What does / g think about openbsd?

Works great on my x201, everything worked out of box, power management, wifi works, 3D acceleration, Thinklight, you name it.

Attached: 2019-05-05-112918_1264x764_scrot.png (1264x764, 29K)

Sounds like the FUD that Microsoft shills have been using to explain away their patron's problems for decades. I'd ignore such people, they sound made up.

That's exactly my point to what I made you called sub human and this is wrong

Does OpenBSD nsa bulletproof?

That's known as "security by minority", and you should never rely on it.

Yep, this is what came up in my head when they mentioned that (although I didn't know that was a term, thanks!). I generally trust their expertise for security and networking topics, so I didnt question them further at the time

There weren't any vulns in it from the Shadow Brokers or Vault 7 leaks.

OpenBSD is the only proactively secure OS in existence.

openbsd.org/security.html

TempleOS is more secure

I actively contribute to it.
It's pretty nice.

seL4 is provably secure.
Now if someone could just build an OS around it...

it's unix and written in C, therefor riddled with security bugs and exploit-prone designs

isn't there already some Gende build with it?

Idgaf.

BaSeD.

fpbp

Except it's written and audited by smart people, and not brainlets like you.

Attached: 1548361383307.jpg (293x326, 10K)

The OpenBSD shill is a pitiful man who knows absolutely nothing about technology and will try to hide this fact through any means possible. If you attempt to engage one in a serious discussion about flaws of the OpenBSD environment; for example, the lack of ports auditing, the lack of support for a journaling filesystem, SSD trim, filesystem encryption (all things the other BSDs and Linuxes have had for years; all very basic security functionalities), they will cower away and attempt to mask their technological ignorance behind meta-politics or codes-of-conducts, for the simple fact that these are all their feeble smooth brains can understand. They typically come straight from r*ddit or Jow Forums, sometimes as Terry Davis shills who started browsing Jow Forums during the election, and sometimes as Linux users who failed to install Gentoo or Arch who sought embrace and individualism in an operating system they assumed nobody else used. (this goes back to my first point; never believe for one second that an OpenBSD user on Jow Forums understands or cares in any way about the code running his operating system). OpenBSD is, of course, designed to work out of the box — it ships with Xenocara and has relatively sane install defaults so that any user can spam enter and get a working desktop environment.

I have been lurking these threads for a while now in search of serious discussion, and have not encountered a single OpenBSD user who understands more about the operating system they use than the average Ubuntu or Windows user. Don’t fall for it. There are great use cases for OpenBSD, but don’t think for one second that anyone who posts in these threads knows what they are.

Stupid, constipated fish, poster.

checked, based and redpilled likely japanese user

>Linux devs always striving to have more LoC
>OpenBSD devs actively remove code

99% of its users are contrarians who need to feel like even more special snowflakes by using an alternative to the alternative to the alternative.
If you use OpenBSD on anything other than a server exposed to the internet which needs top tier security, you are worse than retarded. You are actively committed to harming yourself and the others around you.

Attached: __artoria_pendragon_jeanne_d_arc_jeanne_d_arc_and_saber_alter_fate_grand_order_and_etc_drawn_by_nipi (957x1331, 634K)

Very well said.
Now, whether this was a pasta or not, it is now. I'm stealing it.

So what are good use cases for OpenBSD?

Desktop, laptop. Don't listen to that ass burned user, it Just Werx if you choose a Thinkpad or Toughbook or most any desktop.

>what does / g think about openbsd?
Based and BSD pilled.

I think Arch is easier to setup (more documentation packages nonfree tools AUR)

And also distros and even kernels are a social construct. Nobody cares if you write pacman -S or pkg_add. At least not the normal Jow Forums user.

Why I use openBSD
-the logo artwork
-no coc
-i dont like the GPL
-the conservative security focused phylosophy seems based
-I use literally only Firefox and Libre Office on my Laptop.

Mostly systems that need out-of-the box security with no data integrity.

You are absolutely retarded.

>no data integrity
There are tools for this which don't require a filesystem with ten million lines of source code.

Then we're talking about something outside of OpenBSD.

based arguments you got there

openbsd not being pegged in the ass with CoC

>package inside of openbsd is outside of openbsd
It's more about the Unix philosophy of not using some complicated solution when a simpler one will work.

>I use literally only Firefox and Libre Office on my Laptop.
bsdfags in a nutshell.

The whole OS is developed by white males and Japanese males.

Taking on extra software to account for operating system flaws is not the UNIX philosophy. UFS is a joke, and the OpenBSD foundation openly admits this.

>Firefox
We use Iridium --enable-unveil for the most part.

sasuga special snowflake, now you can be very leet

>Taking on extra software to account for operating system flaws is not the UNIX philosophy.
That's just wrong, it completely is. Small tools plus operating system is the way to go.

>UFS is a joke, and the OpenBSD foundation openly admits this.
UFS + softdep works and is stable and tested. Some day maybe they will replace it but until then we'll use it and it Just Werx. Rather than offering a dozen half-baked filesystems OpenBSD offers one stable solution which has been tested for decades.

If you're building a NAS then FreeBSD is the easy choice though, I'll give you that. But for desktop / laptop / server use OpenBSD's UFS is fine.

No one gives a shit about the Unix philosophy. It was always wrong.

Router, mail server, reasonably simple general-purpose server. I use it on desktops and laptops too (because it has strong security and is reasonably usable), but networking appliances are where it really blows other stuff out of the water.

the problem is that the only thing Jow Forums does is flexing their neofetch shit.
For Desktop/Notebook usage the UNIX flavor doesn't matter.

>small tools which you can easily understand and combine to do the job
The Unix philosophy is simply a titration of sensible systems theory. A bunch of small generic programs beats out everything and it's sustainable.

Even Lisp machines followed the Unix philosophy, being made of small functions which can be combined to do what the user wants. It's the core thesis of computing, and the origin of the standard library.

Every language worth a shit gives you a bunch of well tested standard building blocks from which you assemble your program with glue and a little novel logic. Unix is the same.

>what is system d
it matters, system d has more lines of code than the openbsd kernel, userland, and x combined

>Even Lisp machines followed the Unix philosophy, being made of small functions which can be combined to do what the user wants. It's the core thesis of computing, and the origin of the standard library.
This is the antithesis of the Unix philosophy. I see no pipes or small programs that "do only one thing and one thing well" here.
For the love of g-d don't even try to pretend that's the same thing.

Pipes are parenthesis, "do only one thing and do it well" is the standard function library. It's the same thing.

on an autistic Level you got a point there. It is better to leave unneeded code out and audit it more. You could also say that the Linux Kernel is bloated.

But in the end. I used arch and didn't die from System d. I didn't even now what my init System was.

>it's all the same bro
Then what you're describing is not even the "Unix philosophy" anymore. Such a broad definition is plain old modular design, which has existed long before Unix was ever conceived.
But alas, apparently Bell Labs revisionism is so bad that it looks like Unix invented even modular design now.

Just admit it, other than inside emacs the Lisp Machine is dead.

You like Lisp machines? Boot emacs on bare metal. That's the closest thing which has received development effort in the last 20 years. 30 really.

>deliberately changes topic after being proven wrong
>lmao who cares if it was different and possibly better, it's dead!!1
Grow out of the Eunuchs worshipping phase. Trust me, I went through it too.

I don't worship it, just use it until something better comes along.

You spend enough time complaining about Unix that you could have made a bare metal Lisp OS by now.

>just use it until something better comes along.
So do I. You can use an OS and still recognize its flaws, and that, from many points of view, we had better OSes already decades ago.

>You spend enough time complaining about Unix that you could have made a bare metal Lisp OS by now.
I know this is a hyoerbole, but there is no need to, as it already exists: github.com/froggey/Mezzano

I'll just use emacs thanks.

OpenBSD is very good for anything that is public internet facing. Think of Email servers, BBS servers, websites with httpd. Man pages are god.
It can be good on a laptop as well and provides the best out of box experience. I don't think it's very well suited for desktop use though for a few reasons.
The kernel itself is still single threaded and thus read and write operations can not be done at the same time, the lack of TRIM support for SSD's (Even though the S.M.A.R.T firmware in most SSD's can self trim)
Networking stack is still trying to become SMP

Overall OpenBSD can be a good laptop/workstation machine but it will be way slower due to the lack of SMP.

FreeBSD is good for storage servers, database servers, or even desktops due to the FreeBSD linuxlator and SMP support. Not to mention wonderful ZFS support and such.

Overall I run my router, website, and email server on OpenBSD.
My laptop runs FreeBSD and my desktop machine runs Gentoo. I really want to run OpenBSD on my laptop but I currently have a bug with coreboot's AHCI implementation that prevents proper AHCI support in OpenBSD

Attached: 1527035921630.png (628x673, 359K)