Is it good OS for daily use?

hyperthreading? but it does. it comes turned off since it has side channel vulnerabilities but you can turn it on with sysctl hw.smt=1

Hold your horses user. Nothing bad about FFS and I love OpenBSD but I am also an honest lover.

? also dragonflybsd does have these features but you group it with 9front?

Love is rarely rational.

Attached: 1523985811848.jpg (200x193, 8K)

No, FreeBSD is more desktop orientated. Using OpenBSD on a desktop is akin to using CentOS on a desktop.

how are you measuring this? it has a functioning x environment and package system.

...what server orientated OS doesn't in 2018?

what to you is a requirement for desktop usage?

I don't understand this at all. OpenBSD seems to be one of the more desktop friendly BSDs.

OS's that sacrifice higher CPU throughput and discourage customization and use older packages all for the sake of security are I would think quite obviously server orientated OS's. Regardless of what Jow Forums tells you, your desktop does not need to be hardened because the only way that you're going to give it a virus without running an network service (ie, being a server), is by fucking up and installing a virus yourself.

what are some examples of this because the only thing i can think of with what you just wrote is some of mate, conky and newsbeuter. they aren't behind on release because of security reasons either but a lack of maintainer (save for mate - can't remember reason why). discouraging customisation? like what? i can't recall anything like that either. and doesn't your desktop need to be hardened (referring to some of their recent decisions with preemptively disabling hyperthreading) with the nature and danger of a web browser with untrusted javascript? the kernel is also mostly biglocked so does this even have a performance affect to the extent where it becomes a problem? we don't run this operating system because of the reduced risk of attracting a virus but because of how simple and how good the documentation is.

I mean old packages in the way Debian's packages are old, which is why desktop users of Debian use Testing or Unstable.
As for customization, see pic related, from openbsd.org/faq/faq1.html#OtherUnixes
Lastly running malicious JS is again usually a problem of the user. If the user is directly telling their computer to run code, then the computer will run that code, hardened or not. I guess there are instances where it can help to reduce damage, but arguing this makes the OS good for desktop users is arguing that anything with an anti-virus program is good too, and again ignores all the other points about the OS that quite clearly make it suited to servers. Again, desktop BSD's exist, it's called FreeBSD, just like Fedora and Cent exist, and Debian stable and unstable exist.

Attached: file.png (1598x46, 10K)

that doesn't make sense. if you want the same experience you can run current instead of stable. i don't see the point you're trying to make when you link that page either. for the javascript that was a specific example since you brought up security and i mean the side channel attack level since the rest is mostly in the problem domain of your ideally (chromium) privsep'd browser. that is the only major distinguishing difference on the functional security front from debian aside from the jails and different seccomp surface/features. there are no security specific decisions that really undermine the performance as to the best of my knowledge except for the smt, so what else in your example? in contrast freebsd is an unsafe operating system, it has no aslr, no pid randomisation, it has weird defaults that the desktop user you're advocating for will need to disable and the developers themselves don't actually use it as a desktop. the openbsd devs do actually use it as a desktop so wouldn't it make more sense if you look at who develops it to advocate for openbsd more?

You should use proper OS, it is called - FreeBSD.

also i've never had the impulse to use testing/unstable as a debian user on this machine.

Attached: me irl.png (657x351, 16K)

>ships with several of its own WMs
>developed to be a desktop OS
>used as a desktop OS by the devs
>not a desktop OS

Attached: 1456409146659.jpg (87x105, 3K)

what about newsbeuter, user?

it's out of date in current iirc (security vulnerabilities included - maybe patched for obsd specific version though?). use newsboat instead.
>someone should really report this and get it retired

You need garbage collection for your SSD, don't be a fucking retard.

You don't need TRIM if you use bcache
Also bcachefs is theoretically very portable, even to *BSD

thanks
using that shit for years now
gotta say it was pretty comfy

Don't use meme OS.
Use real OS

Font rendering on openBSD is absolutely shit, looks like shit in every DE, Show me a good looking desktop on OpenBSD. Pro tip: You can't.

>using harmful software

Forgot the fact that when u install it nothing will work. You will spend 2 days configuring that buttons for volume+/- , brightnes+/- and 100 other little things you didint even think about. also it doesn't have gui network manager , so you have to write your own scripts and put them into shortcuts or write your own. have fun with it.

*hugs*

You just need to install a nice font

It's worked out of the box for me on everything from my UMPC's touchscreen to my laptop's pen digitizer. Same with brightness and volume keys
>write your own scripts for networking
wiconfig

What did you mean by this?

harmful.cat-v.org/software/

MAybe it worked for you bit for most people it wont. Now about fonts, i relally couldn't make it look good. i dont know what was it. so whats your setup ? which font ? which de? possible to get screenshot of your desktop with browser opened - would really like to see it.

Feel like this list is just OpenBSD propaganda

I've only got it on my UMPC right now and I haven't fixed the fonts and all. Had it on my laptop but I wiped it for Windows 7 when I started uni for max compatibility and haven't gotten around to configuring a dual-boot yet. My normal setup is Window Maker or CWM depending on what I feel like using for a WM with Helvetica as the system font. I get that from msttcorefonts in the ports tree.

thanks, will try it tomorrow again with different config. will see what i get.

it is much less polished than the average GNU system

Dragonfly is better for desktop
OpenBSD is only good for security i.e. servers

this is the average OpenBSD user

Attached: a.png (874x779, 127K)

that's pretty based

Openbsd + riced out dwm + st + surf + mpd + mpc + vim/emacs + troff + zathura/mupdf + mpv + ranger + mednafen + rsync + rtorrent is all you need
literally the perfect setup. Nothing can beat this.

>ranger
bloat
>st
input lag, use github.com/jwilm/alacritty

>ranger
>anything but fucking amazing, literally the most versitile file manager ever created
fuck off

oh and sxiv

Ranger has always been buggy for me. Version 1.7 is near unusable in Debian, and 1.9 has strange issues with the interface not updating after certain commands. And the documentation is very poor. There are options for commands that you'll never know about without reading the python scripts.

I've never had a problem like that with ranger either from debian/arch/gentoo repos or directly from git but I won't discredit it.
and that's what makes it so versitile. it can be advanced as fuck or just a simple mc replacement

>You dont need to worry about security
You obviously dont have an important job, security is vital in any relatively important job. OpenBSD supplies that by default, along with all of the other perks which come when you use it.
Inb4
>security isnt important for an average user
Wrong. Everybody needs security, no excuses, no questions asked. You sound like the kind of person that sets themselfs up to be a target. Nice attempt at giving it a bad name, idiot.

It barely works as a desktop OS.

it is the best os on the planet. hardware support is pretty poor though, make sure your shit is supported. all the haters in this thread are niggercattle who should stick to ubuntu, just look at their complaints "no graphical network manager" come the fuck on

I'm too plebian to even get KDE to work on boot. Or anything besides X.

I'll just stick with OpenPepe Tumbleweed for now.

what did you put in your .xsession

>nobody posted the pasta
Shit thread.
Anyway, it's a toy that's as good as TempleOS for serious usage. Enjoy your single threaded firewall, "just 2 remote vulnerabilities" on default system, shitty package manager that forces you to either use hopelessly outdated binaries or recompile software yourself and no TRIM.
Oh, and keep in mind that init in this piece of trash is an absolute joke, network configuration is a pain in the ass, and it STILL uses ipconfig even though it's been on its way out for years.

>and it STILL uses ipconfig
ifconfig? As opposed to what?

As opposed to the modern replacement, ip. I couldn't stand how primitive it was compared to systemd with it's nice network manager for setting up wifi networks as well.

it's a nice and easy to use OS, and if your daily usage is internet/documents/code and you use free software, it's fine.

I see no reason to drop ifconfig; I like how OpenBSD adapts tools instead of adding new ones. On Linux you have ip and iw now, on OpenBSD they simply extended ifconfig to have wireless support.

Best documentation of any OS period.

I tried switching to openBSD on oldass shitpad after years being basic bitch ubuntufag who only did some command line shit every now and then and found openBSD to be a hell of a lot harder to do things then I thought it'd be. Switched over to freeBSD to git gud. I want to be part of secret theo club one day...

Attached: tfw stupid.jpg (800x450, 41K)

Jow Forums where daily use can mean anything

If you are unwilling to read a man page then all linux or unix will be difficult, with exception to fagosx. Windows is your home, boy

the only reason why I don't use it is because the majority of programs I would need are in the build tree.
I'd like to use it on older hardware, but I can't stand waiting for an hour every time I update.
same reason why I never bothered with gentoo

Plan 9 propaganda really, although Uriel was ok with OpenBSD for the most part and not ok with anything else.

haha holy shit this is trolling right. openbsd is for people who like unix, stay with your unmaintanable buggy mess

So use packages?

Are your SSDs ten years old? No? Then you don't need TRIM.
quora.com/Is-TRIM-support-at-the-OS-level-still-necessary-or-are-more-recent-SSDs-able-to-deal-with-it-automatically

>it STILL uses ipconfig even though it's been on its way out for years
Unlike in Linux land OpenBSD tends to update its tools with modern capabilities rather than keep multiple toolsets with one on life support and the other being perpetually rewritten.
OpenBSD's ifconfig handles all the network configuration on the system, including wireless crypto. Unlike Linux where ifconfig became less useful over time, you had to learn a new tool in iwconfig, and then throw it all out again to learn ip.

>hurr it's different and i don't like it

Just tried this OpenBSD 6.4.

Had to disable tpm security measures in bios and remove the card, just to not have kernel panics while booting.

No modern init system, barbaric services scripts. Likely nobody uses that shit and starts everything by hand on reboot.

No security audit frameworks, isn't this suppose to be a secure OS?

Documentation - next to not existent and often outdated.

Compiling generic opensource tools from downloaded official tarballs fails left and right.

All above does not sound like Unix experience to me boy.

I used to use FreeBSD until the trannies took over. Then I moved to Linux until the trannies took over. I tried to look for other options but I'm a retard who built a PC without intel graphics and only have an Nvidia card. Guess I'll never be able to use anything without a CoC outside of a VM for a few years.

Attached: DrGAdW8XgAEOyAd.jpg_large.jpg (640x640, 39K)

>no modern init system
it's literally just some scripts. you could edit it easily. you could replace the entire thing since unlike systemd it's not massive scope creep? and if services scripts bothers you, why not just use supervisord? >unlike the alternative
>no security audit frameworks
why don't you use one from the ports repo?
>documentation next to non-existent
??? it's all in the manual pages ? if you have a specific issue with a bit of documentation write in to complain about it or complain here and we'll point you as to where you need to go.
>compiling generic opensource tools
the packages are all precompiled not sure why you're doing this if it's an issue for you?

>not a unix experience
how is a set of modular disparate scripts not the unix philosophy? the alternative that you're suggesting is a single server of sorts that gradually brings more and more into its scope under a single monolithic system.

FreeBSD's docs, including the Handbook and FAQ, will help you git gud. I believe in you. Soon, you can use any BSD.
bsdcertification.org/certification/bsda-certification-requirements-document-2015.1
The above PDF also has a nice list of things to learn.

yes.

I use OpenBSD as a day to day system mostly to force my sorry arse to actually learn how to use it than because I know how to use it. I use FVWM and deliberately didn't install a filemanager so I'll get better at using the shell (it's working). Thinking of switching to CWM.

There are idiot rumours that BSD stands for Berkeley Software Distribution, it doesn't, it stands for BaSeD

Attached: palaeontology.jpg (678x960, 115K)

Berkeley Standard Distribution, actually

epic

>Documentation - next to not existent and often outdated.
absolutely epic

The sysctl (2) documentation is crap. While the functions are described, i have no fucking clue what to do with them when they are important to tweak the system itself. At least freebsd have a nice faq and huge ass pdf for *nix babbies. Also good luck debugging the programs for crashing because the default "security" features.

I assume you are a young man with too much free time.

ITT NIGGERS THAT CAN'T EVEN INSTALL UBUNTU TRYING TO SHITTALK OPENBSD

there are a loooooot of armchair bsd people in this thread who probably think they're qualified to have an opinion here because they use linux. shudda fuck up guise

>At least freebsd have a nice faq
openbsd.org/faq/
>Also good luck debugging the programs for crashing because the default "security" features.
Never been an issue for me

>All above does not sound like Unix experience to me boy.
Why not? Who said unix had to "just werk'

no, just use a Linux distro. OpenBSD is just, yet another toy os with simple tools for simple problems.

>input lag, use github.com/jwilm/alacritty
Does OpenBSD even have vulkan drivers?

You've most likely used at least one of the "simple tools" developed by someone who uses that "toy" today.

ok and? those tools were also contributed linux specific code to make them secure for their target.

ok and? That linux specific code is nothing compared to the actual tool.

you make it sound like ssh is some hard to do thing.
in either case, it seems like most BSDfags are just macbook using posers.

>you make it sound like ssh is some hard to do thing.
if ssh is so fucking easy to implement, then why don't you do it?

>it seems like most BSDfags are just macbook using posers.
You're specifically thinking of FreeBSD, there are several other BSDs. OpenBSD devs actually use OpenBSD on their ThinkPads

because openssh just works and dropbear exists as an alt. not only that there are literal tons of ssh(d) implementations in languages like java, c++, even nodejs.

yes, and where do you think openssh came from?

OpenBSD is a meme
>Filesystem
default FS doesn't even support SSD TRIM, and I don't think OpenBSD supports anything modern like ZFS or BTRFS.
>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
>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?
>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 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?

Attached: 1999.jpg (480x640, 111K)

Yes yes! You are the Jow Forums optimize bro.

Attached: 1541222302509.png (900x1440, 1.49M)