Open source never stands still. Even the flexible and mature BSDs are continuing to evolve. In this article, Michael Lucas looks at the NetBSD upgrade process, demonstrating the most common steps to stay abreast of the current source code.
Staying Current with NetBSD
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Definitely one of the better OS’es out there. Easy to install. No bloat. Secure. Excellent package management. Tons and tons of apps. Secure. Oh yeah, and portable.
I definitely agree with ephemeral.
What a pity there is not more impetus around this OS, because it’s a masterpiece of elegance…
One plus about the NetBSD community…it isn’t plagued by lamers and d00dz wanting to appear l33t
NetBSD doesn’t get enough recognition. You know what they say, portable code is well designed code.
Like the others have said..Secure, lots of apps, runs on dated hardware, good, quick installs (anyone ever found a bug in NetBSD’s installer?…I’d be suprised if that happened) and lets not forget binary compatibility with Linux and FreeBSD.
Not sexy enough
Define “sexy” in terms of an OS
A good OS, but didn’t work on my new dell laptop. I guess I will have to wait for a version able to boot up in my machine. I thought such a portable OS would have no problem booting in a pentium 4 but sadly it locks. Once thing I agree on about it: its comunity is the friendlier
“Define “sexy” in terms of an OS”.
Easy: BeOS.
yeah.. BeOS .. now re-incarnated in Zeta.. what’s in a name.
NetBSD is probably the most elegant OS out there.
Being a research OS it has extremely sexy code, well written, logical, systematic.
It has the smartest package managment system out there – pkgsrc. It handles dependencies better than anything else without using resources. Just compare pkgchk -u to FreeBSDs portsupgrade -Ra, to Gentoo’s emerge, Debian’s apt etc. Plus it’s portable. I have used pkgsrc on Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD.
Unbloated install, low resources (ruby for portupgrade anyone?).
Since this is an end-user / Desktop site: How does this help the gamer? It doesn’t. It’s not made for it. But you can use it to secure your old BeOS box.
Since this is a BeOS fan site: I like it as a desktop OS, I hope Zeta ads some security features so it can also be used when on a network.
I use NetBSD on the Desktop where it suffers the same shortcomings as all UNIXs (except OSX). But it handles dependencies better than anything, has good hw support and has the most stable kernel out there.
It’s good. Try it.
A.
yeah I found a bug in the netbsd installer.. I think I was trying to install it on my 4mb ram 486 laptop…parts of the installer segfaulter.
You used the “NetBSD small” disk, right?
Because if not, you indeed found a bug “in the netbsd installer” :-).
Worked fine for my 486 4mb ram workstation.
I’ve tried NetBSD, and I like it. It does have an elegant design. But upgrading from source, like the article describes, is not robust enough. I’ve upgraded FreeBSD from source scores of times, with few complications. With NetBSD, out of a dozen tries, I got the whole thing to compile only once. FreeBSD has a more simple, albeit less flexible, upgrade procedure. I can’t see myself switching to NetBSD. I just like my FreeBSD too much. But I would like to see more features from NetBSD make it into FreeBSD. I was very glad when FreeBSD adopted rcng.
…wouldn’t you want to check the autobuild status BEFORE you hose your system instead of after?
Otherwise, nice.
Sexy? Do you work with your computer or do you sleep with it?
How is BeOS any sexier than NetBSD or other UNIX like OSes? I’ve used both NetBSD and BeOS and I don’t find BeOS any sexier than NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, QNX, or even Windows 2K/XP. Perhaps my office and workspaces just don’t have that romance inducing ambience. *sigh*
I have a tiny Sun IPX workstation from the early 1990s. I tried installing Linux 2.4 and OpenBSD, but neither would work. The Debian and OpenBSD SPARC installers would die mysteriously.
Disappointed, I tried NetBSD as a last resort. NetBSD was nearly as k3wl or well-known as Linux or OpenBSD. However, the NetBSD install went flawlessly! Everything worked perfectly, with a pleasantly small set of userland tools.
Well, I certainly can’t say the NetBSD lacks bloat. Even a “minimal” install requires dozens and dozens of megabytes, perhaps even a hundred, without even a GUI.
The new build.sh system is much simpler for upgrading, maybe you should try it – I found it much simpler than FreeBSD’s upgrade rutine.
Well, if the FreeBSD vs Linux “debates” are anything to go by, then NetBSD vs. FreeBSD ought to be fierce.
Or maybe not. After all, what’s there to argue about between them?