/baot/ - *BSD And Other Things

Convince me to switch from Devuan to OpenBSD. All the software I use daily is available on OpenBSD or reported to compile and run. But there's a severe lack of drivers and the file system runs like shit on SSDs. So what now, BSDfag?

Since OpenBSD fan boys are sleeping I will answer for them:
>It has great manpages!

I don't think either of those will run a modern web browser.

where did you hear that? sndio on obsd is the best

The best what?
Is audio on OpenBSD still choppy when you scroll a fucking webpage due to having an ancient kernel with a crappy scheduler?

>sivers.org/openbsd
Let's review that article:
>It’s uncompromising. It’s not a people-pleaser or vendor-pleaser. Linux is in everything from Android phones to massive supercomputers, so has to include features for all of them. The OpenBSD developers say no to most things

And that's a good thing! Wait, no, it's not.

>Instead of trying to make it do more, they keep it focused on doing what it does with more security and reliability.

For example, the reliability of being the only open source OS without a journaling file system.

>They review and remove code as often as they add. If something is unused, unmaintained, or unnecessary, they’ll axe it. If it’s unwieldy, they’ll make a small simple replacement. For examples, see doas, OpenSMTPD, httpd, and LibreSSL.

And that's a good thing! Oh, wait, no, it's not. Their SSL implementation does not support TLS 1.3 (the most recent and secure standard), their HTTP implementation does not support HTTP2, their SMTP implementation is missing features that everyone has been taking for granted for about 20 years. They have their own alternative to certbot, which does not support wildcard certificates (remember, this is the Security OS (tm)).

>Each new release seems to be getting leaner by removing old cruft. No other operating system does that.

Yes, I wonder why other operating systems don't use that fucking retarded strategy.

>The installers are amazing. The initial installation takes like five minutes. Hit [Enter] to the defaults, make your username and password, and it’s ready to go. Then the software installer is ideal, too. Just pkg_info to search for something and pkg_add to install it in seconds. (Which also installs all of its documentation, too.)

Have those niggers ever used Linux? To have full disk encryption in OpenBSD you need to drop into a console prior to using their "oh so super simple installer" and issue fdisk and disklabel commands (remember, this is the Security OS(tm)

(continued)

Regarding the "5-minute installer" and the packaging system... That's pretty much every Linux distribution for the past 15 years.

The packaging system of OpenBSD, written in Perl, is extraordinarily slow (the only thing slower is Brew, the horrible shit written in Ruby used on macOS). It's quicker to do a full system upgrade on Ubuntu than updating a few big packages on OpenBSD.

>And because they don’t stay cutting-edge, keeping a cautious pace, it keeps working and doesn’t break.

Yes, just like MS-DOS.

>The whole system is carefully planned and consistent, instead of a hodge-podge of bits and pieces.

That's bollocks. The D in BSD stands for Distribution, because it's a mix of stuff coming from different development groups. Don't tell me that X is consistent with anything else. They use Mesa for graphics, Chromium as the browser, etc.

You will see the same rhetoric from similar OpenBSD fanboys. It's always feel good stories about intangible stuff like "it's better designed' or other similar bollocks. Ask them about actual support for anything or performance benchmarks and they will revert to their modal argument of better manpages.

The sad reality is that OpenBSD is not even good at what it was supposed to do...

It's terrible as a firewall due to poor performance. Their kernel does not scale beyond about 3 or 4 Gbps due to being giant-locked, which is fine for a home network but clearly does not work for an ISP or even a large corporation or university.

Meanwhile, Linux or even FreeBSD (which is also a POS for different reasons) scale to beyond 100 Gbps.

This is not trolling, it's a warning.

And if you don't believe me, just go on their very own mailing lists to see what people are talking about.

marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc

I am seriously considering installing FreeBSD on my next desktop, convince me why I shouldn't.
>no hugs

First of all sndio can be installed both on FreeBSD and Linux distros, second sndio is a sound server like PulseAudio, it doesn't add that much to sound quality other than mixing and sound routing capabilities.i escaped Linux because of fucked sound system. OSSv4 does everything so we'll you don't even need to run sound server on top of it.

No software on BSD OSes at all. There is not even a fucking gparted on it. Sure you can do all of that in terminal, it just gives you overall picture of software available to BSD compared to Linux. Next thing that turned me off FreeBSD was that bhyve(their type1 hypervisor like KVM) doesn't support GPU PCI passthrough.

FreeBSD has a WineHQ port and can also run Linux software, this will probably cover me.

is freebsd the most supported/standard BSD?

no, freebsd is always been ahead of openbsd in terms of audio

Yes. I don't know why openbsd is shilled so much on this board. It's outdated garbo memed by it's users as "muh most secure OS".

yeah, after browsing a bit by myself I came to the same conclusion.
It's shilled because it goes ahead in autism

Well, it's a really good OS if all you care about is man pages.

Yes but it's also pointless.
FreeBSD developers are basically in a death spiral of chasing after Linux features, with fewer resources and developers.

You might as well use the system they're trying to catch up with directly.

well, but freebsd is an OS.
What is the /linux/ OS?
there's a shit ton of options, I'm on debian but I would prefer something less tweaked.
Red Hat and CentOS are supposedly the most used OS in the industry, Ubuntu looks good too, Arch is probably the best one since it just uses the upstream packages

>There is not even a fucking GNU program.
Well, of course, retard.

>2019
>his router can't handle mixed-mode Wi-Fi
Also
>implying OpenBSD's limited to 802.11g

Ayy boat is back

Dabbled with OpenBSD some more today and couldn't figure out why intel is so bad on my thinkpad so I went back to FreeBSD again. Maybe one day...

Not only is OpenBSD limited to 802.11g, its implementation is so basic that it does not support the full speed
Meaning your wifi is literally ten times slower than Linux or Windows

>I'll back up my lie by reiterating it
no

Do the test yourself and you will see. You will probably get about 20 Mbps of your 11g card.

Same story (but different reason) with 10G ethernet cards, where you will be lucky to even get 4.

Literally do the test yourself or check openbsd-misc for people reporting similar benchmarks

I feel no need to test a supposed issue just because some guy who has already lied on the topic (and continues to with every post) told me to

I dont get it.
If you are running OpenBSD on your laptop it takes less than a minute to verify. Just transfer a file and see for yourself.

>I don't get why a guy I've lied to repeatedly won't listen to me this time

Attached: file.png (320x214, 155K)

What means more advance? What innovations bring to the table?

>FreeBSD
*hugs*

Say something nice about the hammer filesystem

Attached: small_logo.png (150x167, 11K)

>marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc
>warning
are you retarded hahahaha

>muh gparted doesn't work
called disklabel/fdisk retard, imagine crying salty tears over not having some pretty gui for your shit.