CD-Sized Image Of BSD-Based TrueOS Released For Servers

[beetreetime]

FreeBSD and ZFS are fantastic. Both great projects with a perfect UNIX pedigree

No, FreeBSD and ZFS are not fantastic project. All they produce is shitty performance and usability and contribute to fragmentation in the FLOSS community.

... but that said. I am also very interested in Hammer2 from DragonFlyBSD. I do look forward to the completion of the ongoing work to port it to OpenBSD. Really exciting stuff.

HAHAHA... What a joke, You should see Hammer's performance compared to ZFS, BTRFS, EXT4FS and even EXT2FS. Greg K Hartmann even said Matt Dillion shouldn't waste time making his shitty OS like Linux when He could simply make Linus better. BTW. Good luck with porting Hammer2 to OpenBSD. MadDog Dillion has adopted the Linux/Systemd way of making his shit run on his OS only and run it well.

[beetreetime]

http://aboutthebsds.wordpress.com/20...sage-dwindles/

Woe!! Opera is dropping FreeBSD. last time I hear is FreeBSD users mostly use opera. I wonder what will happen now.

[beetreetime]

ZFS is not Advance

As for ZFS, it is advanced. That is an objective and indisputable fact.

ZFS is not advance, it is significantly better compared to stone UFS and UFS2 and a little better compared to ext2. But compared to BTRFS and EXT4. ZFS is a piece of shit, slow, needs more then 4GB of RAM, corruptible, an scalable, can't complete with embedded devices. Plus ZFS is not a F(ail)BSD advantage. Linus now has it and it works far better on Linux then F(ail)BSD.

Also, UFS2 is a total piece of shit even with soft updates and journalling. It's journelling is nothing to shit compared to EXT4FS.

It sure wasn't 'stolen' from Solaris either - that's not how open-source works

BSD always steal shit. Remember USL vs BSDI? The stupid BSD fucks at Berkeley thought they could get away with violating USL copyright so they got smashed in the ass at court. UC California then disbanded them due to this blatant academic misconduct causing BSD to become the fragmented mess it is today.

[jake_lesser]

<Utter bullshit claiming BSD is popular>...

http://aboutthebsds.wordpress.com/20...sage-dwindles/

@pawlerson
kpedersen (true name:Karsten Pedersen) is a regular participant in BSD activities (http://dk.linkedin.com/in/karstenlangpedersen). He's a hardcore member of the BSD troll club. So there's no hope to talk sense into him.

[JX8p]

Keep spreading FUD about me and about Linux? When comes to "better networking": according to w3tech BSD server market share is 1% and Linux is 38%. According to Security Space Linux is 38% to 78% and BSD is less than 5%. According to netcraft Linux is much more reliable than *BSD. BSD file system is an old piece of utter shit (I'm not talking about the one stolen from solaris) and Linux has few far more advanced file systems (including ZFS). BSD isn't used in any serious markets, so bullshit about its file system being advanced is nothing, but wishful thinking. So, no advantages at all, but huge disadvantages and a lot of crap from BSD troll.

The fact that the FreeBSD Foundation receives donations from very big companies with huge market share in their sectors and that FreeBSD work is regularly sponsored by big names like NetFlix and DARPA/ARFL suggests that you are as wrong as can be.

As for ZFS, it is advanced. That is an objective and indisputable fact. It sure wasn't 'stolen' from Solaris either - that's not how open-source works

As for UFS - when used with soft updates, GJournal, and other GEOM framework features, it's well comparable to EXT4 - a simple, stable filesystem building on a rock-solid foundation.

[wikinevick]

Same person writing same crap all the time. It's just silly. FreeBSD has only one good file system: zfs. It was stolen from solaris. Its other file systems are from the stone age and they're just crap. You said they're more advanced, so I'd love to hear about their advantages.

Heh... I wonder how many local filesystems you need/use nowadays. I only use one, the same one used by Netflix but I am surely keeping an eye on ZFS.

However, stupid troll is an obvious troll.

Yeah Pawlerman ... you are pathetic. Not really worth my time calling you anything but a luser.

[wikinevick]

Huge advantages ...

Keep spreading FUD about me and about Linux? When comes to "better networking": according to w3tech BSD server market share is 1% and Linux is 38%. According to Security Space Linux is 38% to 78% and BSD is less than 5%. According to netcraft Linux is much more reliable than *BSD.

Oh netcraft ... you'll have to crosscheck because anything coming from Apple and the Sony Playstation uses the BSD networking stack. Netflix claims that their 30% share of US Internet traffic is powered by BSD.

BSD file system is an old piece of utter shit (I'm not talking about the one stolen from solaris) and Linux has few far more advanced file systems (including ZFS). BSD isn't used in any serious markets, so bullshit about its file system being advanced is nothing, but wishful thinking. So, no advantages at all, but huge disadvantages and a lot of crap from BSD troll.

I am not talking about linux, which I admit is a fine kernel. TrueOS is a complete OS centered around ZFS and it's just wonderful: the "boot environments" are awesome. UFS2 is no toy either, soft updates is a technology that only the BSDs have been able to achieve.

[kpedersen]

FreeBSD has only one good file system: zfs.

Frankly. I could humour you but largely we agree. FreeBSD does have an exceptional filesystem, ZFS, pioneered by Sun Microsystems, one of the most innovative companies to have ever existed.

As many sources state, including this presentation: http://wiki.illumos.org/download/att...1/zfs_last.pdf
"ZFS is the last word in filesystems"... so I am pretty much forbidden to mention any others. Sorry

FreeBSD and ZFS are fantastic. Both great projects with a perfect UNIX pedigree

... but that said. I am also very interested in Hammer2 from DragonFlyBSD. I do look forward to the completion of the ongoing work to port it to OpenBSD. Really exciting stuff.

I think what Endman means is:
"FreeBSD has few far more advanced file systems (including ZFS)"


I do agree with this statement though. BSD users do seem to hear a lot of crap from you. Actually, everyone seems to hear a lot of crap from you! haha.

Same person writing same crap all the time. It's just silly. FreeBSD has only one good file system: zfs. It was stolen from solaris. Its other file systems are from the stone age and they're just crap. You said they're more advanced, so I'd love to hear about their advantages. However, stupid troll is an obvious troll.

[kpedersen]

I think what Endman means is:
"FreeBSD has few far more advanced file systems (including ZFS)"

and a lot of crap from BSD troll.

I do agree with this statement though. BSD users do seem to hear a lot of crap from you. Actually, everyone seems to hear a lot of crap from you! haha.