Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-06-06 10:25:51 -0300: several linux distros have achieved a difficult goal: ease of installation-use combined with a stable system. (...) I think that there are a lot of linux distros out there that are really easy to use, and even more friendly or beatiful than windows. I dont think that FreeBSD has achieved this. (...) But I see it is not desktop oriented (I repeat, this seems ok for me. FreeBSD is better for a server station, not for a desktop). I use FreeBSD 4.x on my desktop machines, also with excellent results. I'm glad FreeBSD is different, that's why I use this OS and not Windows or another OS that runs breakneck to achieve its levels of idiot-friendliness. I see two fallacies in your post: * being further in the race to copycat Windows is an achievement. Gee, why aren't all these people using Linux then? * FreeBSD is a worse desktop operating system than Linux. How come I haven't noticed during the last few years? -- How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb? You don't know, man. You don't KNOW. Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Did you guys already unmount your filesystem? On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:48:26 +0200, Oliver Fromme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yuval Levy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oliver Fromme wrote: I do look carefully every day, because it's my job. I work with various operating systems every day, including FreeBSD and Linux. From a professional I would expect a more mature and balanced approach, rather than my favorite OS is the best one and the others have no advantages. That's not what I wrote. FreeBSD is not the best. There is no such thing as the best, in general. Be real: there is a lot of diversity of OS out there and they all have advantages and disadvantages. Right. Everyone has to decide for himself which tool works best for his job. Yup, I know the usual freebsd-for-servers and linux-for- desktops arguments. And to be honest, I'm fed up with them. They're lies. I'm running FreeBSD on my desktop at home, a lot of people are happily running Linux on their servers, and I've seen people successfully installing FreeBSD who have never even heard the word unix until that day. You can run FreeBSD on your desktop at home because you have the skills, the time, the dedication. For most standard applications it doesn't require any more skills (or time, or dedication) than with any other OS. In fact, getting some applications to work correctly under, say, Windows requires more skills (and time, and dedication) sometimes. You are special. Every human being is special Right. I don't disagree with you there. [...] They do not share your view. I do not share your view. This does not make us liars. Uhm, what are you talking about? I've never called you a liar. But those people who claim that FreeBSD is only suitable for servers and Linux is only suitable for desk- tops -- those are liars. There are plenty of counter- examples. I am moving my servers from Linux to FreeBSD, because FreeBSD gives me the manageability, stability and security that are more important to my clients than the bleeding edge features that often make it into Linux first. I am generally inclined toward Open Source software over proprietary one, but will pragmatically mix and match to obtain what works best for me rather than dogmatically pretend that my favorite OS is the best and its filesystem is the brightest and its license is the only acceptable distribution form. I agree 100%. Most of my machines (i.e. the machines which I own or which I'm responsible for to operate) run FreeBSD, but some also run Linux (Debian), Solaris or Windows. I used to have OpenBSD, too, but it stopped working for me (a long story). And currently I'm evaluating to move one of my privat machines from FreeBSD to DragonFly BSD, because some of its features would be very useful. Still, of all of those systems, FreeBSD is (currently) my favourite. It's particularly versatile to work well for all kinds of different purposes, including servers _and_ desktops. Which brings me back to the topic of this thread: is there anybody out there with the skills to cleanly solve this shameful situation in which rebooting FreeBSD results in unclean mounting of ext2 (and potentially other) volumes? A umount command in rc.shutdown should be a feasible work-around. Fixing the driver is probably not a high-priority, because not many users are affected by the problem, I guess. (But then again: It's open source, so you can try to fix it yourself.) Best regards Oliver PS: I think this should rather move to the -chat list. -- Ronald Klop Amsterdam, The Netherlands ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Maxi Combina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I have used the ext2fs driver for exactly one reason: to migrate data from Linux to FreeBSD on machines which are being converted from the Dark Side. And that I do not seed the need of insult other OS. And I do not see any insult. (If you're referring to the Dark Side pun, then maybe you should check whether /dev/irony is working correctly for you. I really thought it wouldn't be necessary to add a smiley in that place, but unfortunately I seemed to be wrong.) Even worse if the other OS is open source (as linux). Being open source doesn't mean that a piece of software is any good. In fact, I've seen a lot of open source which is just plain crap. (OK, now _this_ is an insult, but I didn't mention any specific software in particular.) Linux has its _really_ good points. Well, I don't see any. But everybody is free to have his own opinion. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co KG, Oettingenstr. 2, 80538 München Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. IRIX is about as stable as a one-legged drunk with hypothermia in a four-hundred mile per hour wind, balancing on a banana peel on a greased cookie sheet -- when someone throws him an elephant with bad breath and a worse temper. -- Ralf Hildebrandt ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
I do not seed the need of insult other OS. May be you need to look more carefully. I am not talking _only_ about this thread. As I said, I dont wanna flame, just reflecting (or trying to :) ) Even worse if the other OS is open source (as linux). Being open source doesn't mean that a piece of software is any good. In fact, I've seen a lot of open source which is just plain crap. (OK, now _this_ is an insult, but I didn't mention any specific software in particular.) Totally agree. Well, I don't see any. But everybody is free to have his own opinion. Well, I insist: maybe you should look more carefully :) Just to mention the first thing that comes to my mind: several linux distros have achieved a difficult goal: ease of installation-use combined with a stable system. I have no trouble with a diffucult / unix-like OS, but a lot of people do. And this a _fact_.They dont have time to spend learning to use a dificult OS. And I think that if we want to tell more and more people (friends, family, goverment, companies, etc) to move to an open source OS, we must do an effort. I think that there are a lot of linux distros out there that are really easy to use, and even more friendly or beatiful than windows. I dont think that FreeBSD has achieved this. I dont think there is need. FreeBSD is more suitable for a server station, but not for the desktop. I use linux both as server and desktop with excelent results. I am using FreeBSD since a few weeks ago, also with excelents resutls. But I see it is not desktop oriented (I repeat, this seems ok for me. FreeBSD is better for a server station, not for a desktop). I dont think that there is an OS that is the best for all the purposes. Use windows if you want to play the latest games. Use *BSD if you want or need a really good unix. Use linux if .. ( fill in the blanks ;) ) Please let me know if you dont agree, and why. Best regards, Maxi ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Maxi Combina wrote: companies, etc) to move to an open source OS, we must do an effort. I think that there are a lot of linux distros out there that are really easy to use, and even more friendly or beatiful than windows. I dont think that FreeBSD has achieved this. I dont think there is need. FreeBSD is more suitable for a server station, but not for the desktop. I use linux both as server and desktop with excelent results. If you want a Unix desktop, like most likely many people on this mailing list want, or need, you can use FreeBSD aswell as Linux but not Windows (even with things like UWin or Cygwin, it's a pain). I don't understand this we need to compete with Windows on the desktop thing. I've never considered Windows to be particularly useful as a desktop environment, why should the Unix systems compete with it? [And btw., please let's move this discussion to -advocacy, since it doesn't really belong on this list.] mkb. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Maxi Combina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not seed the need of insult other OS. May be you need to look more carefully. I am not talking _only_ about this thread. You replied specifically to my mail, and you didn't mention any other threads. Well, I don't see any. But everybody is free to have his own opinion. Well, I insist: maybe you should look more carefully :) I do look carefully every day, because it's my job. I work with various operating systems every day, including FreeBSD and Linux. Just to mention the first thing that comes to my mind: several linux distros have achieved a difficult goal: ease of installation-use combined with a stable system. Yup, I know the usual freebsd-for-servers and linux-for- desktops arguments. And to be honest, I'm fed up with them. They're lies. I'm running FreeBSD on my desktop at home, a lot of people are happily running Linux on their servers, and I've seen people successfully installing FreeBSD who have never even heard the word unix until that day. Please let me know if you dont agree, and why. I don't agree, but I won't tell you why, because it is probably a waste of time. I've had this a thousand times before. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co KG, Oettingenstr. 2, 80538 München Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. I invented Ctrl-Alt-Delete, but Bill Gates made it famous. -- David Bradley, original IBM PC design team ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Oliver Fromme wrote: I do look carefully every day, because it's my job. I work with various operating systems every day, including FreeBSD and Linux. From a professional I would expect a more mature and balanced approach, rather than my favorite OS is the best one and the others have no advantages. Be real: there is a lot of diversity of OS out there and they all have advantages and disadvantages. For as much as I love FreeBSD, it is not (and probably can't be) better than all OS on all comparisons. Diversity is good, most existing OS have their rightful place in the IT ecosystem. Just to mention the first thing that comes to my mind: several linux distros have achieved a difficult goal: ease of installation-use combined with a stable system. Yup, I know the usual freebsd-for-servers and linux-for- desktops arguments. And to be honest, I'm fed up with them. They're lies. I'm running FreeBSD on my desktop at home, a lot of people are happily running Linux on their servers, and I've seen people successfully installing FreeBSD who have never even heard the word unix until that day. You can run FreeBSD on your desktop at home because you have the skills, the time, the dedication. You are special. Every human being is special and there are plenty of us out there that have other skills and want to dedicate their time to something else (like http://www.photopla.net/pano.php?id=25). They do not share your view. I do not share your view. This does not make us liars. I am moving my servers from Linux to FreeBSD, because FreeBSD gives me the manageability, stability and security that are more important to my clients than the bleeding edge features that often make it into Linux first. I am generally inclined toward Open Source software over proprietary one, but will pragmatically mix and match to obtain what works best for me rather than dogmatically pretend that my favorite OS is the best and its filesystem is the brightest and its license is the only acceptable distribution form. Which brings me back to the topic of this thread: is there anybody out there with the skills to cleanly solve this shameful situation in which rebooting FreeBSD results in unclean mounting of ext2 (and potentially other) volumes? Yuv ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Can the two of you please take this bikeshed to -chat or wherever? Thank you, Wilko On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 11:00:41AM -0400, Yuval Levy wrote.. Oliver Fromme wrote: I do look carefully every day, because it's my job. I work with various operating systems every day, including FreeBSD and Linux. From a professional I would expect a more mature and balanced approach, rather than my favorite OS is the best one and the others have no advantages. Be real: there is a lot of diversity of OS out there and they all have advantages and disadvantages. For as much as I love FreeBSD, it is not (and probably can't be) better than all OS on all comparisons. Diversity is good, most existing OS have their rightful place in the IT ecosystem. Just to mention the first thing that comes to my mind: several linux distros have achieved a difficult goal: ease of installation-use combined with a stable system. Yup, I know the usual freebsd-for-servers and linux-for- desktops arguments. And to be honest, I'm fed up with them. They're lies. I'm running FreeBSD on my desktop at home, a lot of people are happily running Linux on their servers, and I've seen people successfully installing FreeBSD who have never even heard the word unix until that day. You can run FreeBSD on your desktop at home because you have the skills, the time, the dedication. You are special. Every human being is special and there are plenty of us out there that have other skills and want to dedicate their time to something else (like http://www.photopla.net/pano.php?id=25). They do not share your view. I do not share your view. This does not make us liars. I am moving my servers from Linux to FreeBSD, because FreeBSD gives me the manageability, stability and security that are more important to my clients than the bleeding edge features that often make it into Linux first. I am generally inclined toward Open Source software over proprietary one, but will pragmatically mix and match to obtain what works best for me rather than dogmatically pretend that my favorite OS is the best and its filesystem is the brightest and its license is the only acceptable distribution form. Which brings me back to the topic of this thread: is there anybody out there with the skills to cleanly solve this shameful situation in which rebooting FreeBSD results in unclean mounting of ext2 (and potentially other) volumes? Yuv ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- end of quoted text --- -- Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Yuval Levy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oliver Fromme wrote: I do look carefully every day, because it's my job. I work with various operating systems every day, including FreeBSD and Linux. From a professional I would expect a more mature and balanced approach, rather than my favorite OS is the best one and the others have no advantages. That's not what I wrote. FreeBSD is not the best. There is no such thing as the best, in general. Be real: there is a lot of diversity of OS out there and they all have advantages and disadvantages. Right. Everyone has to decide for himself which tool works best for his job. Yup, I know the usual freebsd-for-servers and linux-for- desktops arguments. And to be honest, I'm fed up with them. They're lies. I'm running FreeBSD on my desktop at home, a lot of people are happily running Linux on their servers, and I've seen people successfully installing FreeBSD who have never even heard the word unix until that day. You can run FreeBSD on your desktop at home because you have the skills, the time, the dedication. For most standard applications it doesn't require any more skills (or time, or dedication) than with any other OS. In fact, getting some applications to work correctly under, say, Windows requires more skills (and time, and dedication) sometimes. You are special. Every human being is special Right. I don't disagree with you there. [...] They do not share your view. I do not share your view. This does not make us liars. Uhm, what are you talking about? I've never called you a liar. But those people who claim that FreeBSD is only suitable for servers and Linux is only suitable for desk- tops -- those are liars. There are plenty of counter- examples. I am moving my servers from Linux to FreeBSD, because FreeBSD gives me the manageability, stability and security that are more important to my clients than the bleeding edge features that often make it into Linux first. I am generally inclined toward Open Source software over proprietary one, but will pragmatically mix and match to obtain what works best for me rather than dogmatically pretend that my favorite OS is the best and its filesystem is the brightest and its license is the only acceptable distribution form. I agree 100%. Most of my machines (i.e. the machines which I own or which I'm responsible for to operate) run FreeBSD, but some also run Linux (Debian), Solaris or Windows. I used to have OpenBSD, too, but it stopped working for me (a long story). And currently I'm evaluating to move one of my privat machines from FreeBSD to DragonFly BSD, because some of its features would be very useful. Still, of all of those systems, FreeBSD is (currently) my favourite. It's particularly versatile to work well for all kinds of different purposes, including servers _and_ desktops. Which brings me back to the topic of this thread: is there anybody out there with the skills to cleanly solve this shameful situation in which rebooting FreeBSD results in unclean mounting of ext2 (and potentially other) volumes? A umount command in rc.shutdown should be a feasible work-around. Fixing the driver is probably not a high-priority, because not many users are affected by the problem, I guess. (But then again: It's open source, so you can try to fix it yourself.) Best regards Oliver PS: I think this should rather move to the -chat list. -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co KG, Oettingenstr. 2, 80538 München Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. And believe me, as a C++ programmer, I don't hesitate to question the decisions of language designers. After a decent amount of C++ exposure, Python's flaws seem ridiculously small. -- Ville Vainio ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
On Monday 06 June 2005 17:02, Oliver Fromme wrote: Yup, I know the usual freebsd-for-servers and linux-for- desktops arguments. And to be honest, I'm fed up with them. They're lies. I'm running FreeBSD on my desktop at home, a lot of people are happily running Linux on their servers, and I've seen people successfully installing FreeBSD who have never even heard the word unix until that day. Please let me know if you dont agree, and why. http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/big-picture.html#faq-6.5 it's about the best programing language ... but if you replace programing language with OS it still applys. -- The sergeant walked into the shower and caught me giving myself a dishonorable discharge. Without missing a beat, I said, It's my dick and I can wash it as fast as I want! pgpUy6PTLo975.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Iulian M wrote: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/big-picture.html#faq-6.5 it's about the best programing language ... but if you replace programing language with OS it still applys. From the web page: Anyone who argues in favor of one language over another in a purely technical manner (i.e., who ignores the dominant business issues) exposes themself as a techie weenie, and deserves not to be heard. I wouldn't argue that the point the person wants to express doesn't have some truth in it but imho anyone who talks in such a condescending tone about tech weenies when they present logically sound arguments is someone who deserves not to be heard. mkb. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 10:25:51AM -0300, Maxi Combina wrote: snipped for brevity combined with a stable system. I have no trouble with a diffucult / unix-like OS, but a lot of people do. And this a _fact_.They dont have time to spend learning to use a dificult OS. And I think that if we want to tell more and more people (friends, family, goverment, companies, etc) to move to an open source OS, we must do an effort. I word of mouth advertising is teh best most reliable form of advertising going ... good working examples performing well and in a stable manner is the best way of showing pwople that an operating system is worth concidering. especially if it is a college is using it (comfortably and assuredly) to do the job at hand. think that there are a lot of linux distros out there that are really easy to use, and even more friendly or beatiful than windows. I dont think that FreeBSD has achieved this. I dont think there is need. FreeBSD is more suitable for a server station, but not for the desktop. I use linux both as server and desktop with excelent results. servers can be managed by purpose built gui shells but they would needs be a very complicated and very very deep multi-leveled, many menued beast tehat would be an almost nightmare to navigate, eve if it were designed properly !!! user interfaces can be very well served by a text console or text shell .. basically it depends on what you grew up with and it is this dichotomy that is driving the current schism twix gui/non-gui users. each side has valid arguemnts .. but the truth lies in between teh two 'extremes', or so it has been shown to me over these few decades that i've watched this system develop, and so on. I am using FreeBSD since a few weeks ago, also with excelents resutls. But I see it is not desktop oriented (I repeat, this seems ok for me. FreeBSD is better for a server station, not for a desktop). i've been using computers to solve problems and provide solutions since os9 was a twinkle in its parents eyes (microware) and qnx was going ultra reliable realtime unix(alike) operating systems and teh text console was king .. then came novel os/2 and ms windows v3.11 each one was really hard to adjust too and dificult to change from untill i came to qwindows this was based upon an x11 distribution (forgot which one) but it was quick clean comfortable to use and gave me direct access to teh cli (command line interface) if it was needed and it was an easy and simple switch. all of teh current crop of gui's are not ! what i'm trying to say is tha these days in an effort to become easy to use the gui interface which sits on top off and between teh user and the operating system propper has become a very complicated and indeed very bloated and in some cases almost uslessly crippling user interface. perhaps, we (at freebsd) should settle upon a clean easyish simple and lightweight GUI that we accpet as the official freebsd gui and set up a dev team to set it up as the gui that freebsd uses to provide teh 'ease of use' most new users are looking for when they move from another gui'fied platform be it microsoft window, mac, or some other custom platform. thier whole task would be to work on integrating the freebsd gui into/with the freebsd oprating system but keeping it seperate so that it would be like a jacket one could put on when the weather turns bad or one goes from one environment to another .. to use another analogy. when one becomes aclimatised to teh new environment then to get better performance, easier usage and so forth then you could then take off the jecket (take out the gui environment) and use the raw or the cli shell that is the basic way most all operating systems have by way of teh users interoperating with the core of the operating system. I dont think that there is an OS that is the best for all the purposes. Use windows if you want to play the latest games. Use *BSD if you want or need a really good unix. Use linux if .. ( fill in the blanks ;) ) Please let me know if you dont agree, and why. i disagree .. not so much with wghat you have said, maxi, rather with the usage paterns that we have all sortof assumed are teh way things were, work etc, etc, at teh end of teh line all operating systems are really identicle, why ? because an operating system is the controls built into the cpu systems command protocol structure that feeds information to, retrieves information from, queue work streams for the cpu to process, move around its varions media channels. now that shell that we users see, use and or interface with this raw and basic level protocol system/language. now this interface level can be a direct 'text console' cli as in most unix like shells or the ever more popular graphical user interface - gui. over time the developers of these interface tools start to add stuff that makes teh job 'easier' to use untill the point that the whole system become so overgrown that one need special
Re: filesystems not properly unmounted [OT]
Personally, I have used the ext2fs driver for exactly one reason: to migrate data from Linux to FreeBSD on machines which are being converted from the Dark Side. And that I do not seed the need of insult other OS. Even worse if the other OS is open source (as linux). With this attitude we are NOT going to change anything. Linux has its _really_ good points. Windows too (altough personally I hate windows/microsoft, I must admit windows' advanteges). I do NOT pretend to start a flameware. I am just reflecting. Maxi ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
