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."
"Remember to please use a mirror."
Since when does Slashdot care about overloading webservers?
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Server is working just fine.
Yet Socrates himself is particularly missed.
A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed.
It appears I was wrong! From Netcraft:
OS: Solaris Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) PHP/4.3.1 mod_perl/1.27
When anger rises, think of the consequences.
Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
...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.
Nothing strange about that.
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#wwwsolaris
Read more about it here.
No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
How can anyone trust an operating system like OpenBSD when its insecure, come on it still has a root account, You obvoously haven't used Cryptech Radicacally Advanced PowerBSD. This operating system uses the "swallow the key" principle. Once installed, you are pernemently in a sandbox, with NO WAY to get root access becasue THERE IS NONE, For extra security the Installation CDROM has a built in Self destruct mechanism. Once It installs it scans a special diode embedded into the disk and destroys the CDROM. No one has managed to hack a Cryptech RAP BSD box, and I have ran one connected to the Internet on a high volume site (10,000,000 hits a month) which publishes controversail material. Noone out of the THOUSANDS of kiddies have manged to get in so far, and good riddance.
And make sure you listen to the release song too. It's great :-)
No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
Note: this is purely an academic question, it is not my intention to critisize anyone, but just to learn why these things happen, not being a very experienced programmer myself.
Looks like the announcement has been delayed a little as I've had the OpenBSD3.4 CDs for over a week now, ordered from the OpenBSD online store!
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.
Unlike 3.3, which made it months before a single security-related patch was issued, 3.4 LAUNCHES with 3 such patches.
That said, it's such a huge release in terms of changes made (x86 Write or eXecute memory pages, for one) that it's more than worth the upgrade.
As with most such fundamental updates to OBSD, though, I expect this release to be significantly patchier than the last couple.
--Ryv
As I was lucky enough to run into this on a relatively new install I could just do a complete reinstall, but not reading the upgrade instructions can get you in a lot of trouble this time... :)
karma capped
You're wrong. TCP/IP was developed by Berkely and later included in AT&T Unix. Microsoft's TCP/IP is derived from the Berkely (BSD) version.
Does anyone who runs a mirror care to describe the traffic hit that comes with the rush to download 3.4? I remember seeing the stats for the FreeBSD Walnut Creek server handling tons of traffic whenever the next version of something it was serving was released. Generally it was RedHat, ironically.
While I order CDs to support the project, I run snapshots for many things, and being close to a mirror (OC-3 linking our sites), it takes minutes to install via ftp.
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.
And of course you are completely unbiased. I note you did not give a sampling of the many posts that acknowledge OpenBSD is never going to be the best performing OS out there. And it is pretty obvious the developers trade off performance for security (in both their effort and their designs). Are Linux and FreeBSD better performers? Do they scale better than OpenBSD? Yes. Of course they do. Is it a big deal? Well, that depends on what you want to do doesn't it?
it will be called the "Tombstone".
No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
was more like
"Given the ferocity with which the OpenBSD nazis fix things like this in their code wouldn't this sort of thing, in the kernel, be one of the first things they did?"
Indeed, I thought this was done quite a while ago...
It's the DAEMONS you have to worry about... (it had to be said, right? RIGHT???)
TCP/IP was developped for 4.3 BSD NET/2 release funded by a governmental DARPA grant.
All other OSes borrowed from it, and Microsoft didn't steal it, since Microsoft pays taxes too.
From a University of Texas CS instructor's web site:
The Transmission Control Protocol was first formally specified in December of 1974 by Vint Cerf, Yogen Dalal and Carl Sunshine.
The link can be found here:
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/think/Early_D ays_Of_TCP/index.shtml
And supporting documentation will be found here:
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/think/Early_D ays_Of_TCP/Annotated_Bibliography/index.shtml
Since everyone else is doing it now, why isn't there a *.torrent file for this release of OpenBSD?
Because in English abstract nouns usually do not receive the definite article [see Mosse -- accent aigu on the "e" but I'm too lazy to look up the escape code -- for a good history of that]. Hence "Man" referring to humanity in general (compare "l'homme" or "ho anthropos"), or in this case "World Peace" referring to the idea of peace in the world.
All's true that is mistrusted
You can relicense the code. Look at the numerous projects out there that are avaliable under multiple licenses.
1.6 Gbit/sec of AES-128? Damn, I gotta get me one of these!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
1 point for sarcasm, -2 points for not knowing that the p designation refers to the portable version of OpenSSH, not patch release.
At most 2, if the first one found is shown to be exploitable at some point. The other one was in the portable (i.e. non-OpenBSD) version of OpenSSH only.
Because OpenBSD does not offer any iso images for download. The official iso images are copyrighted by Theo and can only be gotten by buying the CD's or by pirating them. Or course you could make your own homebrew iso images, that's perfectly legal, and then distribute them as torrent files. But the OpenBSD project depends on CD sales to fund the continued development of the OS. Go buy the official CD's.
Thanks for being so understanding, I don't have broadband. I figure that it would be common knowledge whether linux used safe calls to these functions or not...I didn't ask you to go through the sources, btw. You put yourself through that.
OpenBSD makes a distinction between ports and packages; packages are recommended because they are maintained actively and more thoroughly audited; ports are sort of `use at your own risk'.
Zero points for not being able to pull your head out of your ass and laugh, and for chrissakes, it was NOT a troll, it was a JOKE. Jesus you OpenBSD people are touchy.
Please help metamoderate.
If you did, you would how the ACTUAL OpenBSD developers responded to fefe's benchmarks.
For example, here is what Ted Unangst (a very major committer to OpenBSD) replied to requests for help improving performance:
"apply the patch below to your mmap benchmark. a real application is unlikely to use pread and mmap. openbsd uses a separate cache for read and mmap calls. while it seems you are attempting to time only a page fault with cached data, that is not happening on openbsd.
the results for all other OS should remain the same, but OpenBSD improves dramatically. the adjusted benchmark is a much closer match to application behavior in reality."
Which was followed by above-mentioned patch.
I don't think it's fair for you to judge an entire operating system community based on the contents of a few selected emails. By doing so, you are being just as biased as you say the others are.
The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.
Can't you hurry up? Look at the front page of bsd.slashdot.org....
Freebsd released 4.9 before your 3.4!!!
(j/k)
On a side note, reading the 2nd or 3rd post about trojaned obsd ISOs floating around the web is really sad and upsetting. I love the open sharing of software and source code around the internet, but i always fear that someday it will be to a point that *everything* has been tampered with, essentially creating a need to look through more source code than anyone has time for. Sure we can solve this with technology (such as with MD5 Checksums) but as we create smarter verification, the internet will create smarter shitheads. I'd hate to think that it will eventually degrade into a win-some/lose-some cat-and-mouse game.
I actually lost some sleep few months back when the GNU folks announced that their main ftp site got compromised. I realise that servers get cracked every day, but when it's gnu/linux/bsd/oss folks it feels personal.
I'm not well acquainted with any $krYp+ KyddI3z, cr4x0rz or know what they use, but i'll be willing to bet that their OS and many of their tools are based on software from those they are attacking.
Assholes.
do() || do_not();
Hey, I know you :)
/. :)
You're actually reading comments on
You must be bored then
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
The two bugs you mention, weren't actually bugs
in OpenBSD.
* one was a bug in PAM and most GNU vendors
* one is a bug, but can't be exploited due to
W^X, propolice, NXSTACK, NXHEAP and friends.
Heck, I've tried the gobbles exploit again
against OpenBSD-2.9-OpenSSH where it worked
back then. It failed to run due to these four.
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And
Heh, rather amusing since you're guilty of exactly the thing you accuse me of. :)
Perhaps I'm being a little too demanding. But if you can't properly operate the disk partitioning tools for an OS, maybe you aren't really qualified to be doing benchmarks on it.
Most of the comments about Felix being an idiot have good reason for doing so. He went out of his way to trash talk OpenBSD, and most of the problems he encountered were as a direct result of his inability to RTFM. Why should the OpenBSD community have any patience for someone who bechmarks first and ask's questions later ?
It runs fine for some months now and I can't see any reason why I should change to Linux or another *BSD (I love pf).
You can use pf with FreeBSD pf_freebsd-1.0_7 as well as ipf and ipfw. For me the reason for using OpenBSD for firewalls in the past was that it had altq integrated in kernel and that time if you wanted to use altq with FreeBSD you had to apply patches for "release" kernel version. Now altq is in FreeBSD kernel too.