OpenBSD 6.5 is now the official Jow Forums OS, time to change the sticky

Fuck BSD.
Bad enough they >> Terry Davis to the sticky.

Attached: 1556995104579.jpg (291x248, 22K)

Maybe make an actually useful OS, fagfag

It's perfectly useful though, unless of course your usecase is muh vidya or you're some kind of graphic design fag in which case you'd be using FagOS
Everyone that uses Linux could be using openBSD and see no difference at all, unless their hardware is non-free

>Everyone that uses Linux could be using openBSD and see no difference at all
Graphics rendering is useful being gaming and graphics design. For example, lots of astronomy software needs useful video drivers in order to render. GPGPU requires working video drivers, too.

not the OS's problem

>unless their hardware is non-free
OpenBSD has even less supported hardware than linux-libre. My atheros card has a bug as old as thumbnails in GNOME and nobody has bothered to fix it
Maybe I'll try it out when Guix/OpenBSD comes out

It's not the OS's problem that Nvidia isn't supported. That's Nvidia's fault. However, it is the OS's problem that recent AMD cards aren't supported. OpenBSD needs the amdgpu driver (not radeon) before it can be considered a usable desktop for many people.

I won't be trying BSD again in this lifetime.
Why constantly shill it when as soon as anybody tries it, they see what utter shit it is?
What do you hope to gain?
Is this some exercise in "epic trolling" that you tell yourself is amusing?
I mean seriously, what the actual God damned fuck?

Why OpenBSD and why now. It's a fine OS, but I find I am more contented on GNU/Linux.

>54MiB
What did he mean by this?

you're just salty because you're too stupid to install it correctly

Fuck off, Theo de Raadt

Yes goy, there's nothing better than Linux... Don't listen to these )))shills(((... stay where you are... post "no drivers" a few more times... yes... don't even try it....

Thank you nvidia, Our Greatest Ally, for keeping them away from greener pastures. A gold coin for everyone... GPL is true freedom...

Not him but openBSD is so fucking easy to install that it's borderline impossible someone fails to

based mods bls stiggy

What makes this so monumentally different from the previous version? Is it finally at the level of usefulness that linux had a decade ago?

Enjoy your buggy OS with nodrivers and screwed up everything.

The real official OS of Jow Forums is Win10 now. Windows 10 will have WSL2 with real Linux so there's no excuse to not use Windows 10 any more.

The Libreboot devs themselves say it can't be done right now, you mongoloid.

It was 30 MB but I installed some daemons.

>3D acceleration works
>wifi works
>ethernet works
>sound works
>drive controllers, everything
Sounds like you dunces tried to install it on unsupported hardware like idiots.

>hit enter like 5 times
>enter root password and create a user at the prompts
>reboot
it's the easiest most pain free OS to install in the world, even ms-dos is more of a pain with its installer

>claims to have to best documentation of _any_ operating system
>it's all just manpages

>manpages (with examples for various usecases especially the ones you're going to use the most)
You have no idea how useful that is until you have to actually use something

Man pages can be formatted as PDFs and printed out, browsed online, and the ones in OpenBSD are well written and generally include plenty of examples if you're a moron so you don't even have to look up common use cases on the web.

OpenBSD is the only system I know of where you could install it and completely learn every facet of the OS even including not just using it but programming for it, without ever having to access an online help forum or other external resource.

Learn to read.

Cool, can I play Skyrim on it?

I switch to void Linux and Jow Forums starts shilling it. Because of that, I switched to OpenBSD, and now I see this shit. Fuck off, OP, don't fucking make me switch to plan 9 as a last resort to feel special.

That's actually the only reason I haven't librebooted my x200 yet. I hope someone eventually finds a fix.

based, what the fuck are they thinking

It's really frustrating. I don't want to lose Libreboot. It's great. But I don't want to switch back to Linux either. OpenBSD is too good.

No

>unsupported hardware
You mean any hardware?

Just Werks on my system...

I'm still kind of new to all this, how hard would it be to setup a dual-boot with OpenBSD and Windows 7?

nobody can boot.
welcome to openbdsm

Very easy if you use separate hard drives for the two OSes. Not so easy if you use a single hard drive.

Just install coreboot with Seabios i guess??

Serious answer: if that's what you want to do, you might as well just run OpenBSD in VirtualBox (on Windows).
You get all the stuff you want from OpenBSD (the command-line environment, maybe some desktop environment running i3 or XFCE) but you can still run Chrome, faster, on Windows. And all your games, etc.

The only reason you would not want to do that is that VirtualBox does not support modern versions of OpenGL, but realistically you won't be using OpenBSD to do heavy 3D stuff anyway...

That being said you can still dual boot, you just have not to screw up the setup (I've never done it).

Also, if you really want to learn OpenBSD and use it for something it's good at, find an old PC and turn it into a router/gateway running OpenBSD.

That's what I do at home. It's pretty comfy, I have an OpenBSD router running my own DHCP server, wireless access point, NTP server, DNS cache, DNS server (for all my machines), etc. And of course the OpenBSD firewall, PF.
There are some downsides: Wi-Fi is limited to 802.11g (and it's actually slower than on other systems), and the file system is old so if the box crashes (power cut) you might have to wait 10 minutes for it to check the disk after it starts (fsck). But it's fun and a good way to learn networking.

freebsd is superior!

Attached: iq by operating system.png (4000x3515, 2.34M)

FreeBSD is not even a full operating system at this point.
It's not really self-hosting; most of its developers use macOS, and it's mostly running on the cloud or in dedicated appliances, and through third-party distributions like FreeNAS, pfSense...
And it's not really a community project anymore; it's on life support, and mostly developed by a few people paid by the FreeBSD Foundation, which in turn is funded by a few medium-sized corporations using FreeBSD in their appliances/products. The "community" left is mostly a few old farts/boomers/Unix greybeards who defend their territory and are resistant to any change. That's not really a sustainable model.

The problem with FreeBSD is that they have positioned themselves as a Linux alternative. But they got completely obliterated by Linux in the past few years. The few advantages they have, stuff they got from Solaris (like ZFS and DTrace) and jails now have credible alternatives in Linux. Maybe not as good, but good enough. And Linux is dominating on every other aspect, including performance.

Comparatively, OpenBSD is definitely getting obliterated by Linux in performance, but OpenBSD has an actual community of developers, and it's a fully self-hosted operating system (in fact, OpenBSD developers are notorious for using OpenBSD for every single thing: laptop, routers, servers, etc.) It's slow but it works. The installer works, if you plug in a USB keyboard it's going to work. I'm pretty sure no FreeBSD developer has done that with their system in years...

Then fix it faggot

Attached: theo.jpg (196x268, 15K)

Not after 6.2

What's this? A fish? I want some devil in my BSD.

And as a proof of what I'm saying, just watch where Solaris people are migrating (now that Oracle basically killed Solaris). You'd think they'd got to FreeBSD for ZFS and DTrace (although arguably DTrace is a minor thing, all things considered).
But they're not, they're migrating to Linux, including die-hard Solaris engineers like Brendan Gregg (the guy who literally wrote the book on Solaris performance).

FreeBSD will be yet another casualty of Linux, along with Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Irix, Cray, Windows Mobile, etc.

OpenBSD will continue to exist because it's an actual alternative to Linux, offering some actual value (it's much slower, but has a significantly nicer userland). NetBSD exists in an alternative reality where time does not matter, and will exist as long as people want to run code on their VAX or Dreamcast. But FreeBSD will eventually vanish.

Cuck OS for virgins.

Attached: openbsd23_cover.gif (579x579, 56K)

>they have positioned themselves as a Linux alternative
In what universe? Did you see it in a dream?
>now have credible alternatives in Linux. Maybe not as good, but good enough.
ZFS is a slow clusterf*ck on Linux and it will never be properly integrated due to the nature and limitations of the Linux kernel, and BTRFS is almost forgotten despite SUSE's corporate attempts, although it never was that interesting, whereas ZFS implementation in BSD is quite objectively brilliant.
So, nope pal, not true. These are not credible, like, at all. Attacks of a clueless Linux user.
>Linux is dominating on every other aspect, including performance.
perhaps out-of-the-box, but there's no "out-of-the-box" for FreeBSD. I doubt that a Linux system can outperform an intelligently configured BSD one.

why is full encryption even needed ? why not just have an unencrypted GRUB partition then encrypt the rest ?

kek

>And as a proof of what I'm saying, just watch where Solaris people are migrating (now that Oracle basically killed Solaris).
They're migrating where big money currently is.
>FreeBSD will be yet another casualty of Linux
Yeah, you wish.

>developed by a few people paid by the FreeBSD Foundation, which in turn is funded by a few medium-sized corporations using FreeBSD in their appliances/products.
Yeah, Linux is totally not this.

>old farts/boomers/Unix greybeards who defend their territory and are resistant to any change
muh change
Did you notice it's not an iOS thread, Rakesh?

>In what universe? Did you see it in a dream?
It's always been the case. FreeBSD marketing has always been about being high-performance, on Intel machines.

>I doubt that a Linux system can outperform an intelligently configured BSD one.
You're completely delusional then.
There is a reason why 500 out of the top 500 supercomputers run Linux, why almost all ISPs run Linux, why high-frequency traders run Linux...
How do you explain that people like Brendan Gregg migrated to Linux, not FreeBSD? Despite FreeBSD having DTrace and ZFS.

As for ZFS, well, XFS (which you conveniently forgot to mention) seems to be good enough for NASA, the CERN, etc. while FreeBSD fanboys brag about using ZFS on their 4 TB FreeNAS rig.
But, while you mention it, FreeBSD is so crappy a development community that they are now tracking ZFS on Linux. That's right, even though Linux will never ever include ZFS in the kernel for licensing reasons, they still have a development community large enough that they can find a group of developers able to move faster than FreeBSD and illumos put together. Embarrassing.

It's time to face the truth: FreeBSD is on life support, it's a cold body upon which a few mediocre appliance makers are feasting.

Jow Forums users confirmed for retards

>Yeah, Linux is totally not this.
Just the Linux Foundation has 150 employees (versus a handful for FreeBSD, including useless diversity managers and crap like that). And Linux development is done and funded by IBM, Red Hat, Samsung, AMD, Intel, Google, etc.

Meanwhile FreeBSD is a playground for pfSense, FreeNAS and Netflix. Maybe a bunch of corporations like Sony and Apple who uses parts of the C library and TCP/IP stack.

Unix was a mistake, claiming your OS is the most unix-like is like claiming your car is the most Model T-like.

>Did you notice it's not an iOS thread, Rakesh?
FreeBSD passwords are still hashed using MD5 because the old fart who wrote that code 20 years ago does not want to let go.
And the entire thing is like that...

>hugs

>FreeBSD passwords are still hashed using MD5
Sure thing buddy this is from the default login.conf @ my FreeBSD 12.0 boxen
>default:\
> :passwd_format=sha512:\

Also from man 3 crypt
>Currently supported algorithms are:
>1. MD5
>2. Blowfish
>3. NT-Hash
>4. (unused)
>5. SHA-256
>6. SHA-512

A FreeBSD user, a faggot and a retard walk into a bar.
He orders a onions latte.

Does OpenBSD have a journaling file system yet? It's only been, like, 25 years since they've become the norm in the real world.

Lol no.
It still fscks for 10 minutes when rebooting after a failure.

openbsd.org/innovations.html

>does linux/windows/macos have all these security mechanisms by default yet? It's only been, like 25 years since they've become the norm in the real world

>Does OpenBSD have a journaling file system yet?
no. They have softdepencies thou. Which is superior and less bloated than journaling

>has always been about being high-performance, on Intel machines.
It doesn't even remotely mean they ever wanted to be "the Linux alternative". Quit pulling words out of your ass.
>There is a reason why 500 out of the top 500 supercomputers run Linux, why almost all ISPs run Linux, why high-frequency traders run Linux...
Yep, it's called "being a cluster of big enterprise corporations". Do you think they use your nice community-based distro? Or a division of 100 paid engineers and an enterprise solution?
>a group of developers able to move faster
To move where?
>it's a cold body upon which a few mediocre appliance makers are feasting.
It's a group of dedicated old school academicians who don't give a heck about you or your supposedly new amazing ideas of how OS development should be organized. They've seen generations of people like you who said they're old-fashioned and are "dying".

> whataboutism
Well, yeah, security-wise Linux is on par with OpenBSD. The only reason there are fewer OpenBSD CVEs is because no one uses it, so no one cares enough to look for them.

>citation required

>HP EliteBook x360 1030 G2

FreeBSD:
>Works, even without CSM
OpenBSD:
>Doesn't boot after install, even with CSM enabled
OpenBSD developers truly think Lenovo owns a monopoly on laptops with ThinkPads. My EliteBook is cheaper than a ThinkPad.

Some random guy found dozens of bugs just by, well, looking for them: youtu.be/rRg2vuwF1hY , something hundreds of people are doing for the Linux kernel non-stop.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-05-07 34C3 - Are all BSDs created equally - YouTube.png (613x620, 203K)

>They have softdepencies thou. Which is superior and less bloated than journaling
Brainlet.
Not only it's not superior (no one believes that), it's not enabled by default in OpenBSD due to being broken.

>it's not enabled by default in OpenBSD due to being broken.
Just add it to fstab faggot and it is not enabled by default is because OpenBSD devs are autistic fucks not because it is broken

Official advice from the FreeBSD wiki:
>Don't use certain system calls that are fast on Linux because they're slow as fuck on FreeBSD

Attached: ohnonononononon.png (1619x529, 86K)

It's not enabled by default because they literally have no one working on the file system (the few ones left when they did the Bitrig fork), so no one has ever fixed the remaining bugs in softdep.

I know we're doing a bit of banter and trolling but seriously, check the mailing list.
The OpenBSD developers officially advise against softdep.
Just this year:
>softdep needs a maintainer, and it isn't me.
This is Theo saying that, in 2019.
marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=151534132711005&w=2

Anyone who's been following openbsd-tech and openbsd-misc knows that softdep is basically unreliable.

My bad it's from 2018, but the point remains.
This is a post from Theo telling someone how they would debug and fix softdep, if they were so inclined.

The truth is that softdep is complicated enough that even on FreeBSD it barely works (and that's where it originated from, by the guy who wrote the FFS in the first place...)

>t's not enabled by default because they literally have no one working on the file system (the few ones left when they did the Bitrig fork), so no one has ever fixed the remaining bugs in softdep.
If it's broken it would not be enabled by default. Like for example TMPFS which you need to recompile the kernel to enable that. And reason for that? Nobody is fucking working with it so it's "broken". Softdeps don't have the same issue thus it's not broken and enabled by default arbeit not in the fstab because devs are autistic fucks

Kek, I'm pretty sure Theo knows about this crap better than you, so if he says it's unreliable I'm more inclined to believe him than some autist on Jow Forums

And it's certainly not superior or less bloated than journaling. It's actually way more complicated. Which is why NetBSD replaced them with journaling (WAPBL), and indeed why the guy who wrote all that stuff in the first place also added journaling to that, later, in FreeBSD.

>Kek, I'm pretty sure Theo knows about this crap better than you, so if he says it's unreliable I'm more inclined to believe him than some autist on Jow Forums
So show me where Theo is telling that softdeps are broken and should not be used. I know in the past he said that somebody should check it or we will remove it and guess what somebody did check it thus not broken. He did the exactly same thing to tmpfs and guess what? Nobody fucking checked it thus its broken and not enabled by default.

>And it's certainly not superior or less bloated than journaling. It's actually way more complicated.
Literally the resons why OpenBSD chose softdeps over journaling was because journaling caused too much complexity and lines of code in the base. You can argue whatever you want but that was the reason why they chose softdeps over journaling

> the resons why OpenBSD chose softdeps over journaling was because journaling caused too much complexity and lines of code in the base
Because as we all know MS-DOS is the best OS out there since it has fewer lines of code than the rest.

I just wish they had TCP/IP stack so I could shitpost from my DR-DOS box all day long

Anywhere I can get the image without the letters?

commission the artist?

useless OS for useless nocoder people
makes sense t b h

Fair enough but Ilja van Sprundel describes OpenBSD's willingness to delete masses of crappy code as a strong contributor to it being more secure than the other BSDs (along with its general design/philosophy).
>So show me where Theo is telling that softdeps are broken and should not be used.
marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=143769903423017&w=2
I'm a huge OpenBSD fanboy and I'll tell you that filesystems are its biggest weakness (far more than say kernel locks which are slowly but surely being eliminated; nobody's working on filesystems). I'm just holding out hope for a HAMMER2 port someday, or at least WAPBL. But the blocker for WAPBL is bufcache stuff, and the only one working on that is beck@, slowly.

It’s funny how the shills just disappear when you point out their blatant lies.

>I'll tell you that filesystems are its biggest weakness
That sure is true and I too would like to see HAMMER2 or ZFS(not coming lol) support in the kernel. The subject was is softdeps in UFS broken or not. They had problems with that back in 2015 and 2018 but thats it now it's 2019 and work has been done and it's not broken. Thus it's part of the default kernel if it would be broken it would a) not compiled in the default kernel b) removed because that is how OpenBSD autists work

>work has been done
What work, exactly? Got a commit to point to? Because I'm pretty sure you're talking out of your ass, and Theo's opinion of softupdates is the same as it was back then.

Hello mr.glowie in the darkie

>Theo's opinion of softupdates
Oh pray and tell what Theos opinions are about softupdates a) in general b) OpenBSD implementation of it to FFS?

*crickets*