Perils of .0 releases

FreeBSD Logo (big)Ivan Voras has created an excellent page listing all the new and exciting features that will find their way into FreeBSD 7.0. Now with 3 betas released of FreeBSD 7.0 there are still some issues and bugs that need to be resolved. Ivan has done a post outlining where issues and problems can be expected, but he assures 7.0 is still perfectly usable:

“As 7.0 is approaching release, a recurring question on the mailing lists is (in its many forms) “how stable is it?”. The answer really depends on what you are planning to do with it, but there are several known errors, bugs and misfeatures which will surely be present in 7.0-RELEASE. If your workload includes some of those, you better wait for the next release before putting a 7.x in production. If not, go ahead: by all means it’s stable enough.

Here’s the list of problems currently known to me, as of 7.0-BETA3. The list is probably not complete (so it may grow over time), and some of the problems listed may not be relevant to your workload, so take it with a grain if salt.

  • ZFS is sometimes unstable (or at least not as stable as UFS), especially under low memory conditions, on both i386 and amd64
  • tmpfs is somtimes unstable in subtle ways (not very repeatable)
  • unionfs doesn’t work over cd9660 (this one is obscure and only hurts LiveCD makers)
  • removing mounted USB drives still doesn’t work (and USB support in general has most of the old problems)
  • gcc program profiling doesn’t work
  • java doesn’t work stable with some applications (tomcat sometimes crashes)
  • while performance was greatly improved for database-like tasks, there are reports that complex tasks like heavy web applications could have performance problems.

I don’t want to sound pessimistic – of course there are also many good news.”

Whole post here: Lotsa FreeBSD (27/11/2007)

AsiaBSDCon 2008 update

AsiaBSDCon 2008 is scheduled for March 27-30 in Tokyo. The deadline for paper proposals has been extended to December 11th. A mailing list has been set up for those who want to stay up-do-date with the latest announcements.

AsiaBSDCon is a conference for users and developers on BSD based systems. The next conference will be held in Tokyo, in March of 2008. The conference is for anyone developing, deploying and using systems based on FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonFlyBSD, Darwin and MacOS X. AsiaBSDCon is a technical conference and aims to collect the best technical papers and presentations available to ensure that the latest developments in our open source community are shared with the widest possible audience.

Smoothwall vs M0n0wall: a comparison

m0n0wall-logo2.gifWhen it comes to firewalls, most people are fine with a consumer grade solution like a Linksys, Netgear or D-Link “router,” but these devices lack in features. With a Pentium II 200MHz processor and 1GB of RAM, you can create a firewall that’s way more powerful than the standard cable/DSL router you get from a computer shop, and thanks to free software it has features those other devices can only dream about. Here, is a quick and small comparison between Smoothwall Express 3.0 (based on Linux) and M0n0wall 1.231 (based on FreeBSD).

Hardware
Both Smoothwall and M0n0wall run on low end hardware just fine. For both systems, you’ll want at least a Pentium 2 and 128MB of RAM. Smoothwall requires more hard drive space than M0n0wall, which only needs about 8MB! Machines like this are available at auction sites, flea markets and garage sales for next to nothing. Keep in mind that these machines will use more power than a consumer “router,” but M0n0wall does have an option to turn off the hard drive after a few minutes of being idle. Now, on to the feature comparison.

Features
Smoothwall offers many more features than M0n0wall, including a caching web proxy server, DNS server, intrusion detection system, instant messenger logging, NTP server and email virus scanning.
By design, M0n0wall is only a firewall. It keeps to the Unix programming concept of doing one thing very well. If you want things like a proxy server, IDS or DNS, you’ll want to use Smoothwall. If you want things like 1:1 NAT, M0n0wall is your best choice. Both systems offer web based management and traffic shaping.

Final Word
The bottom line is that both of these systems are excellent firewalls. Smoothwall has more features, but requires higher-end hardware, while M0n0wall’s web management of firewall rules and traffic shaping seemed to be easier to use.

This is a summary of a post found on Linux Brain Dump