differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Piotr Kowalsk » Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:20:28



Hi!

I'm loking for an atricle on that subcject. Can anybody send me a link

pk

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Dave Uhrin » Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:44:20



> Hi!

> I'm loking for an atricle on that subcject. Can anybody send me a link

http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/relnotes-i386.html
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.1R/relnotes-i386.html

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Piotr Kowalsk » Sun, 22 Jun 2003 21:22:22


Quote:> http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.0R/relnotes-i386.html
> http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.1R/relnotes-i386.html

yeah, thnk U, but i think i need sth on the whole purpose of the project,
new goals, new fundamentals (new thread handling etc). Anybody?

pk

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Erik Nygre » Sun, 22 Jun 2003 23:45:55



> Hi!

> I'm loking for an atricle on that subcject. Can anybody send me a link

The 5.x-branch is called CURRENT and the 4.x-branch is called STABLE.
Once you know that, you might read the chapter about CURRENT vs STABLE
in the FreeBSD Handbook:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-sta...
To further complicate things, the project is currently moving to make 5.x
STABLE, move CURRENT towards 6.x and stop development for 4.x.
This has not yet happend, but if things work out, maybe 5.2 could be the
start of STABLE in 5.x-branch.
This makes the 5.x-branch "semi-stable" right now.
New things are first implemented in CURRENT, and if they seem to work well,
and they CAN be implemented in STABLE without breaking anything else, they
will possibly be MFC:ed (Merged from Current).
Normaly nothing goes into STABLE that will require reconfiguration for
older STABLE installations in the same branch.
If you want a *really* stable system, you might opt for a RELEASE instead.
Releases have been verified and have passed a few BETA and/or RC-steps, which
means they are in quite good shape usually.
Each release are kept in a separate branch of the CVS tree, and following
one of thoose branches is a very good way to keep a very stable system.
Only important bugfixes goes into the release-branch, usually security-
related.
The cvs-tags for STABLE is RELENG_4 (will eventually be RELENG_5), for
CURRENT the tag is "." and for 4.8 it is RELENG_4_8. 5.1 is called
RELENG_5_1 (great surprise?)
To understand this in detail, please read:
http://www.freebsd.org/relnotes/CURRENT/early-adopter/index.html

--
Erik Nygren
e r i k { a t } s w i p { d o t } n e t
Linux - If you hate Microsoft, FreeBSD - If you love Unix

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Piotr Kowalsk » Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:29:35


Erik, thnx a lot, you're genius - i'm maybe a little deeper into FreeBSD
that it could be seen from the subject of my post, but you're the first to
clearly explain the difference between a STABLE-branch and release from
stable, thanks. If you could write a few words more about what the x.RELENG
is i'd be grateful.

What I was looking for asking the question, was what were the goals, new
fundamentals when they decided to start 5.x from 4.x- there must have been a
major difference in, i dunno, in technology, ideology etc if they decided to
change from 4-C to 5-C, am I wrong? And I was looking for an article on that
subject.

pk

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Steven G. Kar » Mon, 23 Jun 2003 02:30:08




Quote:> Hi!

> I'm loking for an atricle on that subcject. Can anybody send me a link

You're almost comparing apples and oranges.  I'll give you
a short list of features that are in or are going into 5.x
that will not be added to 4.x.

 1. KSE (kernel schedule entity).  This is similar to
    a light weight process, but different :-)  When completed
    it will permit M:N and 1:1 thread libraries and sort of
    kernel level threading the kernel.
    http://www.freebsd.org/kse/index.html

 2. Support for IA64, AMD64, sparc64, ppc and maybe mips.
    4.x only suppors IA32 and alpha.

 3. SMPng.  Fine-grain locking within the kernel, which
    permits more than one process to be within the kernel
    http://www.freebsd.org/smp/

 4. C99 and POSIX compliance.  Some of this may be back ported
    to 4.x.  http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/index.html

 5. A new scheduler framework, which permits the use of different
    schedulers.  Currently, we have SCHED_4BSD and SCHED_ULE.
    4BSD is in 4.x and ULE is only in 5.x

 6. Update all device drivers to use busdma.  This means the
    drivers can be written once and used on any supported
    architecture.

 7. PAE -- support for upto 8 GB of memory on a IA32 system.
    Note any single process is limited to 4 GB of memory.
    This may apply to sparc64, amd64, and IA64 as well.

 8. UFS2 -- second generation UFS, which provides extended
    attributes and better ACL facilities.

 9. Snapshots and background fsck.

10. RC_ng -- a complete rewrite of the start up scripts
    based on the startup system of NetBSD

--
Steve

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Bill Vermilli » Mon, 23 Jun 2003 03:57:16




>Erik, thnx a lot, you're genius - i'm maybe a little deeper
>into FreeBSD that it could be seen from the subject of my
>post, but you're the first to clearly explain the difference
>between a STABLE-branch and release from stable, thanks. If you
>could write a few words more about what the x.RELENG is i'd be
>grateful.
>What I was looking for asking the question, was what were the
>goals, new fundamentals when they decided to start 5.x from
>4.x- there must have been a major difference in, i dunno, in
>technology, ideology etc if they decided to change from 4-C
>to 5-C, am I wrong? And I was looking for an article on that
>subject.

You had been pointed to release notes earlier and you said you
wanted more.  In that same tree on the 5.x releases you will find
more of what you want in the 'early adopters guide' portion also.

Wandering around the FreeBSD.org website you can find all sorts
of interesting things.

It looks like we missed the anniversary as I just saw
that June 19th was the 10th Anniversary of the name "FreeBSD".

There is a Roadmap for 5-STABLE which will might help.

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/5-roadmap.html

If you get the sources you can build your own as the sources
for all things such as this are in the /usr/doc/<LANG>/articles/??
directory.  You'll also see books in there too.   Getting the first
ones up wasn't the easiest thing I've done.

--

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Dave Uhrin » Mon, 23 Jun 2003 04:15:15



> You had been pointed to release notes earlier and you said you
> wanted more.  In that same tree on the 5.x releases you will find
> more of what you want in the 'early adopters guide' portion also.

> Wandering around the FreeBSD.org website you can find all sorts
> of interesting things.

Have you had your term paper written for you lately?
 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Erik Nygre » Mon, 23 Jun 2003 05:45:01



> Erik, thnx a lot, you're genius - i'm maybe a little deeper into FreeBSD
> that it could be seen from the subject of my post, but you're the first to
> clearly explain the difference between a STABLE-branch and release from
> stable, thanks. If you could write a few words more about what the x.RELENG
> is i'd be grateful.

I'm not exactly sure I know what you're after here, but RELENG_x is just
the name of the CVS-tag. The pattern for the releases themselves are
RELEASE_4_8_0_RELEASE (this is the tag you use to get exactly the source
for what is on the CD-images FreeBSD 4.8).
A little more changes is in RELEASE_4_8. At releasedate, this should be
exactly the same as RELEASE_4_8_0_RELEASE, but as time goes by, and bugs
get discovered, the most dangerous ones are fixed.
Even more fluent is RELENG_4 (aka 4-STABLE or 4.x-STABLE). In that branch
lots of new thing appear (like SCSI-emulation, dirprefs, firewire-support
etc). The important thing is POLA (Policy Of Least Astonishment) - nothing
that goes into a STABLE branch should create havoc to the existing systems
in the same branch.
Of course RELEASE_4 was once (almost) the same thing as RELEASE_4_8_0_RELEASE.

Quote:> What I was looking for asking the question, was what were the goals, new
> fundamentals when they decided to start 5.x from 4.x- there must have been a
> major difference in, i dunno, in technology, ideology etc if they decided to
> change from 4-C to 5-C, am I wrong? And I was looking for an article on that
> subject.

I think the goals for CURRENT are set during the development. I don't think
there is some kind of agenda that says "now, here is 4.0 RELEASE, now lets
make this the stable branch, and rewrite the scheduler before we release 5.0"
Rather I think there are (lots) of ideas, and once in a while, there is just
too much that differs between STABLE and CURRENT (maybe too many really good
features that people like and so on), and so a new STABLE branch is spawned
and eventually the old one is abandoned.
To follow the goals for CURRENT, I think you have to read the mailing list

However, there *is* a roadmap for 5-STABLE. You'll find it here:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/5-roadmap/index.html
it's kind of "things that have to be completed to call this STABLE"

--
Erik Nygren
e r i k { a t } s w i p { d o t } n e t
Linux - If you hate Microsoft, FreeBSD - If you love Unix

 
 
 

differences between 5.x and 4.x FreeBSD branch

Post by Bill Vermilli » Mon, 23 Jun 2003 11:57:18





>> You had been pointed to release notes earlier and you said you
>> wanted more.  In that same tree on the 5.x releases you will find
>> more of what you want in the 'early adopters guide' portion also.
>> Wandering around the FreeBSD.org website you can find all sorts
>> of interesting things.
>Have you had your term paper written for you lately?

You'd never believe how long ago it was that I wrote a term paper.
Tech docs and published artices yes - even a couple of years of
writing a newspaper column [as an adjunct to my real work] but no
term papers in recent memory.

I moved to Unix in 1983 - barely 20 years ago - so you can see
it's been awhile.

I suggested just browsing the freebsd site as the poster seemed to
be fairly new I didn't suggest using the docbooks. [I build all the
docs on my own system as I find it faster to get them].

'docbooks' install a lot and wasn't the easiest thing I've wraped
my keys around.  The are several parts of it in
/usr/ports/texproc/docbook*

At least I didn't come across as an old-fart :-)

Bill

--