD 10.0 RC3 Is Here To End Out 2013

[JX8p]

And also....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk6tIjXRuUY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9dVwQaI7uI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGTnjs9C3fw

I could go on for hours. Give it a rest-- your youtube videos mean nothing in the grand scheme of things, and you know it.

[Sergio]

CthuIhux, aka Pawlerson, aka kraftman, aka BSDSucksDicks, etc, etc, attacks!

[squirrl]

BSD had a better scheduler for years up until 2009 when two researchers' patches finally made it into the Linux kernel. Forgot their names. They fixed the race conditions Linus and the kernel DEV wouldn't acknowledge.

Now if ATI AMD would fix 3D acceleration. We know what it's capable of. PS4


OSX is another great example of BSD.


SLACKWARE sorta follows most of the design principals.

[Vim_User]

I’ve also just installed and played with this release little and it’s still on an old Dell Inspiron 400 in my basement (Yeah I known such a waste of good hardware on a crappy OS). And from what I’ve experienced, nothing important has changed. Hard to install, hard to setup both as a desktop and as a server (more difficult then linux), configuration files are in obcure and hard to get places (unlike linux where the config files are more orderly and easy to get places).

The changes that I see are:
-System is more flakier then previous releases
-Lot more bugs
-Slower
-Wifi and wired do not work



To me, ZFS encryption is appears more hackable then EXT4 encryption. Better invest more in BTRFS encyption.



I acturally compared FreeBSD 10’s pkgng to Fedora’s yum and found that pkgng and found that pkgng is still horribly slow and still does not handle package conflicts automatically.



That’s funny cause it took me until 9am in the morning to “fully” install gnome-shell and even then there were still lots of dependences missing and only fallback mode worked. On Arch Linux, I got gnome-shell fully installed in a matter of 1 hour.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA......

Finally to rap up this post, here’s a joke:


Why did the BSD dev cross the road?

To get to the Apple Store to buy a Mac

Actually, I find this post very telling. Other people install the OS and don't have problems, you install the OS and can't get it to work properly in a reasonable amount of time. So what does that tell us? Seeing that the thing that changed here that lead to a different result in installing the OS is the admin, one has to conclude that not the OS, but the admin is buggy. Maybe he is a RC version? Or maybe even a beta? Maybe he should go to a doctor to get some testing before being released into the wild?
That would probably help to fix his issues.

[DanL]

Why did the BSD dev cross the road?
To get to the Apple Store to buy a Mac

DIE, TROLL. DIE! This site (and probably Earth itself) would be better without your presence in 2014.

If you insist on trolling, at least get a new account. Also, you may want to get a new blade in your wit knife. Your current one couldn't cut hot butter...

[Sergio]

That's strange, because I was able to get a FreeBSD Apache web server up and running in little under an hour, PC-BSD takes even less if you use the default options.

It's clear to me that you aren't using FreeBSD 10, as I have had no problems with that on any of the hardware that I've installed it on (except Broadcom wireless, but that's flaky on Windows too)

Man, he is OBVIOUSLY trolling...

[intellivision]

I?ve also just installed and played with this release little and it?s still on an old Dell Inspiron 400 in my basement (Yeah I known such a waste of good hardware on a crappy OS). And from what I?ve experienced, nothing important has changed. Hard to install, hard to setup both as a desktop and as a server (more difficult then linux), configuration files are in obcure and hard to get places (unlike linux where the config files are more orderly and easy to get places).

The changes that I see are:
-System is more flakier then previous releases
-Lot more bugs
-Slower
-Wifi and wired do not work



To me, ZFS encryption is appears more hackable then EXT4 encryption. Better invest more in BTRFS encyption.



I acturally compared FreeBSD 10?s pkgng to Fedora?s yum and found that pkgng and found that pkgng is still horribly slow and still does not handle package conflicts automatically.



That?s funny cause it took me until 9am in the morning to ?fully? install gnome-shell and even then there were still lots of dependences missing and only fallback mode worked. On Arch Linux, I got gnome-shell fully installed in a matter of 1 hour.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA......

Finally to rap up this post, here?s a joke:


Why did the BSD dev cross the road?

To get to the Apple Store to buy a Mac

That's strange, because I was able to get a FreeBSD Apache web server up and running in little under an hour, PC-BSD takes even less if you use the default options.

It's clear to me that you aren't using FreeBSD 10, as I have had no problems with that on any of the hardware that I've installed it on (except Broadcom wireless, but that's flaky on Windows too)

[mark45]

Man, I only wish you could know just how sorry I feel about you... Really, I'd love you could understand just how pathetic your life is... just creating endless accounts on Phoronix to troll BSD, and even create a blog to troll BSD, where all the responses are from yourself. YOUR F**CKIN LIFE IS SUCH A SAD THING. Have you considered... you know... killing yourself? I'm sure you don't even have a family that would miss you... Really, man: YOUR LIFE SUCKS!

I think you're holding back, tell us what you really think of him.

[Sergio]

I?ve also just installed and played with this release little and it?s still on an old Dell Inspiron 400 in my basement (Yeah I known such a waste of good hardware on a crappy OS). And from what I?ve experienced, nothing important has changed. Hard to install, hard to setup both as a desktop and as a server (more difficult then linux), configuration files are in obcure and hard to get places (unlike linux where the config files are more orderly and easy to get places).

The changes that I see are:
-System is more flakier then previous releases
-Lot more bugs
-Slower
-Wifi and wired do not work



To me, ZFS encryption is appears more hackable then EXT4 encryption. Better invest more in BTRFS encyption.



I acturally compared FreeBSD 10?s pkgng to Fedora?s yum and found that pkgng and found that pkgng is still horribly slow and still does not handle package conflicts automatically.



That?s funny cause it took me until 9am in the morning to ?fully? install gnome-shell and even then there were still lots of dependences missing and only fallback mode worked. On Arch Linux, I got gnome-shell fully installed in a matter of 1 hour.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA......

Finally to rap up this post, here?s a joke:


Why did the BSD dev cross the road?

To get to the Apple Store to buy a Mac

Man, I only wish you could know just how sorry I feel about you... Really, I'd love you could understand just how pathetic your life is... just creating endless accounts on Phoronix to troll BSD, and even create a blog to troll BSD, where all the responses are from yourself. YOUR F**CKIN LIFE IS SUCH A SAD THING. Have you considered... you know... killing yourself? I'm sure you don't even have a family that would miss you... Really, man: YOUR LIFE SUCKS!

[corebob]

I also tried to install a fully encrypted zfs a couple of weeks ago (rc2 or something) but I think the scandinavian keyboard layouts you get access to during installation are messed up somehow.
When I tried to type in the disk password at first bootup, the passwords never matched. Not even with a simple alpha-only password.
I could only make it work using a US keyboard layout