Slashdot Mirror
OpenBSD 3.4 Released
tedu writes "We just couldn't wait another 2 days, so now you can enjoy OpenBSD 3.4 a little early and protect yourself from ghosts and goblins. More details at the OpenBSD website and official announcement. Remember to please use a mirror."
Since when does Slashdot care about overloading webservers?
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
...perfect code is irrelevant to security! Didn't you hear me?!
-Bill
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
Remove unlicensed MATH_EMULATE code (written by some guy named Torvalds) from the kernel, leaving only the GNU emulation code for the moment.
Gotta love that.
And you think the discussion on the OpenBSD side was less biased? Well, I'll just show you some of the comments from misc@openbsd.org about the article:
:-) It shows the real attitude of most OpenBSD fanboys. Later, in the newsgroup de.alt.sysadmin.recovery, Felix summarized what kind of emails he got from the different projects. Some of the Linux people found it interesting, FreeBSD seems to have been quite friendly too (a few asked about benchmarking 4.8), the NetBSD people immediately explained why the mmap benchmark measured a worst case situation in NetBSD, and immediately started improving NetBSD performance-wise. But about OpenBSD he wrote that he only got only two emails that were not insulting. Some people even explained to him that the 1024 cylinder limit he mentioned in the article doesn't exist (it does! I know one person that tried to fix it, but his patches were not taken because he used intel syntax instead of AT&T syntax in some assembler files), and some people said that OpenBSD doesn't crash as he described. So far, the crash could be reproduced and is in the OpenBSD bugtracking system.
"Because as Lars pointed out before, benchmarks are seldom little more than a great way to use numbers to prove your point. Especially coming from this overtly pro-linux, anti-openbsd in the flesh little devil Felix. The benchmarks he provides serve little more than to feed his
pro-linux ego and no real interest in improving OpenBSD, and neither do your (collectively) rantings as to this being proof that OpenBSD is broken. [...] The intuitive way to meet this attitude is to benchmark now the security advantages of OpenBSD where it outperforms Linux."
"Leitner is a linux bigot, he's very anti-openbsd (obvious to anyone who's ever read his rantings), the tests shows OpenBSD in a bad light, draw your own conclusions."
"I have better things to do than testing networking performance of operating systems. I'm very busy already. I've chosen OpenBSD as my server OS, because security is my main concern. I like it a lot. So far, nothing I've read has convinced me to install something else. I took time however to discredit (rightfully I think) this guy's test, because it struck me as being very unjust."
"Theo could easily rewrite OpenBSD to thrash these other OSes, real things like multiprocessor support are a real drag for them, so OpenBSD could be heaps faster. But who cares how many binds/second can be done, this isn't real "work", so what does it prove?"
I especially like the last one.
A monkey is doing the real work for me.
It's the DAEMONS you have to worry about... (it had to be said, right? RIGHT???)