A great reputation she kept up, my God! She kept me up.

[reddragdiva]

I want candy. The finest output of a million monkeys with Model M keyboards on caffeine. But I want to run it on Proper Gentleman's Dissolute Hippie Son's Unix^[*], rather than any of that shoddy Cheap Finnish Imitation.

So I'm considering moving from the present FreeBSD 4.6.2 plus random new libs, packages and the occasional symlink to FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE.

I am not running a server that will stay up four years despite daily Slashdottings. I just want a desktop. With new shiny candy. But an operating system organised on vaguely sane principles, which rules out the Finnish thing.

The FreeBSD UK mailing list considered it an entirely feasible idea. I know _nicolai_ has suffered annoying hardware incompatibilities trying to run it on his laptop. Has anyone else actually used the thing and have any experience to relate?

[*] Apologies to hirez.

Comments

Re: Right here

[loosechanj.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I do get the same IP in the same OS. Except when I go *days* without rebooting one or the other. So I guess I'm good there. I'll look at those man pages, cuz in FreeBSD 5.2 there's *nothing* in dhclient.conf I don't think. Just a note that the defaults are usually ok. I don't know of any way to tweak what XP sends.

Re: Right here

[owdbetts.livejournal.com]

It's possible that the IP address you get depends on the hostname (if any) you supply in the request, though I've never heard of a this.* Windows always sends the hostname in the request; not all other clients do (although I'm pretty sure that the ISC dhclient can be made to).

[*] The old @Home network, of course, required you to supply a designated hostname in order for you to be allowed onto the network. And they designated the hostname. But that's not the quite same thing...