Slashdot Mirror
OpenBSD 2.8 Released
I just logged into the OpenBSD ftp server and noticed that OpenBSD 2.8 is up and ready for download. From the Press Release, 2.8 contains improved hardware support for newer Apple Hardware (iMac, G3, G4, G4 Cube), security fixes, AES support, AES/Rindjael encrypted swap, OpenSSH 2.3.0, RSA libraries in base install, and many more ports in the ports tree. According to the project, this release commemorates 5 years of OpenBSD, on October 18, 2000. This is OpenBSD's 9th release. Happy Belated Birthday OpenBSD!
I've bought at least one cd per release since 2.4 and that gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.
:)
I've had the 2.8 CD on preorder since the release date was announced. Now, that's warm fuzzies.
The most important thing you can do to secure an OS isn't auditing, it's intelligent design. Windows NT has been pretty heavily audited internally by Microsoft, and it's still a block of Swiss cheese due to its design.
Auditing is a good step, but no amount of auditing can overcome brain-damaged design.
Take a look at man tar (for a non-GNU version of tar) and info tar respectively. Newbies complain that man pages are hard to understand, being primarily references rather than teaching tools. I've read man pages that described in detail every option available, but neglected to say what the program was for! Very few (Linux) man pages explain how the program fits into the grand scheme of things or include a tutorial. Most don't even include examples. Furthermore, there's no toplevel man page or any man page equivalent to, say, the Shell Utilities info page, which are very useful for learning about how to use the system rather than an individual program (which you may not even know exists or is appropriate for the task at hand).
Now, mostly this can be fixed by writing more man pages and adding explanation and tutorial matter but if you're going to do that, you start wanting more structure and navigation than man provides and thus info was born. So, I disagree that man is superior to info. Info solves real problems with man.
The problem is that info hasn't been widely adopted and most people just end up using man (at least I did -- I don't even think to check info most of the time). When that happens, stubbornly refusing to write proper man pages and saying "use info, it's much better!" does no good.
(Plus, the standard info viewer sucks entirely too much, but at least there's pinfo.)
I suspect that whether it's info or man isn't the key point though. If you want really good documentation with examples, a tutorial, descriptions of concepts and common work procedures, links (navigatable or "see also") to related programs and so forth, then you're talking about a major effort in writing the documentation and that, I think, is the main reason such documentation doesn't exist in info or man for most programs.
--
Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
I just want to know: If the BSD license doesn't qualify as free software, THEN WHAT THE HELL IS FREE SOFTWARE? Aside from Public Domain, BSD is probably the most liberal license out there, much freer than GPL in the true sense of the word? I'm not terribly familiar with the FSF, so I would appreciate it if you would clarify.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I buy a fair number of CD releases, and also occasionally purchase t-shirts from OSS organizations. I have no problem with forking over cash for the CDs, even if they are coasters after a few months. These folks must be making a better return on their CD sales than on things like t-shirts, since the cost of making CDs is chicken-feed. Buying the CD, I suspect, it a much more direct way of supporting folks like OpenBSD, Debian, etc.
:)
Besides, I'm a bit of a completionist, so I like collecting the pre-fab CDs
Mind you, if you are a student or somesuch, I can see the value in getting the freebee.
Actually, I don't think it has anything to do with OpenBSD vs. ThingsFallingFromSky. Ever notice that the more technical the original article, the few people that post responses?
Things that make you say "hmmmm..."
Oh, man, why did I spent my last moderator point yesterday? This deserves to be moderated all the way up to 5! :-)
(8-DCS)
BSD license you are allowing others to make their own moral decision about what they will do with your source, but with the GPL you are forcing
them to uphold your moral views.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's the heart of the matter. By definition, when you force some one to uphold YOUR moral views, then you are restricting freedom. The BSD license gives you freedom, while the GPL license takes away some of that freedom in order to provide something Good(TM). The freest society possible is anarchy. Democracy, however, trades some of that freedom in order to provide the Good thing of keeping people from killing each other. My point is that neither license has a clear advantage, but that each is a personal choice. If you feel that people have every right to use your code without releasing their own, then by all means use the BSD license. If you feel that the overall-good (which is usually CONTRARY to freedom) is best served by other people OSSing their code, then go ahead and use the GPL. Neither person is wrong, they just have different views.
PS> I'm pretty sure, that if you feel that slavery is right, you have every right to sell yourself into it.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I've been running 2.7 since the day it was released, and it's been nothing short of amazing. I wonder if I should install it on a G4 Cube, to tide me over until OS X comes out? ;-)
Even with the RSA patent expiration, I still think OpenBSD is one of the best OS's around. It's just tight code, with quality man pages, and a great user base.
Free music from Jack Merlot.
from the three-years-without-a-hole dept
You have my pity.
--Shoeboy
... is as always to BUY THE CD (one or more, and possible additions to your wardrobe) at http://www.openbsd.org/
Regardless if you install over ftp are updating an earlier installation from CVS or just don't bother to upgrade.
BUY THE CD to support on of the worlds most secure operating systems.
Remember the wise words of RMS:
Free software has not to be free as in free beer.
I've bought at least one cd per release since 2.4 and that gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.
The people in the OpenBSD team are doing the most important thing to secure an OS: Auditing. They need support in time and hardware to be able to debug and audit new code. Time is money.
If you work on a company that needs a driver or a port of a package to a secure OS, then don't hesitate to pay for development of free software.
Check out http://www.openbsd.org/ to find out how to support the project.
"The number of posts on Usenet"??? I'd say that your chain of reasoning has a fatal flaw right from the start. Very little technical BSD discussion is conducted via Usenet.
Frankly, OpenBSD gets discussed more often on Usenet due to emotional, not technical reasons. That's not to say that the issues discussed aren't technical, just that things like security and encryption tend to elicit vocal opinions.
Of course, you're probably the same FUD-meister who shows up in any BSD discussion that appears on the Slashdot front page. Or perhaps there are several of you who make posting the same drivel some sort of hobby. In any case, your anonymous status suits your overall lack of credibility. Not sure why I bother...
If you track the OpenPackages lists a bit more closely, you'll observe that all sides are indeed co-operating.
There are sufficiently difficult architectural questions to be answered (depend on perl or not? netbsd doesnt have it in-tree, openbsd does), that it's not going to be a particularly smooth road.
I know it sucks when another OS (besides Linux) is mentioned on Slashdot, but all of us Linux fans can deal with it. So please keep your anti-BSD propaganda to yourself..!
Not really. The ports are a major security concern. They do not go through nearly as much (in some cases none) security auditing simply because there is too much source code to audit all the ports.
If you want lots of ports, use FreeBSD. You should try to stick with only the base install + a few other badly needed ports if you want OpenBSD to remain effective and secure.
Remeber, they only heavily audit the base install. Anything you install besides that is just like installing any other OS. You're taking the security out of it.
Sorry, but this is flat out wrong. The old BSD license with the advertising clause did not qualify as free software, because it required you to mention all the contributors to your software in any advertising you did. Image if all the software in RedHat were covered by such a clause - then redhat would have to purchase a full page any time they wanted to advertise, just for all the credits!
The new BSD license is Free Software in the FSF sense; You can see an FSF classification of software, under which the BSD license is classified as Non-Copylefted Free Software. Also see A comprehensive list of software licenses and how they are classified
Like many others here that run OpenBSD, I've got a collection of CDs from previous releases, and really don't need another CD, since I can just snarf the updates.
Rather than get Yet Another T-Shirt, I suggest that people wanting to make a donation do it via PayPal. The OpenBSD user on PayPal is: obsdpaypal@openbsd.org. This is by far the easiest way to send them money, and it all goes to the project.
If you're a corporation that uses OpenBSD, I suggest that they make a nice donation - I've usually suggested $1000 as a suitable amount.
-Erik
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
It doesn't work like that, even supposing your figures are correct. The thing BSD needs to "survive" (i.e. continue being updated) is not a sufficiently big user community; it's a sufficiently big developer community, measured by able-programmer-hours. Since Theo and a few others are highly competent and heavily dedicated, the BSDs have as active a developer community as they need.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
Unfortunately, I find it's ports selection somewhat lacking
Feedback as to what is lacking is always appreciated...
Remember that OpenBSD provides enhancements to the other BSD's ports systems in the form of FLAVORS (which allow multiple options per port, for example in the case of PHP, you can select php-mysql-imap), and FAKE, which installs the port into a separate directory for packaging, instead of directly in the filesystem.
Right now, I'm tinkering away at a curses (visual) interface to the whole tree, that will allow advanced searching and browsing, instead of just through the command-line interface.
If it's just volume of packages that you find is bad, then please feel free to read bsd.port.mk and help the team out! Simply port your favourite application up and post it to ports@openbsd.org
>Remember the wise words of RMS:
Free software has not to be free as in free beer.
Ah, but OpenBSD, like all BSD's, is *not* free software. The licensing is (surprise, surprise) BSD-style, which qualifies as open source, but not as free software in the notion defined by RMS / GNU / FSF.
Stallmanism aside, I greatly respect OpenBSD as a project and I agree wholeheartedly that it should be supported.
I think I'll buy a T-shirt rather than a CD, though...
--Lenny
I just have a few questions about xMach, it sounds like an interesting project.
1) Could you explain its benifets as compared to other Linux distros?
2) Does it use 2.4, or 2.2?
Seriously though, here are the real questions:
1) How do you justify using Mach as opposed to something like L4? In other words, what do you have to say about xMach that refutes the claims that Mach is slow? (Not, microkernels, Mach specifically.)
2) What versions of the BSD's are you working off of?
3) What are you doing other than merging Mach and 4.4BSD to make the system as fast as you say?
4) What benifets does Mach provide as opposed to traditional BSD's?
5) What does xMach have that something like Darwin doesn't?
I'm ecstatic to see another OS, especially one designed to be light and fast, on the scene, I just want to know some of the details. Thanks in advance.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...