Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

FreeBSD 6.1 Released 227

nbritton writes "FreeBSD 6.1 has been released! This release is the next step in the development of the 6.X branch, delivering several performance improvements, many bugfixes, and a few new features. Of note are the major improvements to the filesystem and SATA code, possibly making FreeBSD the number one choice for SATA RAID implementations. For a complete list of new features and known problems, please see the release notes, errata list, Bittorrent Downloads, Mirrors, Hardware Notes, and Installation Guide."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FreeBSD 6.1 Released

Comments Filter:
  • by phase_9 ( 909592 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:51AM (#15292673) Homepage
    Yeah, but does it run solitaire?
  • NCQ? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ruiner13 ( 527499 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:53AM (#15292690) Homepage
    I don't see it listed in the release notes, but does it finally support SATA NCQ?
  • by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @10:00AM (#15292753) Homepage
    I'm still running 4.8. :-P

    Now I'm gonna have to download and burn yet another version I won't get around to updating to. =)

    Oh well, it aint broken, I'll update it some day.
  • Desktop worthy... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by shrapnull ( 780217 ) * on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @10:02AM (#15292771)
    FreeBSD has always been great with RAID in my experience. I frequently load it up on servers and don't need additional drivers for my RAID cards (which is more then I can say for W2K3 on the same boxes). Since switching to FreeBSD on my desktop I haven't swapped OS's out (something I tend to do at least once every couple of months). It's been roughly a year now, so I think it's safe to call it "home." If you're into linux and want to try a BSD, now's the time. At least now that VMWare Server Beta is free you can install an instance of this and dust the file with no harm if you don't like it. Although a lot of my linux peeps are quick to criticize, not one of them has complained after actually trying BSD of some sort, and while they're not all converts they grow to understand why someone would choose BSD over linux. Yes there are differences, and no you probably won't notice them in a desktop environment.
    • While I agree with you, being a 1-year Linux-->FreeBSD convert, I think that's a somewhat unfair jab at Win2003. FreeBSD 6.0 didn't support 3Ware's latest SATA-2 raid cards out of the box, either. Don't know if 6.1 now does, but I think comparing an OS that's 2-to-3 years newer than Win2003 is a bit disingenuous.

      Not that's I'd ever use Win2003, mind you. :)

      • I should have clarified the majority of my RAID usage on FreeBSD is SCSI-based hardware RAID systems. It has, however, been working since prior to W2K3's release and yet no server offering from Microsoft has successfully detected my Intel hardware RAID cards during installation (gotta use ye olde floppy disk drivers), while BSD has. I've had better luck then that with Adaptec stuff with MS though. And don't get me wrong, Microsoft has it's place and we're an Active Directory environment. I use FreeBSD t
  • FreeBSD 6 + pf (Score:5, Informative)

    by afternoon_nap ( 640340 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @10:07AM (#15292803)
    I use FreeBSD 6 because of the overload table option available when using pf:
    ## for SSHD from other hosts
    pass in log on $ext_if inet proto tcp from any to $ext_if:network \
                  port 22 flags S/SA keep state \
                  (max 5, source-track rule, max-src-nodes 5, \
                    max-src-states 10, tcp.established 60, tcp.closing 5, \
                    max-src-conn-rate 3/30, overload flush global) \
                  label "SSHD_IN_$if"

    If some sshd scanner hits my host more than three times in 30 seconds his packets go to an overload table and his states flushed. Any address or net listed in the badhosts table is blocked outright. It works as advertised and I couldn't be happier.

    pf+altq really does give me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.
    • Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf (Score:3, Informative)

      Ah, yes, the port of PF from OpenBSD...
      • Is that the smugness of an OpenBSD user I hear in your tone? It's hard to tell, as your post had no real point.

        I don't see anything wrong with the cross-pollination of technologies amongst the BSDs. I prefer PF over native IPF myself on my own server, and I, too, like the overloading feature. In fact, it's one of the things I love about FreeBSD (code sharing, I mean), to the point where I jumped from the Linux camp to the FreeBSD camp.

        FreeBSD's a damn fine product (as is Linux). I'll be cvsup'ing my

    • Thanks for that. =)

      With portsentry setting pf to block all other port scans I can do this without having to move sshd ports(like I've currently had to do).
    • by Rescate ( 688702 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @10:44AM (#15293077)
      ## throttles SSH connnection requests to 3/minute from same IP
      ## $RED_DEV is Internet-connected interface, CUSTOMFORWARD is the chain being processed

      iptables -A CUSTOMFORWARD -i $RED_DEV -p tcp --destination-port 22 \
               -m state --state NEW -m recent --set

      iptables -A CUSTOMFORWARD -i $RED_DEV -p tcp --destination-port 22 \
               -m state --state NEW -m recent --update --seconds 60 --hitcount 4 -j DROP
    • Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf (Score:2, Redundant)

      by Dan Ost ( 415913 )
      Is there some reason that you're using FreeBSD with pf instead of using OpenBSD with pf?

      (for those of you who don't know, pf is developed by the OpenBSD team and was ported
      to FreeBSD by some FBSD developers).

      It just seems to me that if pf is the reason you're using FreeBSD, then you would probably
      be even happier using OpenBSD.
    • Everybody talks about BSDs as being fabulous firewalls, which I don't deny, but what can they do that linux + iptables & tc can't?

      Here's a similar rate-limiting deal: .php/t1829.html []

      And Linux has all kinds of QOS capabilities: OWTO.html []

      This is not a troll, it's an honest question. Why BSD for firewalls?
      • Re:FreeBSD 6 + pf (Score:4, Interesting)

        by LurkerXXX ( 667952 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @01:52PM (#15294824)
        For one thing, pf is a lot easier on the eyes than iptables. Look through some iptables config files you find on the net. Then go look at some pf.conf files. I think you'll see it's much easier to look at the pf files and instantly see what's going on.

        For another, please point me to the linux equivalent of CARP [] ( an incredibly easy to set up redundant firewall ). If you are in charge of running a firewall for a company, redundant hardware at the firewall is nice.

    • There are various programs/scripts that deal with ssh scanning, but that's a really nice angle to it. I've been using DenyHosts on my production servers (it's in ports, I'm running 6.0-RELEASE on sparc and x86) and it's been working a treat. To name a few other ways to handle it, there's [], DenyHosts [], fail2ban [], blockhosts [], bruteforceblocker [] (uses pf) and i'm sure i'm missing a bunch of others.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @10:09AM (#15292812)
    Addition of a keyboard multiplexer. This allows USB and PS/2 keyboards to coexist without any special options at boot.

    Yes! Its about time, been waiting for ages for this one. Signed,

    Doctor Octavius

    • Re:Two Keyboards. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Just Some Guy ( 3352 )
      In all seriousness, Good God, that problem was a PITA. You used to have to configure your machine to use one type of keyboard or the other (which required kernel edits last time I did so). Although you could put a command to switch between them in your startup sequence, you'd be stuck if you rebooted into single-user mode and your machine was configured for the one you didn't have at that moment.

      Typical scenario: you install a server at your office using a PS2 keyboard. Then, you move it to a colo with

  • As an OS X user I wonder if the new SATA options etc are coming from Apple or there were Apple coders involved in creating new code.
  • Working Great! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Ramjet350 ( 582868 )
    I was out on last night looking at documentation and noticed that 6.1 was listed as the current release. I grabbed it and installed right away (probably not the best idea) but it works great so far. Very stable and all my hardware is detected and working perfectly.

    If you haven't tried it, get an old box and give it a shot. More experience with Unix never hurt anyone!
  • Rebuilding world (Score:2, Informative)

    by nubbie ( 454788 )
    Besure to check out andbook/makeworld.html [] on how to rebuild world. No need to reinstall when you can rebuild the OS yourself.

The rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. The haves get more, the have-nots die.