2.0.2 ???
-
Looks pretty exciting to me.
Particularly switching ntp daemon. ;D
Thanks Jim.Steve
-
Pod….The original inquiry wasn't inspired by impatience.
Most of the time a post like this is made with a little inspiration from a lack of patience.
2.0.1 was not widely known at all. You had to be watching github to even know it was being worked on. There were snapshots, but everyone who was on the release didn't know about it from the autoupdate but had to go to the snapshot server. 2.0 got the same attention that 2.1 is getting.
With 2.0.2, it is basically the same without the snapshot server having the images. You could still watch github for the changes. I didn't know where to look to get the snapshots, but that is okay, I am testing 2.1 not 2.0.2. For the few system I have running 2.0 series only one is a "lab" machine and the rest are production. I am not loading snapshots on production firewalls.
Like I said, I did have a build server to create my 2.0.2, and those who knew where to get it got it and was helping test. I saw a few posts in the forums about 2.0.2. I don't really watch the mailing list, so I am not sure about it being there or not.
I am not sure about the disappearance. Perhaps they needed the space back for 2.1 snaphots. If that is the case, then more 2.1 please.
Just because you didn't know where to find the light does not mean the rest of us were in the dark about 2.0.2. -
The 2.0.2 snapshots were up while it was actually doing snapshots. Now that the release images have been built, they are shut down (as we always do close to a release) to avoid having someone out there with a build labeled "2.0.2-RELEASE" that is not actually the release. If we find something that needs fixed, their now outdated image wouldn't know it needed updated.
So at the moment we're just doing what we've always done… It's just a little delayed due to lack of time to get it all in place.
-
Thanks JimP, I stand correct on the snapshots for 2.0.2.
There is not rush to get 2.0.2 out. Take your time. Thanks for all your efforts building and support this great project. -
When will it be released Jim and thanks for the brilliant work so far!
-
As I said earlier, very soon, as soon as we have time to finish up the whole release process.
-
Has there been any movement on a 2.0.2 release? Will it be out before 2.1, which is supposed to be out very soon itself?
-
There really isn't anything holding back 2.0.2 still, just time.
2.1 has plenty of things holding it back. -
Hi,
Is there any milestone or timeline for pfSense project?
-
We don't keep one officially, but redmine tracks it:
http://redmine.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/roadmapWe never did have an official entry/designation for 2.0.2 in there.
-
As I indicated in the original post.
2.0.2 release is exceptional.
My system runs dual quad xeons, has 26 nics comprised of 12 low bandwidth ISP's balanced into one tier and numerous servers and appliances attached to the remaining 14 nics.
It is a very busy system, and not so much as one hickup, belch, burp, or f*rt.
It has performed even more error free than did 2.0.1 which was excellent.
I have the last (I guess you would call it pre release - release) 2.0.2 iso before it was taken down.
I have no idea what's really going on here, but if you want the last version that was in the public domain let me know. -
As I've said, we have the images, it's mostly that the right people haven't had enough time to get the release formally signed and rolled out.
Actually I found a couple more issues with the images today, and also added a warning about PPTP being compromised (not specific to pfSense, PPTP as a whole has been cracked), so there will be another round of new images.
-
How has PPTP been cracked??
-
https://isc.sans.edu/diary/End+of+Days+for+MS-CHAPv2/13807
https://www.cloudcracker.com/blog/2012/07/29/cracking-ms-chap-v2/ -
2.1 has plenty of things holding it back.
Isn't 2.1 supposed to be out by 18th October, in time for EuroBSDCon 2012?
-
Dont think it will happen….
-
Dont think it will happen….
That's a shame. I was really looking forward to it. From an outside perspective, it looks almost like the pfSense project is grinding to a halt…
-
From my POV, then v.2.0.1 has taken steps in the wrong direction regarding user friendlyness.
Its very obvious that it is nerds that has designed the GUI and you have to do a lot of manouvering in the menus to accomplish basic tasks.
2.0.1 also has the disadvantage that it consumes a lot of CPU running virtualized as many do now a days.
If you colocate and pay by the CPU use, it could get expensive in the end. 1.2.3 doesnt have these issues at all.
You see a lot of help done here on the forums that comes down to a not so intuitive user interface.
It could be a lot better!
I look forward to 2.0.2 since the ISO tested didnt perform as well as 1.2.3 and NAT was unstable in reflection state.
I hope this is solved in 2.0.2. Otherwise 1.2.3 will stay a little longer.
-
That's a shame. I was really looking forward to it. From an outside perspective, it looks almost like the pfSense project is grinding to a halt…
If someone only watches the blog, maybe. But anyone taking even a passing glance at the forum, github, redmine, etc, can see there is constant activity.
From my POV, then v.2.0.1 has taken steps in the wrong direction regarding user friendlyness.
Its very obvious that it is nerds that has designed the GUI and you have to do a lot of manouvering in the menus to accomplish basic tasks.
2.0.1 also has the disadvantage that it consumes a lot of CPU running virtualized as many do now a days.
If you colocate and pay by the CPU use, it could get expensive in the end. 1.2.3 doesnt have these issues at all.
You see a lot of help done here on the forums that comes down to a not so intuitive user interface.
It could be a lot better!
I look forward to 2.0.2 since the ISO tested didnt perform as well as 1.2.3 and NAT was unstable in reflection state.
I hope this is solved in 2.0.2. Otherwise 1.2.3 will stay a little longer.
Not sure how the 2.0.x GUI is all that different from 1.2.3 in the way you describe. Main difference is the dashboard but that has nothing to do with navigating from page to page. In 2.1 I've made navigation quite a lot easier with the shortcut bar that lets you easily move between pages in the same "section" such as if you're looking at DHCP settings, you can see the service status right on the page, go to the logs, leases, etc. without digging through the menus to find the other entries.
I've not heard of 2.0.x using more CPU than 1.2.3 in general, and we have a ton of customers running 2.x in production environments colocated/virtualized.
-
Many are reporting extensive use of CPU on host running 2.0.1 virtualized….
