Slashdot Mirror
Bug Busters! OpenBSD 5.1 Released
An anonymous reader writes "Today the 5.1 release of OpenBSD has surfaced. As usual, it includes improved hardware support, but also OpenSSH 6.0 and over 7000 ports, with major performance and stability improvements in the package build process (and some really cool stickers). Here's the changelog, the download page, and the CD-ordering page. "
Will one of those 7000 ports run on my dishwasher?
Netcaft is dead....
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I think..
Honestly is OBSD relevant any more in the grand scheme of things, mainly due to its 'director' and its limited scope?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
... unless you don't feel like putting X on a server, in which case building from ports is unsupported and sometimes obviously broken.
What if someone needs to use port 8000?
Bug busters!
http://saveie6.com/
You know, you can write a robust, rumbunstious, attention-grabbing headline without being a deceiptful troll-weasel (cough sanzem-something), like soulskill has done here.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Only 7000 ports? But NetBSD has OVER NINE THOUSAAAAAAAAAAAAAND!
http://wideopenbsd.org/
Seven of Nine
Anyone got a human-readable changelog with highlights? The linked one is a dump of everything that's changed.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Pfffttt... Only 7000 ports?
The OS I'm using has 65536 ports.
So many people (apologists?) use downloading different distributions of *nix operating systems as justification for P2P applications.
How come OpenBSD isn't using P2P (BitTorrent specifically) to help spread the wealth? I understand they're affiliated with many Universities and hence "free bandwidth", but honestly it's 2012 now.
Why no torrent?..
.
An awesome periphery and utility server OS.
Why does no one ask about the relevance of the porn industry? OpenSSH was the biggest thing since Debbie does Dallas. Few have more than that to their credit.
Bearded fellow: Let he who is without sin throw the the first stone.
Crazed villager [inspecting charismatic sinner]: Theo, is that you?
Crazed villager's wife: Who does this bearded guy think he is?
Here's the thing about security. If you have to ask about relevance, you can't handle the truth.
I would like to see the number of contributions from OpenBSD that are currently in other applications and/or other operating systems as compared to other *nix....
I had a look at it, and found some things interesting.
Under highlights, it mentions that it supports GNOME 3.2.1 (fallback mode), but for KDE, it supports 3.5.10. For GNOME, this is the first time I have seen any BSD support GNOME3 - in fact, there was some discussion in the past about how GNOME3 wouldn't run on BSDs due to systemd being a requirement. The other interesting aspect of this is that it goes for the latest, much publicly disparaged version of GNOME, but for KDE, which is much improved, it's @ 3.5. They could have either gone for KDE4.8, or if they didn't like that, they could have ditched KDE altogether and gone w/ Trinity.
The other thing I noticed throughout the notes was improvements in support for IPv6, such as fragment handling, but what I haven't figured out is how mature is OpenBSD's IPv6 support compared to FreeBSD? FBSD is currently second to none when it comes to IPv6 support (I'm not sure how it compares to Windows 7, which has been innovative for IPv6 on its own, w/o relying on the BSD layer 3 stack as it did for IPv4), but I was curious about OBSD. If someone wanted to create an IPv6 firewall cum router w/ OBSD as the management OS, does the OS have whatever it needs for this purpose?
On a separate note, I did find it interesting that they include software that's now GPL3 - such as Emacs, GCC, Libre Office, among others. In the case of the compiler, they didn't offer LLVM/Clang, and nor do they seem to prefer BSD software to others - for instance, Apache is the web server that they offer, and not Nginx. In short, I found their choices of default software pretty interesting, given all the recent discussions regarding GPL3 vs BSDL and so on.
How is OBSD's IPv6 support superior to FBSD, which is what your first statement above seems to suggest? I've checked their site - for instance, their Networking FAQ, and there is nothing there that suggests that OBSD has embraced IPv6 and supports it in a big way. There is no mention of any DHCP6 support, even though they have a major section on DHCP support, and in all the examples that they provide, they use only IPv4 examples, implying that equivalent IPv6 support either doesn't exist, or at best, is nowhere near as ready. Except in the section that describes ifconfig, there is nothing that suggests that IPv6 is even supported, if one goes by just this section of the FAQ.
I agree that their improvements would be incremental, but for your claim that it exceeds that of FBSD, I'd need to see that 5.1 supports everything about IPv6 that FBSD9 supports - and more. At least going through their above documentation, nothing seems to suggest that this support is there. Only thing about FBSD - some of its derivatives, like pFsense, which is purely an FBSD firewall and router, does not support IPv6, despite FBSD supporting it. Which is a real disappointment.
Sure, I realize that some people would rather have OpenBSD running on bare metal, without having untrustworthy layers underneath, but since in the grand scheme of things we're running just about everything on top of VMware these days (except stuff that needs hardware acceleration), how well does OpenBSD work on top of VMware? Is installing it straightforward, or does the disk partitioning get weird? Can I just hand VMware the ISO and tell it to install itself? Will the vmware tools install cleanly? I'm mainly interested in using the firewall bits and IPSEC tunnels, and maybe also the http servers for things that need security more than they need flashy content management.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
...the base install is pretty limited...
The base install is painstakingly audited. They look for all bugs, even ones that have no apparent means of exploitation. This has often resulted in OpenBSD being unaffected by holes discovered in other systems. The same degree of assurance cannot be extended to thousands of ports, however, so a line is drawn around the base install.
That being said, I've heard that Theo expects that one should be able to 'cd /usr/ports' and 'make install' - to build and install every port in the tree - without error. What other OS has the balls to pull that off?
The truth about KDE: http://www.mail-archive.com/misc@openbsd.org/msg88679.html I also remember them coming to misc and inform the community and porters that KDE won't run on openbsd due to the use of a cool linux daemon to manage stuff.
This was said to be true about GNOME3, where it was rumored that one linux daemon systemd was required - but OBSD seems to support GNOME3 in fallback mode. The fallback mode support for GNOME3 seems to be due to the requirement that in GNOME3, the GNOME shell requires 3D accelaration to work, as it requires graphics composition. That brings into focus the fact that most graphics cards don't include open source drivers, and while that's not a roadblock for FBSD, it does seem to be more of one for OBSD. On the FSF side of things, some of the FSF endorsed Linux distros, like Trisquel, had the same issue, and they too defaulted w/ this fallback mode GNOME option.
Was this ever a problem in KDE4? While KDE4 had initial problems due to Qt4 being unready at the time, KDE4.8, as it stands today, is reasonably mature. KDE5 and beyond will support Wayland in addition to X, but OBSD needn't go that route if it doesn't want to. At any rate, does KDE4.8, like GNOME3, require 3D accelaration to get going? I've never heard of KDE having such a requirement.
They don't include Emacs (instead mg is in base, rewritten from scratch with a funny easter egg inside) neither do they include Libre Office. It's just a Makefile and some patches that are distributed. Package are a convenience for the users, and available only if the license is 'free' enough (i.e legally possible). They want to switch to pcc instead of gcc, I've heard that Theo does that.
Okay, why does this page seem to suggest that Emacs and Libre Office are included? Very strange!
OpenBSD's IPv6 stack is one of the most mature stack. I bet its code is already somewhere else (free license => not wasting engineering efforts). You might want to read about Packet Filter if your especially interested in tunning/handling IPv6 traffic.
Apache is actually an old version of apache, before the license sucked, and it underwent a lot of changes. Don't compare it to nginx. You can get it in the ports/package sysem if your not happy with the shipped apache.
I listed my questions about IPv6 support above, under the discussion I renamed 'IPv6 support'.
As a side note, OpenBSD uses the ISC license when i can now. Might be worth looking ;).
It doesn't use the normal BSD license like other BSDs?
I doubt OpenSSH is WITHOUT qualifications the most used FOSS program. We can safely assume that OpenSSH doesn't exist in most Windows installations. So the primary market for OpenSSH should be *n*x users. And among Unix/Linux users, Apache is probably installed in more systems. There are also probably more total Linux kernel installs if we count embedded systems.
I don't know though if OpenSSH makes the grade as the most used "end-user" FOSS.
About diabetes - causes (low blood sugar, glucose, insulin levels), Symptoms of diabetes in women, risks, diagnosis, types (type 1, type 2) and Treatment of diabetes , Medicine , diet, exercise, and other lifestyle changes.
http://publichealthsystem.blogspot.in/2012/04/diabetic-issues-causes-signs-and.html