A "security-oriented operating system" that does not provide security fixes for its packages

>A "security-oriented operating system" that does not provide security fixes for its packages

You convinced me to install this meme shit. APOLOGIZE IMMEDIATELY

Attached: 1200px-OpenBSD_Logo_-_Cartoon_Puffy_with_textual_logo_below.svg.png (1200x781, 180K)

Other urls found in this thread:

man.openbsd.org/free.3
openbsd.org/innovations.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Reminder that OpenBSD is lacking the following things:
>A robust filesystem such as ZFS, btrfs, or HAMMER2
>Any kind of journaling FS
>SSD TRIM
>NFSv4
>Support for more than one core on various parts of the OS. The firewall, pf, is confirmed to be one of these parts, although there may be more.
>802.11ac networking
>Nvidia graphics from this decade
>AMD Vega graphics
>Certain Intel graphics, at least judging from comparing the manpage to the wikipedia article
>Broadcom wireless
>Bluetooth
>WINE
>LUKS/dm-crypt
>Linux compatibility layer
>Mounting ext filesystems
>free(1)
>lsblk(8)
>Proper virtualization (vmd/vmm is awful compared to KVM+QEMU or even Virtualbox)
>and probably more

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

oh, and while we're on the topic of security, it's also lacking mandatory access controls or capability-based security. All you get is nigger-tier rwx.

laugh out loud

Ouch

>you dont have to fix what is not broken
WOW

>free(1)
Wait openbsd has free or am I just retarded?
man.openbsd.org/free.3

>free(1)
>free(3)
yes

What's the difference though

One is shit
The other is also shit

One is a tool that reports memory statistics. The other is the free() component expected in a libc to free memory allocated by whatever standard c memory allocator you're using, assuming it doesn't garbage collect for you.

one is a function, one is a shell tool
but openbsd has the shell tool in packages, so who fucking cares

Shitty pasta meme as wrong as ever. A mix of things OpenBSD actually does have and things that aren't problems.

>t. ignoramus

one's a program that displays the amount of free and used memory within the operating system. on a linux machine, you could likely run it from the command line right now. the other is a kernel procedure that a program calls to deallocate a specific section of its memory that it is no longer using.

>the wikipedia article
oof

By this I mean I looked at the article, and saw some Intel integrated graphics types that were listed as supported in OpenBSD.
GNU/Linux doesn't have this problem.

great research there lil guy

I mean the free command, which tells you the status of your memory usage. OpenBSD does not include this, and instead expects you to use vmstat, which is lacking in that it is less clear and does not provide as much relevant information. For example, it does not report total, used, or available.

weren't*

FreeBSD is Superior.

>allocated by whatever standard c memory allocator you're using, assuming it doesn't garbage collect for you.
what is this even supposed to mean? free(3) will only free memory allocated with libc allocation functions (malloc(3) and co.). And all of this has nothing to do with garbage collection which isn't even a thing in C.

it's only good for bastion hosts that need to be so secure even the admins can barely get in

again, see It's not even good at that.

t. brainlets

OpenBSD's pledge(2) and unveil(2) calls provide highly granular sandboxing and access control that surpasses most other OSes' mechanisms in terms of both usability and security.

softupdates are perfectly serviceable
journaling is bad from a security perspective - metadata is a data leak for glowniggers to exploit

But obsd is comfy on tkp laptop

Both are the millionth workaround for Unix retardation.

I can't find this command on FreeBSD either. What OSes does free(1) exist on?

Israel is *really* pissed off this week eh.

Yes, I'm sure that Israel *hates* the operating system that leaves security holes unpatched.

Policy isn't opt in. Pledge and unveil are opt in and thus useless.

OpenBSD does not support HT and does not even patched the latest Zombie vulnerability.

Use FreeBSD, it is the only one true BSD.

>OpenBSD does not support HT
It does, it's just disabled by default

>Pledge and unveil are opt in and thus useless
No. It reduces the attack surface by preventing some exploits against common components (e.g. it prevents things like crongrab).

It doesn't prevent all attacks but it's low-effort on the developer's end and does prevent a lot of nonsense.

So HT does not work on openBSD? Right?

Also, no TRIM.

This ongoing meme-post demostrates that there are shills paid to advocate against OpenBSD's usage.

Open B.S.D
Open Backdoor Security Death

linux trannies are really worried about people switching over once linus got CoC'd huh?

Attached: mechant-mask.jpg (252x291, 29K)

Does any other OS have all these security mechanisms BY DEFAULT?
openbsd.org/innovations.html

If le tranni meme + edited merchant is all your argument, opencuck? Don't bother answering, it might reduce the health of your untrimmed SSD.

>uses irrelevant meme argument
>yes goyem, keep using linux

Attached: pot.png (885x891, 52K)

>Another anti-openbsd thread posted by linux cult.

Attached: Cheetah face! _ Animals - faces _ Pinterest _ Cheetahs, Animal and Cat.jpg (1056x960, 244K)

But I just use the GNU operating system.

GPLover, FreeBSD is superior OS. Get over it.

ITT: seething debian trannies

Why freebsd is superior to openbsd?

FreeBSD is superior to Linux and your memeBSD.

kys lintard

by that logic HT also doesn't work on ChromeOS (Linux) you rart

Okey, I believe you, but can you give example

GNU/Linux doesn't have systat so is a pointless hobby system for children.

it's a glowie psyop
hit them with your car