Discuss FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFly, etc.
Join us on IRC:
#baot @ irc.rizon.net
#freebsd,#openbsd,#netbsd @ irc.freenode.net
Documentation:
freebsd.org
openbsd.org
netbsd.org
Curious Linux user? Ask questions, get answers, ignore obvious trolls.
Other urls found in this thread:
trueos.org
openbsd.org
wolfram.com
openports.se
mathematica.stackexchange.com
openbsd.org
marc.info
marc.info
twitter.com
darwin could also be mentioned in the initial post since it IS a BSD derivative
Good thread OP
Keep making this fucking general
is it possible to do a wireless openbsd install and if so how
openbsd 6.4 was released recently
netboot
True. But who uses that?
>Using gif got other than animations with transparency
First mention for TrueOS
trueos.org
Many people including me on laptops. It's really cool, you should try it out!
You raise a good point. FWIW, I got the artwork from openbsd.org
install CRUX
Does Mathematica work in OpenBSD?
Mathematica is proprietary software, so OpenBSD is unlikely to support it in the future. It is also not listed on the system requirements from Wolfram.
wolfram.com
I do not have experienece with Mathematica, but perhaps some free software alternatives can fit your workflow. The list of ports for OpenBSD in the math category can be perused here: openports.se
According to this
mathematica.stackexchange.com
maybe py-sympy? I suppose it depends on what you want to do. Perhaps there is nothing as comprehensive as Mathematica available.
(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.
CoC cuck
(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.
OpenBSD does not support any 802.11 Wi-Fi standard newer than 'n'. It also lacks Bluetooth.
WINE doesn't exist on OpenBSD.
maxima is also available in OpenBSD ports and was mentioned in the stackexchange thread.
>inb4 OS shouldn'tdu nuffin about hardware bits
Since the apparent takeover of the Linux project by trannies, there has been a lot of talk about moving to other operating systems, with one of the main choices being OpenBSD. One of the criticisms of this OS is that its filesystem does nothing to protect against bitrot and data corruption in general. OpenBSD fans have responded to this by claiming that storage device makers are to be blamed for failures. Others have suggested that it is a result of 'bullshit writes' from large and bloated programs such as browsers.
To be fair, I agree that modern browsers are shit, but I've been noticing this as a trend from OpenBSDfags on here. Shifting the blame from the OS to someone else. It's hard drive manufacturers, and if it's not them, it's browser devs.
Pointing fingers doesn't solve problems. Actions do.
What can hard drive manufacturers do to make their hardware failure-proof? Is that even possible with today's technology? No manufacturer has done it in the history of these computer components. What evidence makes you think they can do it now?
What can browser developers do to fix their software? If they do not make their browsers as bloated as they are, 90% of the web will stop working, and that would prevent many people from doing what they want/need to do, since everything is done on the web. Perhaps there is room for a discussion on how the bloat got this bad and how to reverse it, but as it stands, the WWW won't be changing any time soon, and because of that, browsers can't change any time soon.
So it is clear that regardless of who should be 'rightfully' responsible for the issue of bits being flipped, there is only one party that can do anything about it, and that is the OS developers.
>One of the criticisms of this OS is that its filesystem does nothing to protect against bitrot and data corruption in general.
Doesn't soft update solve these issues (filesystem consistency)? At least at the same level of journaling iirc
Bsd is just linux with more w in its commands
I'm setting up my first home server out of an old desktop atm. I'm thinking of putting OpenBSD on it as it seems fitting and is the only chance I'll have to learn a BSD for a while. I'm very experianced with GNU/Linux and can almost install any distro manually, but I'm very unfamiliar with how BSD does it. What am I in for? Is the learning curve steep?
Also, from what I gather OpenBSD almost seems to be anti-customization which I find very weird, I assume for security purposes but still. The server I'm using though is pretty weak - I've plugged in an AMD 2 core to save money and power. Is OpenBSD quite lightweight, and if not how much room do I have to make it more so?
expect shit throughput but small, very well documented, well written and orthogonal OS
Can you elaborate on what an orthogonal OS is? I'm a physics student so it sounds like you're just saying it's at a right angle.
It means it doesnt have /proc and you will be typing the same commands you know and love, but with many added w
OpenBSD is a good option for servers with 2 disks or less. You can use softraid to run the disks in a RAID1 mirror.
I just installed freeBSD in virtualbox and I have to say I liked it. I was surprised that I could install i3-gaps on it. Debian doesn't even have that.
Might consider actually installing it for real in the future.
Has anybody tried out Project Trident?
so vmm supports any linux distro with console boot now? sweet why am I still using debian
literally only using debian to run a proprietary wifi program I need to access once every 6 mos
i want to return to the days of yore where ifconfig still worked and your ethernet devices weren't named stupid things like enp3s0
>Ctrl+F 'ssd trim'
based
I have had success with Alpine booting with vmd. Debian seems like it needs to be installed via qemu before it can be used, due to not including virtio drivers. CentOS may work.
Another limitation is that vmd is single-threaded. A lot of development work has been going into vmd these past few releases, so it should drastically improve in the near future.
Sources
Debian: marc.info