OpenBSD Journal

Heads up! OpenBSD turns 4.5-BETA

Contributed by johan on from the β dept.

Reader Maxime DERCHE reminds us about the tree recently being moved to beta state.
Maxime writes:

Miod Vallat has tagged 4.5-BETA. Snapshots should be available soon for testing, check the mirrors for availability. Read below for the full commit message:

List:       openbsd-cvs
Subject:    CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: src
From:       Miod Vallat 
Date:       2009-02-08 21:02:22

CVSROOT:	/cvs
Module name:	src
Changes by:	miod@cvs.openbsd.org	2009/02/08 14:02:22

Modified files:
	distrib/miniroot: install.sub 
	etc/root       : root.mail 
	share/mk       : sys.mk 
	share/tmac/mdoc: doc-common 
	sys/arch/macppc/stand/tbxidata: bsd.tbxi 
	sys/conf       : newvers.sh 
	sys/sys        : param.h 

Log message:
Move to 4.5-BETA

We need users to help test all parts of OpenBSD and report any critical bugs and problems you can find so we can release a fully functional and stable OpenBSD 4.5.

(Comments are closed)


Comments
  1. By raw foo(d) (80.249.194.29) extrospective@gmail.com on

    They also rm'd wake(8). What's up with that?
    CVSROOT:        /cvs
    Module name:    src
    Changes by:     mbalmer@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/02/08 15:53:01
    
    Removed files:
           usr.sbin/wake  : Makefile wake.8 wake.c
    
    Log message:
    Remove wake(8).  The bin directories are full, no new commands to be added.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (93.158.65.234) on

      > They also rm'd wake(8). What's up with that?

      I'm guessing Marc just missed the beta deadline, generally no new functionality should be added after a software has entered the beta stage.

      Comments
      1. By Brad (2001:470:b01e:3:216:41ff:fe17:6933) brad at comstyle dot com on

        > I'm guessing Marc just missed the beta deadline, generally no new functionality should be added after a software has entered the beta stage.

        nope, that's not it. the commit message says why.

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (74.13.37.115) on

          > > I'm guessing Marc just missed the beta deadline, generally no new functionality should be added after a software has entered the beta stage.
          >
          > nope, that's not it. the commit message says why.

          No new commands? Really? Ever? What if something that blows Theo's mind comes along?

          Comments
          1. By Phil Collins (79.73.228.23) on

            > > > I'm guessing Marc just missed the beta deadline, generally no new functionality should be added after a software has entered the beta stage.
            > >
            > > nope, that's not it. the commit message says why.
            >
            > No new commands? Really? Ever? What if something that blows Theo's mind comes along?

            I'd blow Theo's mind any day!

            I'd start by gently caressing his parrot glove then inspecting his stack.

            SOOOO dreamy!

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (67.69.227.99) on

              > > > > I'm guessing Marc just missed the beta deadline, generally no new functionality should be added after a software has entered the beta stage.
              > > >
              > > > nope, that's not it. the commit message says why.
              > >
              > > No new commands? Really? Ever? What if something that blows Theo's mind comes along?
              >
              > I'd blow Theo's mind any day!
              >
              > I'd start by gently caressing his parrot glove then inspecting his stack.
              >
              > SOOOO dreamy!

              for f's sakes, I'm eating lunch here! Gross!

        2. By el martino (64.34.177.147) on

          > nope, that's not it. the commit message says why.

          Haha is April 1st early this year?

    2. By Anonymous Coward (70.81.15.127) on

      > They also rm'd wake(8). What's up with that?
      >
      >
      > CVSROOT: /cvs
      > Module name: src
      > Changes by: mbalmer@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/02/08 15:53:01
      >
      > Removed files:
      > usr.sbin/wake : Makefile wake.8 wake.c
      >
      > Log message:
      > Remove wake(8). The bin directories are full, no new commands to be added.

      Luckily, this can very easily be obtained and compiled - via FTP or CVS...

    3. By Frank DENIS (193.93.127.141) on http://www.pureftpd.org

      By the way, any hope to get portal (mount_portal(8)) back before the release?

      Comments
      1. By tedu (64.115.195.66) on

        > By the way, any hope to get portal (mount_portal(8)) back before the release?

        no.

    4. By Timo Schoeler (2001:1560:2:0:208:2ff:fe8e:361c) on

      > They also rm'd wake(8). What's up with that?
      >
      >
      > CVSROOT: /cvs
      > Module name: src
      > Changes by: mbalmer@cvs.openbsd.org 2009/02/08 15:53:01
      >
      > Removed files:
      > usr.sbin/wake : Makefile wake.8 wake.c
      >
      > Log message:
      > Remove wake(8). The bin directories are full, no new commands to be added.

      Hm,

      regardless of the reason why it was rm'd, shouldn't it be 'removed' from http://openbsd.org/plus.html also (as it won't be part of 4.5)?

      Best,

      Timo

      Comments
      1. By raw foo(d) (80.249.194.29) on

        > shouldn't it be 'removed' from http://openbsd.org/plus.html

        Might as well remove "Permit tail(1) -f to follow multiple files." This addition was later revoked:

        CVSROOT:	/cvs
        Module name:	src
        Changes by:	landry@cvs.openbsd.org	2008/11/13 11:33:03
        
        Modified files:
        	usr.bin/tail   : extern.h forward.c tail.c 
        
        Log message:
        Backout previous commit, there are still some issues with it.
        ok sthen@

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (203.106.61.13) on

          > > shouldn't it be 'removed' from http://openbsd.org/plus.html
          >


          Last time, iirc I heard a news that pf will be rewrite by openbsd developers. does it start? if yes, where should i view it, and test it?

          10q

          Comments
          1. By henning (213.39.181.65) henning@ on

            > > > shouldn't it be 'removed' from http://openbsd.org/plus.html
            > >
            >
            >
            > Last time, iirc I heard a news that pf will be rewrite by openbsd developers. does it start? if yes, where should i view it, and test it?

            what you refer to is a multi-year project by (fot the biggest part) ryan and me. every release has a fe more bits. 4.4 had the most substantial changes under the hood ever made, tho some stuff had to be disabled last minute - 4.5 will have it enabled. and more will come.

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (203.106.57.66) on

              > > > > shouldn't it be 'removed' from http://openbsd.org/plus.html
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Last time, iirc I heard a news that pf will be rewrite by openbsd developers. does it start? if yes, where should i view it, and test it?
              >
              > what you refer to is a multi-year project by (fot the biggest part) ryan and me. every release has a fe more bits. 4.4 had the most substantial changes under the hood ever made, tho some stuff had to be disabled last minute - 4.5 will have it enabled. and more will come.
              >


              Dear Mr. Henning,

              Thank you very much for explanation. And thank you very much to OpenBSD team, ryan and you, and of course, all pf fans around the world for making one of the best security tools. :)

              Let's donate. ;)

  2. By Anonymous Coward (76.179.22.217) on

    Looking at plus.html, I'm amazed at how much work goes into each release, and I'm excited to try it out.
    Top on my list:
    softraid on ppc ram disk, smtpd, and ypldap.
    Softraid over aoe looks interesting too.

    Thank you developers.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (203.106.61.13) on

      > Looking at plus.html, I'm amazed at how much work goes into each release, and I'm excited to try it out.
      > Top on my list:
      > softraid on ppc ram disk, smtpd, and ypldap.
      > Softraid over aoe looks interesting too.
      >
      > Thank you developers.


      i looking forward for smtpd and ypldap too. and if possible, mpls also :)

  3. By Kevin (208.86.96.10) on http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=uvideo&sektion=4

    Any recommendations on cheap USB webcams supported by uvideo(4)? I see support for several models are improved, so far I've found the following currently available in the states:
      o   QuickCam for Notebooks Pro	$76
      o   QuickCam Communicate Deluxe	$70,1.3MP
      o   QuickCam Communicate MP		$50,1.3MP
      o   QuickCam Deluxe for Notebooks	$42,1.3MP
      o   QuickCam Fusion			$40,1.3MP
      o   QuickCam Pro for Notebooks	$76
      o   QuickCam Pro 9000			$70,2MP
      o   QuickCam Ultra Vision		$42,1.3MP
      o   LifeCam NX-6000			$40,2MP
    
    Looks like the Microsoft LifeCam and the Pro 9000 are the only 2 megapixel models supported under 4.5?

    Comments
    1. By Brad (2001:470:b01e:3:216:41ff:fe17:6933) brad at comstyle dot com on

      > Any recommendations on cheap USB webcams supported by uvideo(4)?
      >
      > I see support for several models are improved, so far I've found the following currently available in the states:
      >
      > Looks like the Microsoft LifeCam and the Pro 9000 are the only 2 megapixel models supported under 4.5?

      There are a lot more that would be supported but its up to users to find UVC compatible cams and report back if they work or not with the current state of the driver. Since all cams marked with "Windows Vista compatible" are UVC then I'm sure you can see how many potential options there are :) I have a Pro 9000 which I used to test driver changes during initial development and it works very well.

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (70.81.15.127) on

        > > Any recommendations on cheap USB webcams supported by uvideo(4)?
        > >
        > > I see support for several models are improved, so far I've found the following currently available in the states:
        > >
        > > Looks like the Microsoft LifeCam and the Pro 9000 are the only 2 megapixel models supported under 4.5?
        >
        > There are a lot more that would be supported but its up to users to find UVC compatible cams and report back if they work or not with the current state of the driver. Since all cams marked with "Windows Vista compatible" are UVC then I'm sure you can see how many potential options there are :) I have a Pro 9000 which I used to test driver changes during initial development and it works very well.

        Where do we report these models back? I'll be getting one this weekend; was looking to test and see how it works in OpenBSD, if supported.

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (70.81.15.127) on

          > > > Any recommendations on cheap USB webcams supported by uvideo(4)?
          > > >
          > > > I see support for several models are improved, so far I've found the following currently available in the states:
          > > >
          > > > Looks like the Microsoft LifeCam and the Pro 9000 are the only 2 megapixel models supported under 4.5?
          > >
          > > There are a lot more that would be supported but its up to users to find UVC compatible cams and report back if they work or not with the current state of the driver. Since all cams marked with "Windows Vista compatible" are UVC then I'm sure you can see how many potential options there are :) I have a Pro 9000 which I used to test driver changes during initial development and it works very well.
          >
          > Where do we report these models back? I'll be getting one this weekend; was looking to test and see how it works in OpenBSD, if supported.

          Well, I got one today and works great!

          I'm not sure where to report this yet, but I'll send in my dmesg if it's worth it (to dmesg@openbsd.org).

          Would good to add this to the man page. I may also buy some other webcams from another place with a good return policy, just to test and report.

          Here's my dmesg of it:

          --
          uvideo0 at uhub2 port 1 configuration 1 interface 0 "Dynex Dynex 1.3MP Webcam" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 2
          video0 at uvideo0
          uaudio0 at uhub2 port 1 configuration 1 interface 2 "Dynex Dynex 1.3MP Webcam" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 2
          uaudio0: audio rev 1.00, 2 mixer controls
          audio0 at uaudio0
          --

          Tested to work with luvcview and fswebcam:

          $ luvcview
          luvcview version 2.0
          Video driver: x11
          A window manager is available
          video /dev/video0
          ...

          $ fswebcam --scale 1024x768 -d V4L2:/dev/video0 test.jpg ; scp test.jpg rusty:

          As for the Audio part, I still need to find a way to test unless anyone has any suggestions on testing this part properly?

          I've tried aucat like this, with this problem:

          $ aucat -o test.wav
          /dev/audio: can't set audio params to s16le,0:1,44100Hz: Invalid argument

          Something from console would be preferred, but optional.

          In the mean time, I'll be setting up a small remote monitoring security system for now, sending to a remote host...

      2. By MCSE (213.168.66.183) on

        > > Any recommendations on cheap USB webcams supported by uvideo(4)?
        > >
        > > I see support for several models are improved, so far I've found the following currently available in the states:
        > >
        > > Looks like the Microsoft LifeCam and the Pro 9000 are the only 2 megapixel models supported under 4.5?
        >
        > There are a lot more that would be supported but its up to users to find UVC compatible cams and report back if they work or not with the current state of the driver. Since all cams marked with "Windows Vista compatible" are UVC then I'm sure you can see how many potential options there are :) I have a Pro 9000 which I used to test driver changes during initial development and it works very well.

        What tool do yout test with? Anything in ports that should yield a picture in return?

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (212.20.215.132) on

          > What tool do yout test with? Anything in ports that should yield
          > a picture in return?

          graphics/fswebcam or graphics/luvcview

        2. By Brad (2001:470:b01e:3:216:41ff:fe17:6933) brad at comstyle dot com on

          > What tool do yout test with? Anything in ports that should yield a picture in return?

          I would also test it out with MPlayer as it seems to be a littler pickier about the cam/driver/V4L2 stack interaction.

          .e.g. mplayer tv:// -tv driver=v4l2:device=/dev/video0

    2. By Anonymous Coward (85.19.213.88) on

      > Any recommendations on cheap USB webcams supported by uvideo(4)?
      >
      > I see support for several models are improved, so far I've found
      > the following currently available in the states:
      >
      > o QuickCam for Notebooks Pro $76
      > o QuickCam Communicate Deluxe $70,1.3MP
      > o QuickCam Communicate MP $50,1.3MP
      > o QuickCam Deluxe for Notebooks $42,1.3MP
      > o QuickCam Fusion $40,1.3MP
      > o QuickCam Pro for Notebooks $76
      > o QuickCam Pro 9000 $70,2MP
      > o QuickCam Ultra Vision $42,1.3MP
      > o LifeCam NX-6000 $40,2MP

      Logitech QuickCam E 3500 Plus at 37 has been working well for me.

      It also has a built-in microphone that attaches to uaudio(4) but
      I've yet to try that out so I cannot say if it actually works ;-)

  4. By Anonymous Coward (212.77.163.104) on

    Men, I tried to bring some snapshot yesterday and my favourite server was down. I checked others and ... surprise ! 4.5 is up. Waiting for mirrors to update.

    Thank you.

    Comments
    1. By henning (213.39.181.65) on

      > Men, I tried to bring some snapshot yesterday and my favourite server was down. I checked others and ... surprise ! 4.5 is up. Waiting for mirrors to update.

      4.5 cannot be up since it is not remotely finished.


  5. By aki (70.20.56.130) on

    Can't find anything on bcm4315 support (numerous notebooks use this wireless chip)? Googling yields no support in October, anything changed?

    If not, anyrecommendation for a supported wifi pci express card?
    Using a Lenovo S10 - running Arch Linux right now because of wireless support and would love to install openbsd.

    Thanks.
    Will purchase numerous CD's.
    OpenBSD user since 2.3.

    Comments
    1. By Brad (2001:470:b01e:3:216:41ff:fe17:6933) brad at comstyle dot com on

      > Can't find anything on bcm4315 support (numerous notebooks use this wireless chip)? Googling yields no support in October, anything changed?

      It won't be supported anytime soon.

      Comments
      1. By aki (130.189.10.63) on

        > > Can't find anything on bcm4315 support (numerous notebooks use this wireless chip)? Googling yields no support in October, anything changed?
        >
        > It won't be supported anytime soon.

        Thanks Brad.

        Any recommendation for a PCI express wifi?

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]