How exactly do you use this? You just look at vim all day? Can you install software on it like vscode, sublime, chrome...

use tmux and vim lad, chromium is in ports, not sure about sublime/vscode.

there's a bounty on freebsd electron. once that's done we might see it in openbsd soon

>Can you install software on it like vscode, sublime, chrome, etc.?
confirmed bait thread, stop replying

When I was in jail there were two guys who used to shave using toilet water because they said it was cleaner than the sink

stfu faggot just because i'm not some emacs using loser and actually DO WORK IN SOFTWARE doesn't mean you have the right to even use this board

given that in each thread someone claims it has no software, I don't wonder that someone gets genuinely confused into believing that it's pure shell OS

To be fair, OBSD is better if you use it as a shell-only OS. Use it where it's good, use something else where it's not. More often than not, if your OpenBSD box has anything attached to it other than ethernet, you're doing it wrong.

that's dumb the devs use it as a desktop os. so do lots of of people.

since it's the only OpenBSD thread alive, let me express my feeling if form of gif about this update
undeadly.org/cgi?action=article;sid=20180712084645

Attached: hurray.gif (500x286, 450K)

(1/3)
OpenBSD is a meme
>Filesystem
SSD TRIM is vital to supporting SSDs, as without it, they degrade quickly due to unnecessary reads and writes. Sadly, OpenBSD has decided not to support this.
OpenBSD also does not offer a modern filesystem option. You simply get the very old BSD "Fast File System" or FFS.
Why is this important? Because when most people think of a secure system, they think of being resistant to evil hackers breaking into it. But that's only one part of security. InfoSec can be generally split up into three components: Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.
In this triad, availability seems to be the one that's lacking here. Who cares how hack-resistant your system is if the data you're protecting is corrupted?
That's not even getting into the volume management stuff that's missing, and the snapshots, and the everything.
"b-b-but MUH BACKUPS!!"
What are you even saying? That bitrot all of a sudden doesn't exist anymore? That backups are the one and only thing you should do and should not be supplemented by a more stable filesystem?
You do realize that if the filesystem is not secure and does not protect against bitrot and corruption, your precious backups are going to be fucked, because you'll be backing up corrupted data. Who even knows how far you'll have to roll back in order to get to a clean state?
"ZFS is one big thing! Very not-Unix! Just combine tools, bro"
OpenBSD doesn't have logical volume management either. Even if it did, FFS doesn't have the checksumming, bitrot protection, etc. Even if it did, OpenBSD softraid doesn't support as many RAID levels as other operating systems' solutions. It's just a worse deal all around.

Attached: puf800X689.gif (800x689, 69K)

(2/3)
>Security
"Only two remote holes in the default install!!!!!!!"
Yay!
I hope you realize that this literally only applies to a base system install with absolutely no packages added. In other words, not exactly representative or meaningful towards... anything really.
OpenBSD also does not have NFSv4 support even 18 years after its standardization. This is an issue security-wise because version 4 is the only one to offer authentication with Kerberos plus encryption with the krb5p option.
A common retort to this argument is that the NFSv4 protocol is "bloated", and that's why OpenBSD doesn't support it. Going off this, the OpenBSD project seems to think that authentication and encryption are bloat. Take a moment to consider that. It's certainly a very strange stance indeed, for such a "security-focused" operating system.
Let's of course not forget that OpenBSD lacks a Mandatory Access Control solution such as SELinux, AppArmor, or TrustedBSD, which provide benefits that are relevant to companies, organizations, and governments looking to better secure their systems and classified data.

(3/3)
>Sustainability
A few years ago, OpenBSD was actually in danger of shutting down because they couldn't keep the fucking lights on. How could anyone see this as a system they could rely on, when it could be in danger of ending at any time?
"but it's open source! Someone could just fork it"
Oh yeah because surely they'll be able to maintain the entire OS
Actually now that I think about it, that really depends on the person/organization that does it. And they might actually have some sense and be able to fix some of the issues listed here.
It's official. OpenBSD would be better off if it shut down and was restarted.
>C Standards-compliance
"B-But OpenBSD is written in strictly standards-compliant C! Clearly that's better than muh GNU virus!"
So you're not allowed to create extensions to the standard? You should only implement the standard and nothing more? Keep in mind that this is nothing like EEE, as the GNU C extensions are Free Software, with freely available source code, as opposed to proprietary shite. People should be allowed to innovate and improve things.
If you're gonna be anal about standards-compliance, then why let people make their own implementations anyway? Why not have the standards organizations make one C implementation and force everyone to use it?
>Miscellaneous
OpenBSD's pf has inferior performance, as it only utilizes one core of one processor. GNU/Linux's netfilter firewall does not have this problem. Neither does pfsense.

Attached: NOpenBSD.png (1000x1000, 168K)

You're getting sloppy. Work on it.

fuck this is cringey

no u

>no u
Go away

no u

Don't make me hug you

Yeah, but most OpenBSD installs are in a whitebox somewhere quietly unfucking ur packets.

b-but we're both boys!

Attached: boys.jpg (350x511, 28K)

>I love GNU linux mmmmm give me more systemd

Attached: numale.jpg (387x437, 40K)

WEW this sperg wrote 700 words

What kind of software are you talking about if their gcc is 10 years old and cant compile shit

>vim
Most OpenBSD users use vi, not vim. Yes, Chrome and Firefox both work. No, Electron developers are retarded, Electron doesn't work on any BSD.
OpenBSD is best as a desktop. What other desktop would I use? The rest aren't in the same league.
OpenBSD has Clang 5.0.1, which was released in December 2017. Yes, the GCC is ancient though, and that does suck. It's clearly possible to enable newer versions of GCC on BSDs, as FreeBSD has done: they moved to GCC 6 recently.

meh some openbsd devs probably like emacs too considering it comes with a minimalist emacs clone in base

C extensions aren't an issue. Sure it should be nice to not having them mixed in the same header files, but not using them is as simple as 1 compilation flag and using them is a deliberate choice of developers.
The issue is Glibc violating the standard at few places thus making it harder to write portable C code.