FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by John Nielse » Thu, 02 May 2002 09:50:23




Quote:> I am currently running 4.5 Stable... AND I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> I came across CD of FreeBSD 3.2 (1999) and was wondering if there were any
> advantages of using an older version of FreeBSD as compared to 4.5...

> Kind of like how win95 runs faster than win98 ME etc... or how you cannot
> run certain programs on ME that were designed for 95/98... im sorry to
have
> used the MS analogy.... but I dont know of any other way to explain it...

The MS analogy is far from apt.  FreeBSD 4.5 is every bit as fast as 3.2 (if
not faster), and has many improvements and bug fixes.  If you're already
using -stable then stick with it.

Quote:> Would I learn more / less by using an older version of FreeBSD? I am
asking
> because I have noticed many of you still running older version of FreeBSD
> and I dont understand why you have not upgraded to 4.5....

Unless you're really gung ho about giving yourself historical background
into the inner workings of FreeBSD, just use a recent version.  If do want
to have a stab at 3.x, use 3.5.1 (ideally upgraded to the latest security
patchset version).  2.2.8 is an even earlier milestone version.

The main reason people are still using older versions can be summed up as
"if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  Think about production servers and
people who administer them.  Upgrading or reinstalling an OS involves some
downtime, even if it's just a few minutes.  And some people just don't have
the time to do upgrades unless there's a very compelling reason.  From the
standpoint of learning about FreeBSD, though, you certainly want to track
regular releases or even -stable at more frequent intervals.  The only
reason I can think of you'd do a new install of an old version of FreeBSD is
to get old hardware support--MFM/EDSI disks, for example, or a NIC that uses
the le or ie driver.  (MFM controller support was officially removed in 4.0.
The le and ie drivers are currently broken in 4.5 and -stable, but show some
promise of getting fixed.)

JN

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Bill Vermilli » Thu, 02 May 2002 12:42:28




>I am currently running 4.5 Stable... AND I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>I came across CD of FreeBSD 3.2 (1999) and was wondering if
>there were any advantages of using an older version of FreeBSD
>as compared to 4.5...

There have been a lot of security holes plugged since then.

Quote:>Kind of like how win95 runs faster than win98 ME etc... or how
>you cannot run certain programs on ME that were designed for
>95/98... im sorry to have used the MS analogy.... but I dont
>know of any other way to explain it...

Well it takes GOBS of resource to run MS products.  My ME seemed
happiest with 512MB.  My 4.5 runs just fine on 64MB [without X
running as I see better in text mode]

We will forgive you this ONCE for using an MS analogy.
Just don't let it happen again :-)

Quote:>Would I learn more / less by using an older version of FreeBSD?
>I am asking because I have noticed many of you still running
>older version of FreeBSD and I dont understand why you have not
>upgraded to 4.5....

Well I started with 2.2.

F reeBSD bilver.wjv.com 4.5-STABLE FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE #15: Fri Mar  8 08:24:52 EST 2002

Hm. Thought I had recompiled since the zlib patch.  I think I did
but didn't install it.  Oh well.  Just started a compile going now.

Once you get it running you will find updating by source and
compiling is so easy you'll wonder why you didn't do that before.

Personally I don't think you have much to gain by going to the
older system.

Bill

--


 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Jean-Yves Avenar » Thu, 02 May 2002 13:25:17


Hello


Quote:

> Kind of like how win95 runs faster than win98 ME etc... or how you cannot
> run certain programs on ME that were designed for 95/98... im sorry to
have
> used the MS analogy.... but I dont know of any other way to explain it...

I don't think you can compare FreeBSD with the Windows family. Windows keeps
using new and heavier user interface requiring more and more resources. So a
Windows 95 machine will run almost fine with 16MB of RAM on a Pentium 100,
but ME requires at least 64MB with a quite powerful CPUs. The integration of
Internet Explorer makes things worse.

On FreeBSD however, as the interface is totally independant of the OS
itself, there's no such thing, and the common rule: The later the better is
generally true. FreeBSD 4.5 fixes a lot of security holes, works better with
stuff like ADSL connection and so on.
I have FreeBSD 4.5 running on a 32MB 486DX machine as a server (not
graphical interface) and I haven't noticed any speed differences since I
upgraded from FreeBSD 3.x ... As a matter of fact, it looks a bit faster.
But it was a long time ago so I'm not so sure anymore, it's very subjective
:)

Jean-Yves

Jean-Yves

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by John » Thu, 02 May 2002 13:48:03


Quote:>[without X running as I see better in text mode]

    I'm reminded of "The Matrix" :)

-
John T




> >I am currently running 4.5 Stable... AND I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> >I came across CD of FreeBSD 3.2 (1999) and was wondering if
> >there were any advantages of using an older version of FreeBSD
> >as compared to 4.5...

> There have been a lot of security holes plugged since then.

> >Kind of like how win95 runs faster than win98 ME etc... or how
> >you cannot run certain programs on ME that were designed for
> >95/98... im sorry to have used the MS analogy.... but I dont
> >know of any other way to explain it...

> Well it takes GOBS of resource to run MS products.  My ME seemed
> happiest with 512MB.  My 4.5 runs just fine on 64MB [without X
> running as I see better in text mode]

> We will forgive you this ONCE for using an MS analogy.
> Just don't let it happen again :-)

> >Would I learn more / less by using an older version of FreeBSD?
> >I am asking because I have noticed many of you still running
> >older version of FreeBSD and I dont understand why you have not
> >upgraded to 4.5....

> Well I started with 2.2.

> F reeBSD bilver.wjv.com 4.5-STABLE FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE #15: Fri Mar  8
08:24:52 EST 2002

> Hm. Thought I had recompiled since the zlib patch.  I think I did
> but didn't install it.  Oh well.  Just started a compile going now.

> Once you get it running you will find updating by source and
> compiling is so easy you'll wonder why you didn't do that before.

> Personally I don't think you have much to gain by going to the
> older system.

> Bill

> --


 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Erik Nygre » Fri, 03 May 2002 16:19:48


...

Quote:> 1.) send email through my ISP's (not directly from my box) email server?

I use nmh, but I'm sure there is plenty of other nice mail clients that
can do this as well. Pine seems to be popular.

Quote:> 2.) download and organize my mail from a remote pop3 freebsd server?

I use nmh for this as well (well, actually, this is WHY I use nmh).
Other popular choices include a combination of fetchmail and procmail
and Pine as frontend.

Quote:> 3.download and read newsgroup postings such as these?

My choice is slrn, but no doubt there are other great choices out
there.

Quote:>   I feel I would benefit greatly from going TEXT BASED only since I would
> have to learn more on how to do things and commands instead of making
> folders by going through the Konqueror browser... Im sorry I really want to
> learn this and I feel the Graphical Interface might be holding me back a
> bit.

All of the tools I use are used from a vt100 terminal session. There
is one more essential tool - screen. I always use it, and thus I can
keep my terminal session availible from home and work alike.

--
Erik Nygren
e r i k { a t } s w i p { d o t } n e t

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Dave Pimlot » Fri, 03 May 2002 19:18:26



>   I have bad eye-sight and would love to use text mode ONLY as the contrast
> of black and white seems to fall better on my eyes as well... what could I
> use in TEXT MODE to:

> 1.) send email through my ISP's (not directly from my box) email server?

> 2.) download and organize my mail from a remote pop3 freebsd server?

> 3.download and read newsgroup postings such as these?

For 1) I use sendmail - mainly because it was already installed... I
just needed to tweak the config

for 2) I use fetchmail to get the mail, procmail to filter the email
(damn spam!!) and mutt to read it.

For 3) I use slrn, but you can only read news while online, you need to
install / configure another program to pull the news items down to the
local machine (which is my next project).

Both Mutt and slrn support colour (if you want it).  These are all my
personal choices, there are plenty of other programs to choose from.

Hope this helps,

Dave Pimlott

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Bill Vermilli » Sun, 05 May 2002 02:12:27





><SNIP>
>>>Kind of like how win95 runs faster than win98 ME etc... or how
>>>you cannot run certain programs on ME that were designed for
>>>95/98... im sorry to have used the MS analogy.... but I dont
>>>know of any other way to explain it...
>> Well it takes GOBS of resource to run MS products.  My ME seemed
>> happiest with 512MB.  My 4.5 runs just fine on 64MB [without X
>> running as I see better in text mode]
>  I have bad eye-sight and would love to use text mode ONLY as
>the contrast of black and white seems to fall better on my eyes
>as well

Well after laser surgery to fix a detached retina there is a bit
of distortion that acts similar to astigmatism.

However I find the black and white too harsh - and I tend to run
all my monitors are lower levels than other as the implants to
replace the lenses in my eye let in a lot more light.

In my .profile [I run ksh from Korns' site] I have this.

vidcontrol green black
vidcontrol -b blue
vidcontrol -c blink

The green letters on a black background are much easier to read and
I like the box around the screen -b for border - as it I see where
the video ends - not just where the glass meets the plastic.

Quote:> ... what could I use in TEXT MODE to:
>1.) send email through my ISP's (not directly from my box) email
>server?

Well you could use sendmail and set the ISP to be smart host,
however I used sendmail to send the mail directly from my machine.

I also manage a small ISP and I have my mail sent there and I run
fetchmail to get it as I keep this machine on a private IP address
and I see no need to have anything sent DIRECTLY to this machine.

Quote:>2.) download and organize my mail from a remote pop3 freebsd server?

I read all my mail and save it in appropriate places using 'mutt'.

Quote:>3.download and read newsgroup postings such as these?

I run cnews.  I actually ran b-news back in the 1980 and migrated
to cnews.  Since I get such a small amount here I never saw the
need to move to inn or anything else.  I use 'suck' to get the
news from my former dialup - who now has a small charge for me to
get news and post through them.

Quote:>  I am using KNode... but I find the text hard to read from far
>away since I'm using a smaller monitor for my BSD box which I
>only want to use for email, newsgroups and learning FreeBSD from
>the comfort of my bed.
>  I feel I would benefit greatly from going TEXT BASED only
>since I would have to learn more on how to do things and
>commands instead of making folders by going through the
>Konqueror browser... Im sorry I really want to learn this and I
>feel the Graphical Interface might be holding me back a bit.

Well since I got my first 'personal computer' a little over 20
years ago I started in text so I had not problems and my first
Unix system - really Xenix - had a 72K kernel.   It will take
awhile to learn the CLI but I live in that mode and I admin some
remote servers that don't have any xserver on them.

I find that once you learn the command line modes you can
be so much faster.  I timed it one time and I could configure
settings on a Cicso router about 10 times faster than using the web
interface on the routers.   You do have to know a bit more - but
learning never hurt anyone.

Quote:>  Does anyone have any suggestions as to what I could use to go
>text mode ONLY? I tend to think that Bills comment fits me since
>I have very bad eye sight (near sighted & astigmatism) and I
>can read the black background with white font from across the
>room... and yet I have to squint from 5 feet away when I'm in
>graphical mode.

Just start a little at a time.  I do have X on the system when I
need it - and it's on ALT-F9.  But just press ctrl-alt-fN where N
is any number of a tty you have configured in /etc/ttys.

console by default is on alt-ctrl-f1.

Quote:>> We will forgive you this ONCE for using an MS analogy.
>> Just don't let it happen again :-)
>haha... sorry about that... i will never ever EVER let it happen
>again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>::hangs head in shame::

's okay.

Quote:>  Thank You everyone for your comments... I appreciate your responses and
>your suggestions and will continue to use 4.5 - Stable (until June 1,
>2002). Sorry I didn't say NEthing earlier... I was waitin' for everyone to
>finish responding... and your responses were quite satisfactory :) THANK
>YOU!

And on my other machine [I have two running FreeBSD - this slow
166Mhz Pentium and the fast :-)  200Mhz PPro - that chips does make
a difference.  The other machine is now running FreeBSD
4.6-PRERELEASE.

When I really need web stuff I do have a 500MHz AMD K2 that I run
MS on - but that hasn't been turned on for two days.

Quote:>  I have to tell you... I started using FreeBSD about a month  
>ago (April 24, 2002) ... and I have learned more in one month  
>(by reading, searching and staying awake for hours) than I ever
>learned in my 5 months prior with Linux Redhat 7.1.            

I can understand that - and I have a few converts to FreeBSD that
feel the same way.  But I've also been using Unix based systems
since 1983 so I'm more comforatable with these than anything.

Quote:>  With FreeBSD... everything DIDNT work right out of the box...
>I saw a MENACING black screen with big bold letters saying 7
>CONFLICTS!!!!!!!!!! I'll tell you... that alone is enough to
>want to make you wanna turn back and say... I give UP...

The older version didn't always snoop out the cards properly.
Getting rid of the conflicts is easy - but you have to have someone
point you to this the first time around or do a lot of work
yourself.

Quote:>I had to bust my ass trying to figure out things that now seem
>simple...

That means you are learning.

Quote:>  Thanks for listenin'

You are welcome, and welcome to the fold.

Bill

--

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Tim Ju » Sun, 05 May 2002 13:09:17


<SNIP>

Quote:> All of the tools I use are used from a vt100 terminal session. There
> is one more essential tool - screen. I always use it, and thus I can
> keep my terminal session availible from home and work alike.

Can you breif me on how to "detach" a screen session, and re-attach it
using other computer?

TJ

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by jp » Sun, 05 May 2002 17:28:40


[snip]

Quote:> Can you breif me on how to "detach" a screen session, and re-attach it
> using other computer?

That is documented in its online reference manual page.

  man screen

Alternatively, try

  http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=screen&manpath=FreeBSD+Ports

--
  j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Erik Nygre » Mon, 06 May 2002 01:17:21


...

Quote:

> Can you breif me on how to "detach" a screen session, and re-attach it
> using other computer?

#Connect to computer using ssh:
ssh myhost.mydomain
#First fire up screen (using 8000 rows of scrollback):
screen -h 8000
#Make a lot of nice things here, like starting slrn:
#create new screens using Ctrl+A c, and switch between them using
#Ctrl+A <SPACE> (or read man-page for lots of other options)
#Now detach from screen:
<Ctrl+A>d

#exit from shell/ssh-session:
exit

#connect my computer from another place:
ssh myhost.mydomain
#attach to running screen, don't care if the screen is already attached
screen -x

--
Erik Nygren
e r i k { a t } s w i p { d o t } n e t

 
 
 

FreeBSD 4.5 vs. FreeBSD 3.2 - Which One

Post by Tim Ju » Mon, 06 May 2002 04:03:54




> ...

> > Can you breif me on how to "detach" a screen session, and re-attach it
> > using other computer?

> #Connect to computer using ssh:
> ssh myhost.mydomain
> #First fire up screen (using 8000 rows of scrollback):
> screen -h 8000
> #Make a lot of nice things here, like starting slrn:
> #create new screens using Ctrl+A c, and switch between them using
> #Ctrl+A <SPACE> (or read man-page for lots of other options)
> #Now detach from screen:
> <Ctrl+A>d

> #exit from shell/ssh-session:
> exit

> #connect my computer from another place:
> ssh myhost.mydomain
> #attach to running screen, don't care if the screen is already attached
> screen -x

I appreciate the info!  :)
 
 
 

1. Performance of native FreeBSD partition vs FAT32 partition on FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE

Hi,

I am planning to set up a FreeBSD file server for my small network.  This
file server will provide access to a large number of WAV audio files - in
total there are about 25gb worth at the moment, and each file is between 30
and 100mb, with the average being around 50mb.  I will be using UDMA IDE
hard drives (1 * 27gb to start with, hopefully 2 * fairly soon afterwards)
rather than SCSI, to keep costs down.  The FreeBSD machine will be a Dell
Pentium Pro 200 with 40mb of ram.

I will be sharing the files over a switched, full duplex 100mb/s network,
using Samba 2 so that they can be accessed from Windows.  Initially only one
workstation will access them at a time.

Ideally, I would like these IDE hard drives to be formatted as FAT32.
Therefore I would have a small FreeBSD HD, say 2gb, as the primary drive,
which I would boot from.  Then IDE drives 2 and 3 would be formatted as
FAT32, and would be mounted under FreeBSD using mount_msdos.  I'd probably
mount them Read-Only for safety, as their contents wont change very often.

The reason I want to do this is that it means I could at any time take out
one or both of the drives and put it into any win98 machine - useful if my
FreeBSD box dies, or if I need to put the files in another machine for any
reason.

However, this will be a false economy if mounting FAT32 would significantly
impact on the file sharing performance.

Could anyone tell me whether there will be much or any performance loss
using mounted FAT32 as compared to native FreeBSD partitions?

Thanks,

Tom

PS. Any performance tips for making the FreeBSD machine as fast and
efficient for this task as possible would also be much appreciated - e.g.
sysctl tweaks, etc

2. Sound in KDE

3. info about updating FreeBSD 4.5 to FreeBSD 4.6

4. Testing cvs-versions of glibc

5. A question on Upgrading FreeBSD 3.2 to FreeBSD 4.1.1

6. Directory Auditing?

7. Motif freebsd.cf file for FreeBSD 3.2

8. Ethernet\Token Ring Router

9. FreeBSD 4.5 - Apache 1.3.26 - kill USR1 causes server to terminate, not restart

10. thinkpad 560x status under FreeBSD 4.5?

11. FreeBSD 4.5 on Asus Terminator Tualatin - Ethernet problems

12. SB128 on freeBSD 4.5 !!

13. How to make an ipsec vpn connection *through* a FreeBSD 4.5 firewall