Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

The FreeBSD Foundation Is Soliciting Project Proposals

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the bsd-confirms-netcraft-is-dead dept.

Open Source 58

Professor_Quail writes "Following a successful 2012 fundraising campaign, the FreeBSD Foundation is soliciting the submission of project proposals for funded development grants. Proposals may be related to any of the major subsystems or infrastructure within the FreeBSD operating system, and will be evaluated based on desirability, technical merit, and cost-effectiveness. The proposal process is open to all developers (including non-FreeBSD committers), and the deadline for submitting a proposal is April 26th, 2013." The foundation is currently funding a few other projects, including UEFI booting support.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

IPv6 DHCP gui (5, Interesting)

Anomalyst (742352) | about 2 years ago | (#43303797)

Include support of LDAP and static leases. A wizard for requesting & configuring IPv6Tov4 tunnels thru current IPv6 providers would be a major boon

Re:IPv6 DHCP gui (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304507)

Sometimes I wonder if (hope that) the people/foundations/politicians Slashdot users read our suggestions. I find some comments quite laudable.

Drivers & ports (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43309879)

Two more things. Have one team whose sole purpose is to proliferate FBSD support to as many known peripherals and devices as possible, so that it's as easy to proliferate PC-BSD on as many laptops as possible, w/o worrying about whether it supports all the hardware or not.

Other - have something like Wine for PC-BSD to run XP and Windows 7 programs. Not so well that nobody wants to develop stuff for PC-BSD, but well enough so that the last essential programs that may not have a unix equivalent can be run emulated, while the bulk of other things run on PC-BSD.

Re:IPv6 DHCP gui (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#43306295)

Fully second this!!! Have a DHCP6 manager that assigns static and dynamic address pools, and allow for the interface ID addresses to be grouped in any way that's convenient. Such a utility would be particularly great in router/firewall gear such as m0n0wall and pFsense, if not in FBSD itself. It should have direct hooks to the relevant /etc/ files so that one doesn't have to whip up an editor and manually edit such stuff.

Other suggestions - all IPv6 related. One - have an utility that allows virtual web hosts to all have different addresses, thereby creating real hosts. Another - this could be either a pFsense or an OBSD project - an application that provides an IPv6 equivalent of the firewall portion of IPv4 NAT, so that that aspect of IPv6 security is addressed. One more - have the option of giving all VMs an IPv6 address of their own (either/both routable & non-routable), and tie that to the DHCP6 manager described above.

All this could be a part of an FBSD answer to OpenWRT, but w/ one major difference that justifies the project - it would be completely IPv6 centric, and the only IPv4 support would be for the sake of making IPv6 services available to it.

Ad Hoc Mesh Network (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43303809)

Smartest thing they could work on right now. Build up some infrastructure NOW for when the SHTF.
Look to:

Re:Ad Hoc Mesh Network (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 years ago | (#43304225)

If you like meshes, you'd better look into CAN and distributed caching too - because without that, your mesh is going to be overwhelmed very easily.

Bring back Ceren Ercen (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43303889)

I know she's old now but maybe she could have a daughter or something.

Better /etc/hosts support (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43303975)

They should get rid of the insecure and buggy libresolv and replace it with /etc/hosts for all DNS lookups.

Re:Better /etc/hosts support (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 2 years ago | (#43304061)

For those of you keeping track, that's the funniest thing on /. today.

Re:Better /etc/hosts support (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about 2 years ago | (#43304331)

He made fun of a common troll/spam. I love it.

Re:Better /etc/hosts support (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 2 years ago | (#43304521)

Thank you for shedding light where there was no darkness.

Re:Better /etc/hosts support (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 2 years ago | (#43307667)

+1 Internets to you, sir.

Spend it all on marketing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304017)

Spend it all on marketing, then maybe you'll get more than 5 people to give a crap about FreeBSD. Serious suggestion.

Re:Spend it all on marketing (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about 2 years ago | (#43304345)

I'm torn between troll and funny. Something about spending charity money, for an Opensource project that gets most of its support from volunteers, on marketing seems funny.

Commit useful new code back from the OSX fork (1)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | about 2 years ago | (#43304307)

The OGL implementation for example.

Re:Commit useful new code back from the OSX fork (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43305093)

OSX was never forked from FreeBSD.

Re:Commit useful new code back from the OSX fork (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43305631)

FreeBSD's implementation of Unix were incorporated in NeXTSTEP, the core of Mac OS X.


Re:Commit useful new code back from the OSX fork (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43307729)

Which does not refute my statement, "OSX was never forked from FreeBSD."

Some kernel and user bits of FreeBSD (and NetBSD) were incorporated into Darwin, just like some GNU bits were incorporated. All the the BSDs and Linux distributions borrow from each other.

I suggest some remedial reading courses or finish high school.

Re:Commit useful new code back from the OSX fork (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43308027)

Which does not refute the parent's statement at all, OS X is heavily based on the BSD Unix, even the Mach kernel itself was originally developed as a replacement for the Unix kernel in the BSD.

Re:Commit useful new code back from the OSX fork (1)

fnj (64210) | about 2 years ago | (#43305889)

You don't have to fork BSD-licensed code. That's the point. Just take the code and use it. Make any changes you want. You don't have to give them anything or tell them anything.

ZFS boot support (3)

rhavenn (97211) | about 2 years ago | (#43304389)

stable and installer supported ZFS boot support for the / volume.

Re:ZFS boot support (4, Informative)

Bengie (1121981) | about 2 years ago | (#43304565)

I think PC-BSD has support to setting up a ZFS boot on fresh install, while allowing a naked FreeBSD install.

Re:ZFS boot support (2)

RicktheBrick (588466) | about 2 years ago | (#43305763)

I want a program that would maintain a backup of the hard drive on a network drive every time the computer is shut off. I want an installation disk that would look for a backup on the network drive and install that backup instead of a new installation.

Re:ZFS boot support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43307765)

This has been solved long ago, use remote boot (PXE).

Re:ZFS boot support (1)

Sadsfae (242195) | about 2 years ago | (#43304747)

stable and installer supported ZFS boot support for the / volume.

It's definitely stable (running 9.1-RELEASE here in a few places) but not in the installer until later.
Setting up a ZFS / install now isn't too difficult but does require using a livecd.
There is a great thread covering it from many angles here, including HD encryption.

http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=31662 [freebsd.org]

One thing I did here was go upwards of 50-60G for root, I find the 10g or 20g in the
examples isn't sufficient for keeping full /usr/src and /usr/ports populated + port builds.

Re:ZFS boot support (1)

The Moof (859402) | about 2 years ago | (#43305163)

Traditional FBSD practice doesn't place /usr and / on the same partition. I usually take it a step further and put /usr/ports onto its own partition due to the nature of that beast.

Java (3, Interesting)

FeatherBoa (469218) | about 2 years ago | (#43304415)

I would like to see improved Java support. What we have now is all either hacks based on running the Linux JVM as a compatible ABI, or you have to build a JVM from source due to licensing. I would like to see a commercial JVM run natively. Ideally IBM's.

That's not something FreeBSD can do though, I don't expect.

Re:Java (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#43305391)

I don't see why they can't work with OpenJDK. It's not under a stupid license like the Sun/Oracle JRE.

Re:Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43305451)


Everything from DragonflyBSD (0)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 2 years ago | (#43304459)

Catch up to DragonflyBSD, which forked FreeBSD in the direction it SHOULD have gone and now has superior just-about-everything.

Re:Everything from DragonflyBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304597)


Re:Everything from DragonflyBSD (1)

fnj (64210) | about 2 years ago | (#43305977)

DragonflyBSD is a good solid project, but could you name the aspects in which it is superior to FreeBSD? DragonflyBSD has hammerfs; FreeBSD has ZFS. That's a draw at best. There are some relatively minor improved features which would be nice to port back maybe.

Re:Everything from DragonflyBSD (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 2 years ago | (#43306257)

Uh, the completely non-locking allocators, scheduler paths, and so on? DragonflyBSD's internals are what separated it from FreeBSD: the original maintainer had some big ideas on how to rewrite the schedulers (process, thread, I/O) and allocators to be a lot faster, lighter, more efficient, and scalable; he got banned from FreeBSD.

HP Moonshot is going to bring 2000+ core servers to the data center one of these years (it's quiet, but there's real progress happening in there and lots of partners in the data center testing out the design and commenting and criticizing and helping to debug and improve it), and everything that isn't concurrent without a performance impact (that means no lock paths and no being any less than 4x as fast to schedule 4 threads at once) is going to shit itself when it hits the hardware and probably die.

Thousands of cores. Bajillions of bytes of memory.

Hardware and file system support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304605)

I would love to run FreeBSD but it won't run smoothly (or in some cases at all) on my hardware, most Linux distributions run perfectly on these machines, but FreeBSD often won't even boot. The primary focus should be to improve hardware support since nothing else matters if the OS won't boot. After that I'd love to see wider file system support for cross-compatibility and a restoration of the pkg-ng package repository.

Re:Hardware and file system support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304791)

My headless server, with Intel CPU/NIC and and LSI controller, works just fine.

Re:Hardware and file system support (1)

fnj (64210) | about 2 years ago | (#43306009)

FreeBSD supports far more hardware platforms than most or any linux distros. I have never had any problem whatsoever with FreeBSD on any PC hardware I tried. What specific hardware have you had a problem with? How long ago was it?

Re:Hardware and file system support (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#43306343)

You seem to be talking about CPUs, but if the subject is supported peripherals or other devices, Linux seems to be way ahead of the BSDs in this area.

Re:Hardware and file system support (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43307153)

I have two desktops and a laptop I've tried FreeBSD on. FreeBSD won't boot on either desktop machine. It runs (slowly) on the laptop, but wireless won't work without manually loading the card's firmware. (It's an Intel 1000 card. The firmware exists on FreeBSD but the card isn't automatically detected.) The laptop is an HP G60, one of the desktops is an HP Pavilon p6 and the other is an eMachines W3107. As to how long ago was it, about a week ago with FreeBSD 9.1. I've also tried FreeBSD 9.0 and the FreeBSD 8.x releases from 8.0 up to 8.2. Most Linux distros run on all three machines without any trouble.

obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304739)

Shouldn't they just make it a project to die already?

FreeBSD powered version of Windows Blue (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43304839)

There I said it.

Red pill, or blue pill. The matrix must decide!

Are there bootable backups ? (2)

Marrow (195242) | about 2 years ago | (#43305097)

Something to completely restore a machine?

Stop wasting your time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43305129)

Stop wasting your time and work on an OS that actually matters, like Linux or Windows.

Double Guitars (2)

bradgoodman (964302) | about 2 years ago | (#43306375)

You know those guitars that are like, double guitars?

Port VirtualBox to FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43306467)

Having a virtualization solution like VirtualBox available for FreeBSD hosts could help increase FreeBSD's adoption, particularly among developers who often need multiple OSes to run on their box.

I for example am relatively new to FreeBSD but would love to use it as my primary workstation OS, with Windows and Linux as guest VMs as my (development) work requires. This would allow me to maximize the benefit from ZFS, which is a major selling point. The ZFS benefit diminishes greatly if you run it in a VM (awesome guest filesystem gets trumped by the fact its "disks" are just files on a the host's less-robust filesystem).

And of course once FreeBSD became my primary OS, I'd be learning more about it and would probably start finding things I'd like to contribute.

Re:Port VirtualBox to FreeBSD (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43311135)

FreeBSD already has a virtual edition called VirtualBDS. On top of that, it also supports jails of Linux (Debian & Gentoo) and BSD itself. Only thing it'd need might be VMware for Windows support, but other than that, I'd say it's there.

HashCash support by default in ALL mail programs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43306597)

http://www.hashcash.org/ [hashcash.org]
http://pthree.org/2011/03/03/the-sad-state-of-hashcash/ [pthree.org]

This type of proof-of-work algorithm can ONLY ever catch on if someone seriously tackles the chicken-and-egg problem of ensuring it's supported in all mail agents AND clients.

The world needs:

-client hashcash plugins for: gmail, yahoo, thunderbird, hotmail
-mail agent plugins for: sendmail, postfix, exim etc.

and they all need to be plug-and-play.

Printer and scanner support (1)

Builder (103701) | about 2 years ago | (#43306699)

If FreeBSD supported more printers and scanners / MFC devices, I'd be back on it tomorrow.

Wayland and modern X/DRI (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43306797)

X developers only write for linux kernel hooks. FreeBSD needs to put eyeballs on DRI and X related drivers, and do Wayland.

Re:Wayland and modern X/DRI (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43309873)

FBSD may not need Wayland, since it's possible that a lot of their users do use X for remote accessing. But for PC-BSD, Wayland should be ported, and KDE 5 and other DEs that support Wayland should be supported on it.

Which brings to mind another point - FBSD needs a team that do just one thing - ensure that every peripheral that sells today has supported drivers, be it open source or not. The goal should be making (F)BSD as automatic an install as Windows usually is. Once that's there, w/ complete plug-n-play, there are some chances of OEMs bundling PC-BSD w/ newer desktops, instead of Windows 8.

the one thing most open source projects lack... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43306819)

better documentation.. and not just the by geeks for geeks often incomprehensible code comments and release notes, either. but actual, real documentation of all basic functions..

and oh yea.. the bsd's need a real installer.

Linux Parity (1)

snadrus (930168) | about 2 years ago | (#43307033)

Foundations for Wayland, KVM, KMS, systemd, Dalvik. Many of these things should just be a compile away with the right few pieces in place. Don't get left behind & don't let Linux's advancements be an island

Re:Linux Parity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43308031)

No, thank you.

Re:Linux Parity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43308055)

Replying as AC because I can't remember my details...

FreeBSD has KMS and GEM right now. There's been (in the past at least) discussions about systemd since FreeBSD had an analog to systemd prior to systemd being developed. There was some alpha-grade systemd dev done for NetBSD in the past but the issue seemed to be the lack of documentation around systemd.

Re:Linux Parity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#43309365)

Release at least a beta version of FreeBSD ver. 10.0 as early as possible. Spend some funds to release fast.

Re:Linux Parity (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#43311167)

How many concurrent versions of FBSD do you want running? 9.1 was announced a few weeks ago, 8.4 beta has just been released. I fear that FBSD has a lot of de facto forks running at the moment.

I'm proud I gave them a hundred bucks! (1)

MythicalMan (261975) | about 2 years ago | (#43308803)

I'm a busy software developer working for a big company, so I don't have much time to contribute for Open Source and open knowledge projects. Supporting the FreeBSD Foundation, Wikimedia and similar initiatives seems to be a good way to pay for their valuable work. I make a donation every year and invite all /. readers to do the same.

oh, just a couple (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about 2 years ago | (#43309077)

Oh, I only have a couple:

* Fix USB device enumeration, you know, like you said you would in 8.1
* Either remove or update storage controller drivers which are no longer maintained and have been
* replace sysinstall outright with something which is more likely to work consistently
* fix the release cycle to have something between "cutting edge requiring a regular rebuild of the system" and "stale binaries released when the release goes STABLE, and more often than not made unavailable completely as soon as they become stable and/or vulnerable".
* Would also be nice if they could make it so the all-too-common upgrade problem where you start an upgrade, but a dependency gets changed while you're upgrading and you end up half-broken (requiring you to run 2+ freebsd machines per release if you want to run one in a production state).

Of course, I'd submit these officially, but like is typical with FreeBSD, "it's your fault, there is no problem, X works fine, moving on" is likely to be the response (if there is one at all).

Too many (1)

rudolfel (700883) | about a year ago | (#43310377)

- fix your filesystem when installing ports. - if your installation program does not use good defaults for filesystems (out of inodes in 2012 :))) ) give the user the possibility to change defaults and document it. I gave up on FreeBSD after I was not able to install it because out of inodes and not finding any documentation about how to format a partition during install with different parameters than default ones. Last but not least: PUT THE GOD DAMN DOCUMENTATION ON THE CD/COMPUTER. YOU CANNOT ACCESS DOCUMENTATION WITHOUT INTERNET.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?