Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OpenBSD 3.6 Live

Posted by michael on from the keep-on-plugging dept.

An anonymous reader writes "There is a mounting excitement for the upcoming OpenBSD 3.6 release, as it is the first release that supports multiprocessor systems. To celebrate the event, ONLamp.com published an interview with several developers to discuss new features, tools, and future plans."

6 of 86 comments (clear)

  1. *BSD obviously not dead. by NekkidBob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There has been so much development in all the BSD's, and a new BSD system (DragonFlyBSD) coming out, how can anyone say *BSD is dead? The OpenBSD community has even pushed some vendors to release firmware for various hardware in a more open source way. If a "dead" community can convince hardware vendors to do that, then why isn't the Linux community doing more to make vendors release more firmware/docs in an open way.

  2. Damn by armypuke · · Score: 2, Insightful
    SMP support on OpenBSD/i386 and OpenBSD/amd64 platforms.
    I was getting my hopes up that I could finally run OpenBSD on a couple of multiprocessor Sun boxes that I have.

    Damn

    --
    Army of One!
  3. On this note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I never really understood why many commercial vendors are developing software for linux and not BSD.

    An example would be Oracle. I was comparing Linux to OpenBSD and I can't really figure out why so many people choose Linux over OpenBSD. Both have package management, good software support, and standard *nix features. OpenBSD on the other hand has features no other unix has such as secure levels and it is secure out of the box.

    Why would anyone select an OS (expecially for network infrastructure) that is not secure by default?

  4. Upgrade Pain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there an easier way to upgrade to 3.6 from 3.5 without removing all the packages?
    I have a fairly amount of packages, but I would also want minimum downtime for the upgrade. Maybe a make world make install mergemaster (reboot) would work better. Any ideas?

    How stable is the SMP stuff?

  5. Props by jazman_777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OpenBSD showed me, security-wise, how crufty and cobbled Linux is. IPtables? Are you kidding? pf rolls it up and smokes it.

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    1. Re:Props by setagllib · · Score: 5, Insightful

      iptables modelled after ipfilter? I had always been under the impression it was moddled out of clay.

      No user->kernel facility interface should ever be that dirty, much less a packet filter. Sure, the way it handles NAT and everything in one relatively uniform way is kinda handy, but the syntax and rigidness is disgusting. You can have a range of ports, or a list of ports, but not a list of ranges of ports. Don't even think about logging and acting on a packet in the same rule. Just pathetic.

      ipfw, pf, ipfilter, they're all so much cleaner and so much more useful. With OpenBSD's new rule optimizer this is even more awesome. I still think natd/ipnat/ would be better off merging their functionality into the filter itself, even if only to make dynamic NAT rules by shell script easier.

      --
      Sam ty sig.