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."

5 of 86 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Damn by NekkidBob · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well if you have enough to spare one, I'm sure a developer could use a multiproc sun box, check their wanted hardware list about donating one to further smp for sun.

  2. Apache on OpenBSD by jpkunst · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apache on OpenBSD always had a lot of security-related patches compared to the regular Apache (chroot for example), but it seems that Apache on OpenBSD can now be considered a real fork:

    After the 1.3.29 they decided to muck with their license, introducing stupid patent terms without understanding what they turned their license (that used to be a BSD-derived one) into with that, so we cannot import new versions unless they fix their license. It is not a big loss tho'. The Apache people have mostly given up on 1.3 anyway, and all that happened over the last years was bug fixes, documention work (actually, mainly translation), and some stupid code shuffling, that only made diffs bigger without improving anything. Now that it is certain that we don't have to worry about syncing to them any more, we can start making the mess of code readable tho'.

    JP

  3. OpenBSD 3.6 released by dhartmei · · Score: 5, Informative

    The official release has just happened. Here are the official announcement, the undeadly.org thread and a torrent for the i386 binaries (149MB, matching MD5 which might beat some of the mirrors). Cheers ;)

  4. 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.