Slashdot Mirror
OpenBSD 5.3 Released
An anonymous reader writes "Today, OpenBSD 5.3 has been released. It has many improvements, updates, and new stuff. Also, OpenSMTPD 5.3 is included. This is the first version of OpenSMTPD considered to be ready for production. Many pre-built packages are available for many architectures. OpenBSD 5.3 ships with various Desktop Environments, including Gnome 3.6, KDE 3.5, and XFCE 4.10."
And don't forget the release song, "Blade Swimmer."
:)
OpenBSD is very cool. It's amazing what Theo and team have done over the years, and sadly, they don't get the cred they so richly deserve: OpenSSH, OpenBGP, pf, etc., and an awesome operating system that just works out of the box.
I'm very surprised more has not been done with OpenBSD. If I ran a company of any kind, it would be OpenBSD on the servers and Linux on the desktop. I would trust nothing else on my servers. I've worked with OpenBSD professionally and it's a joy to use an easy, well-documented system.
Kudos to you, Theo!
But seriously, it looks like a great set of improvements. It is also great to have a new stable choice for mail transfer.
OpenSMTPD presentation is here.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Maybe 2007 really will be the year of the Linux desktop!
Glad to see OpenBSD is continuing to push for better security.
Has anybody been keeping tabs on performance, particularly on multicore systems? I'm curious what gains have been made there over recent years. I know that Linux and NetBSD have improved a lot, but what about OpenBSD?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
My favorite improvements:
* OpenSMTPd - can't have too many solid mail servers out there
* OpenSSH 6.2 - new crypto algorithms and other goodies
* pf improvements - sloppy state tracking for ICMP
* relayd and OpenBGPd improvements
now the question is: how long until those trickle down to sister projects like FreeBSD or Debian/kFreeBSD?
Semantics is the gravity of abstraction
Too bad NetCraft says it's dying :D
I know software versioning schemes aren't exactly consistent, but isn't 1.0 a tacit milestone for production-ready?
Light the blue touch-paper and retire immediately.
Released on May Day, eh? I see what you're up to, OpenBSD. That's a pretty red logo, too.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I hear NetCraft has been wrong before. ;)
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
And don't forget the release song, "Blade Swimmer."
You know that Voight-Kampf test of yours? Did you ever take that test yourself? Theo?
I was looking into OpenBSD but I couldn't find any online community. Where is it? I was afraid it was a product in serious decline.
(I realize OpenBSD may not be welcoming to noob questions, but there must be someplace it is discussed, hopefully with an archive ...)
I'm especially happy for npppd and OpenSMTPD. I have them both on running and find them simply excellent. Now that they are 'production worthy', more people can use them without jumping through a few minor hoops.
npppd works very well for getting a VPN working with a stock iOS device.
Trolling is a art,
Too bad NetCraft says it's dying :D
NetCraft has no clue what OS my firewall runs. :p
Has anyone checked how correctly OpenSMTPd implements the SMTP protocol? The OpenBSD project has an unfortunate history of caring more about simplicity of implementation than correctness (see also this discussion).
We will keep beating you! Don't worry that all the value left in your carcas has been stolen without compensation by the soulless cult of Apple - just keep plodding on and trying to convince maulnourished college math majors that using you makes them cool. And be sure to mention to everyone you're the one who they develop Apache on! Forget the fact all the cool kids have moved on to nginx or self contained web application servers, of course.
But honestly, I'd pick OpenBSD over a lot of alternatives and it's still a nice toy if not for anythign other than its obscurity wrapped in familiarity. OpenBSD is the Alfa Romeo of the OS world - irregular but well performing, bizzare but attractive, works fantastically when well tuned by a master but otherwise is likely to break very very quickly, and will soak up every spare minute of your weekend in the infinite pursuit of trying to make it work "well" or "better".
Yeah, Netcraft doesn't keep track of infrastructure, just servers.
Can someone remind me which is the good one? OpenBSD or FreeBSD?
I know software versioning schemes aren't exactly consistent, but isn't 1.0 a tacit milestone for production-ready?
Many of us do not consider v1.0 to be production ready, more often really a public beta. :-)
This is a truly fabulous operating system. And for the ones wondering about version numbers, OpenBSD increases it by 0.1 for every release. And a new version is released every 6 months. Also, besides the mailing lists, there is a small but pretty capable community at www.daemonforums.org.
Or I guess we would have seen MacLinux.
No, GPL does not force companies to use your code. It may only restrict them from using it.
What do you mean with 'lost it'? OpenBSD has not lost anything.
Or I guess we would have seen MacLinux.
No, GPL does not force companies to use your code. It may only restrict them from using it.
Yup, this is because the GPL is designed to be more open to some than others.
Is it still required to visit a probation officer, and give notice on any change of residence?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
so far all I see is a bunch of catchy tunes, and there butthurt jealousy of Linux's popularity, meanwhile complaining about how some distros have non-free firmware, and how unfree the GPL, along with some prophesizing about how OpenBSD is going to take over the world. Then some bashing of RMS as a hypocrit.
Show me where Theo tells about OBSD taking over the world, I'm fairly positive thats exactly the opposite of his goals. Otherwise, it seems more like your statement is you projecting your own feelings on openbsd. RMS is not a hypocrite, just a fucking douche you're too stupid to recognize as using you to further his own political agenda.
What they miss is the only reason that either RedHat, or IBM, or SuSE call what they sell "linux" and various distros are vaugely compatible with each other is because of the GPL.
What you call 'vaguely' compatible, the rest of us call a joke. Its why no commercial vendors put real effort into targeting Linux, because what you call compatible, real developers call 'a fucking mess with no organization'. Distros BARELY remain compatible with the 'standard linux base', all of them come with random versions of libraries and different sets, in different places, effectively making the only common aspect amoung them to be names like Linux and GPL.
There are plenty of proprietary BSD-based OSs with their code. Mabey if the GPL'd back in the 1990s, people would using "MacBSD" instead of OSX or iOS. I am sorry but the BSD license is self-defeating, and they worked their way to oblivion, despite putting in undeniable hard work.
No, we wouldn't have MacBSD if it was GPL, we'd have something else not compatible at all. BSD did EXACTLY WHAT WAS INTENDED here, it allowed a commercial OS to use a common code base. THIS MEANS COMPATIBILITY. You don't get any more compatible than actually running the exact same code. This is why your shitty little fanboy OS actually can talk to a windows box, because ... everyone ... used .... BSD code ... for networking.
What we have now is ... Mac(h)/BSD ... so basically, we got what you said we would have got with GPL ... without GPL ... BSD also got a metric fuckton of code in return. You pretty much picked 'the example' that is used to disprove your retarded 'BSD doesnt' get contributions back' argument as Apple has given back arguably more than they took in the first place.
The Internet as you know it would not exist if it weren't for BSD. We would most likely still be arguing over which network vendor was the mostest awesomest and still not have systems that talk to each other in a common way. At best there would be the half implemented GPL version that everyone says is fucking awesomer than awesome ... but no one uses but a handful of geeks because some moron thinks that using vi to edit config files is acceptable, and god forbid how evil it is for a company to use your code without you immediately getting access to all of their work as well. Thats pretty fucking hypocritical. You call it 'free', you wouldn't knwo free if it hit you in the ass.
In the linux sphere, we made the corporations who enter give back. So yes, Linux go the devs and is now the most advanced Free UNIX clone, in part because we have 100x the devs working on it, and more people basing their projects on Linux, because of this.
No, you didn't. You don't even realize it. Its not the most advanced on several levels, ZFS being a prime example but certainly not the only example. How advanced can you be when you have a political ideology making decisions which should be based on technical merit? It IS NOT a 'free' UNIX clone, you don't even know what the word means. UNIX is a specification that Linux does not meet. It is not a clone. It doesn't work tha
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
I can't fucking install samba on 5.3. It moans about not having a bunch of X (yes, X for some bizarre reason) junk installed. What a nuisance.
Apple actually does give back.
Have a look at their work on WebKit and LLVM.
New things are always on the horizon
i think i'll log in to mod this guy up
Samba requires xbase53.tgz (not sure why but yeah). Go to your root directory, and, as root, retrieve xbase53.tgz (you don't need the other X packages, just xbase) from your friendly local mirror. Then tar fzx xbase53.tgz to install.
Then pkg_add samba as normal. That should fix it.
How is PCC coming along? Has the project made much headway in making its break from GCC?
I have one question about these alternate e-mail servers. Do any of them come w/ the ability to recall mail? As one might know, in an MS Exchange/Outlook environment, if one has sent an e-mail on Outlook and regrets it after the fact for any reason, be it a typo or whatever, one can try to recall it. If the message has not been opened at the other end, Exchange allows the message to be recalled. Such a feature is sometimes a lifesaver, but I doubt that Sendmail has it. Does anyone know whether any of these alternatives - Postfix, Qmail or OpenSMTPd have it? (Incidentally, how is SMTP a mail server - that's just one part to the e-mail, the other being IMAP/POP)
I largely agree w/ the rest of what you wrote, but to claim that Linux does not meet the Unix specification begs for citations. It's true that Linux has never been lab tested to see whether it does or not, and for that matter, neither have the BSDs. OS-X has been tested and found to pass, so it's a good supposition that FBSD would pass as well. But to claim that Linux would fail begs for evidence. Chances are that Linux has not been put thru those tests b'cos it costs money - money that nobody would be willing to cough up - not Red Hat, not Canonical, not Linux Foundation... After all, if they did meet it, what would it get them?