Slashdot Mirror
OpenBSD 2.6 released
Lots of you wrote in with this -- we've been holding back at Theo's request until the CDs were available, but OpenBSD 2.6 is now released and available from the FTP sites, or by ordering CDs. There are lots of technical enhancements to this release (which are detailed below), and if they don't grab you, check out the very cool CD cover art.
The complete list of changes to 2.6 is too long to list here. However, some of the highlights are:
- Add ssh (OpenSSH) to the base system
- Reliability patches for the PowerPC port
- Improved support for ext2fs
- Perl 5.005_03 in the base system
- Support Joliet filesystems
- More security fixes
- USB support
- Fixes to the ATAPI support
- Speed up the install process
- Many manual page updates
and much more.
If it was just more intuitive. ( i would be in heaven )
Oh oh oh... A new toy. Just in time for Christmas. I look forward to getting this and seeing what improvements there are. OpenSSH is the big on that I'm looking for. Just a note: the ports tree for OpenBSD has grown a lot. If you have tried OpenBSD as a desktop before but never any of the ports ... do so. There are soe pretty cool packages available, and the download/install process is really slick. Good going to the OpenBSD project team. Missin' Calgary. Have a beer at the Ship for me Theo. Dave M
Be smart and work to create. Don't ride on the backs of others.
...improved OpenSSL integration and all the IPSec stuff.
Yeah, slashdot is a horrible forum for this and I know there's a dozen faqs and newsgroups, but the openbsd fans will be here in abundance and will love this chance to advocate... i hope. :)
:)
Do you guys support Aureal Vortex and/or SB Live?
Also, I've heard about FreeBSD's linux emulation... does Open do this, too? How good is it? Can I run Netscape? How about unreal torney?
-Chris
(Someone who would LOVE the security of openbsd on the desktop, if it were possible)
Is there an iso CD-ROM image available for download? I haven't given *BSD a whirl in a while.
No sig.
BSD and Solaris are both offshoots of the original (v7?) Unix source, one side developed by Berkeley, the other side by AT&T, with a lot of cross-pollination. Linux was independently developed to be compatible, without the original source.
Read about the history of unix by one of the original dudes... (dmr).
FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD should have no proprietary source left, they've been cleaned up so they could open the source. OpenBSD is a latecomer, basically a distribution/offshoot (of NetBSD?) designed for security, both by hopefully fixing security problems before they are exploited in the code and having a secure default configuration.
I've messed more with SunOS, Solaris, and Linux than I have with any of the *BSD's, tho...
---
pb Reply or e-mail rather than vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
I like the graphic style for OpenBSD 2.5 much better than the one used for 2.6 (or the other cartoon ones from the past.)
The cartoon look seems to lower its credibility with PHBs and other people you have to deal with.
I want to promote OpenBSD as much a possible, as a 'professionl-like' in quality to new users to BSD or open source software in general.
Just my personal preference. I'm sure a million of you disagree with me (and will violoently tell me), but does anyone out there agree with me?
Um... maybe it's just me, but the image of a cat rampantly having it's way with the fish in the bowl doesn't convey the notion of "security" very well IMHO. Admittedly, the picture is quite cool, but just incongruent with the rest of the cover :)
This is only vaguely on topic...
I've been using Linux for a while now, but I know very little about *BSD. But I am becoming very intersted in getting into it as well. What would be the ideal BSD for me to start with? I have no real security needs, nor do I need to run on anything but x86 hardware. So, should I just go with FreeBSD then? Or would Open or Net be the ideal choice for a beginer?
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
I been wanting to check out this BSD for sometime. But I'm curious as to what games are available for the console? Someone told me that I can't use the regular games, such as Pokemon, from my N-64. Can this be true? Why would Nintendo create a game console that is incompatible with earlier systems?
By the way: I've been coding lisp for about twenty years and I've just switched to Python. For some reason I'm not more productive. I've been thinking about buying a new mouse with one of those twirly gadgets in between mouse buttons. Would this speed up my Python coding? I sure hope there aren't any compatibilty problems with the N-64 and the new mouse!
Will the twirly gadget work with BSD?
W S BWSB
If anyone can provide a pointer to installation support for OpenBSD, we would certainly appreciate the help. The online instructions and readmes are no help at all. I would love to support the project by sending more money for the new version, but there's no point if you can't get to first base....
The essential differences:
FreeBSD is based on the original BSD source
Linux was done from scratch.
It's legal to distribute modified BSD without releasing the source.
It's illegal (breach of the GPL contract) to release Linux without the source.
Linux is developed by anyone and their dog.
FreeBSD is developed by a smaller group of elite programmers.
Oh, and Solaris IS unix--it's just a particular brand.
To add a few points:
FreeBSD (and the other *BSDs) may be *based* on the original BSD source, but they removed any AT&T "tainted" bits a long time ago.
The GPL is not a contract. It's a copyright license. (Yes, there IS a difference.)
Linux is *not* developed by anyone and their dog. Patches that go into the kernel are looked over quite thoroughly by a group of programmers that are just as "elite" as anyone on the FreeBSD core team.
Your right, its NetBSD. Go read Theo's archive (theos.com), its pretty interesting.
You should also note that BSD license is different from the GPL, that BSD netowrking code is considered top notch and used in almost every OS, and that the systems are generally geared towards solving a project goal, not to do everything possible like Linux.
Otherwise, the two are very similar, though Linux has many distributions and until Debian/FreeBSD, which may not deserve the title of distribution yet, the BSD OSes are from one source, and are considered for the most part to be better organized. For the goals of the projects, the BSDs outperform Linux, but on exterior goals, Linux may outperform, or may not, depending on the varients.
Wouldn't Anon.. but found my recent history being 50+ posts was just depressing.
As OpenBSD has been a lesser-known OS for a while, I am writing this post to tell any newcomers what it is all about. While to many this may seem like just another software release, anyone who has watched cryptography and security in general and OpenBSD in particular knows that this will have major significance throughout the industry. It may not be immediately apparant, or even obvious, but it will be important for the follwing reasons: 1. With the recent anti-cryptography crackdowns by the US government (see the article below this one on the investigation of William Simpson), having a complete system of VERY strong cryptography coming from outside our national borders, such as OpenBSD, will significantly weaken our government's efforts to stop cryptography. 2. OpenBSD is apparantly the only major OS that truly follows the saying, "Security is a process, not a product." Personally (and I know there will be much debate on this, possibly even flames), I believe that everyone from the Linux contributors to Sun (makers of Solaris) to, of course, Microsoft, could learn from the example of the OpenBSD team. For those of you unfamiliar with OpenBSD, here are a few examples of how the emphasis in this OS is almost entirely on security: A. Line-by-line security audit of *everything* that goes on the CD. B. Strong cryptography is built in on the most basic system level. C. All aspects of the default setup have undergone rigorous security testing. OpenBSD is, to the best of my knowledge, the only OS that can legitimately claim to be secure right out of the box. All of these factors combined have set a standard that the rest of the industry has yet to meet. Eventually, security will be seen as something not to be expected, but demanded in a product, and the OpenBSD philosophy will serve as a model for this shift. 3. Because many security flaws (such as potential buffer overflows) can cause security-unrelated crashes, the line-by-line audit also resulted in remarkable stability beyond just the security. I think we can all think of a certain software company that could learn from this example. 4. The overall view of the OpenBSD team that security as not just something that happens over time and numerous patches, but rather something to get right the first time, must be adopted by the rest of the industry as soon as possible. Anything less will hold back the advance of the Internet unacceptably. I hope that this has helped some newcomers to the OpenBSD world understand the underlying philosophy of this wonderful OS.
Does anybody know if the OpenBSD folks plan to have their product boxed up and sold off the shelf in local bookstores, like RedHat, Caldera, and many of the other Linux/BSD distributors are doing?
I'd be interested in knowing if that is being considered. And, if so, what the timeframe on it is.
When you say "they" removed any AT&T "tainted" bits, which they do you mean? The original BSD people, or the FreeBSD people. I think the original BSD people removed all the AT&T stuff so they could release the source in the first place. I could be wrong though.
Fair enough, your history must look like my history. I didn't really want to mention any of the other issues just because of their flame-potential, but here goes...
:)
:)
From what I've heard about Theo, I'm not impressed. Maybe he can code, maybe he's got a point or two about securing the OS, but past that I don't think I'd want to work with him either.
Yep, the BSD license is really free, while the GPL protects from what that freedom allows... Sometimes this is good, and other times it's a pain. For instance, I'd like it if Apple couldn't just take the BSD code and attempt to make an OS on top of it, and screw it up. However, if it ultimately replaces MacOS, that'll be an improvement.
I've heard the same things about the BSD networking code, but I haven't really seen a good comparison. Of course, BSD was the first Unix to have networking, but that's no reason to assume it's the best at it. It must be pretty good just from the anecdotal evidence, but I have yet to see some proof.
I like Linux because it has hardware support for the freaky devices I get. Of course, that means it might end up being less stable depending on how supported that is... However, for a good hardware configuration, that's well supported by the OS, it shouldn't really matter which one you use.
The BSD's probably are better organized, and move slower, because of the way their development works. Contrast this with Linux: it's fast and sloppy, and furiously patched together, but it somehow works, and they spend time stabilizing the patches and looking for bugs too...
Also, Linux is getting a lot of attention lately, with corporations funding its development in various different areas, and contributing back, in the hopes of getting a great, compatible Unix OS running on their hardware, and also getting good publicity and saving money in the long run...
The same thing could have happened to BSD, but it was too late, and not as sexy, not as much of a success story about the lone hacker, etc., etc. And that penguin is just too darn cute. Aww...
There's probably more detailed information on the FreeBSD web site, but basically what happened was:
- USB released a bunch of UNIX code that was supposedly "free". This formed the basis for 386BSD, which begat FreeBSD.
- AT&T sued USB (and also BSDi, I think) for infringement of copyright, claiming that some of the code in the original release was under AT&T copyright.
- The case was settled out-of-court, and the FreeBSD team threw out all the AT&T-tainted code and rewrote those sections.
Unfortunately, the AT&T lawsuit made corporations wary of BSD-based products, thinking that what had happened once could happen again. Luckily, most people aren't bothered by any of that now.
Note the penguin-looking skull over the www ;)
Hey guys, can't we all just get along?
-Nick "Who told you I'm paranoid!!!" Gully
Have GNU . . . Will Travel
Did you RTFM grit-pouring-person? It may truly get even better if you follow the details specifically laid out in the FM (the manual).
Thank you for your question. Please drive up to the next window.
...By the way this is supposed to be a stab at humor. Oh and by the way grit-person, have you ever thought about getting counseling?
as mentioned in the subject title..
What do you want? A rainbow-colored window?
Heck no! Just seeing that little window picture-thing gives me intestinal cramps.
Sure, Theo is not exactly a candidate for "Mr. Nice Guy 1999", but that can be said for a lot of people - take Tom Christiansen (please...) as an example. Many developers can change into real bastards if you push the right buttons, the same as any other person.
I'm not going to get involved in a license flamewar, so I'll just ignore the comments on the BSD license...
The BSD TCP stack is generally agreed to be very good. It has had its problems (just as the Linux stack, the Solaris stack, the WinNT (blech) stack...), but it performs very well.
For freaky devices, take a look at some of the stuff that NetBSD supports on its various platforms.
And as for the last bit about the *BSDs being "too late", the BSD kernel codebase has been around for a lot longer than the Linux kernel...
Oh, shit. Didn't catch that on preview, either...
I can not think of anything of value to say except OpenBSD rules. It has never let me down. Give it a try!
:)
Thanks to all those that worked hard to make it what it is. I have no idea what I'd have done without it.
Everyone that does use it like me should buy some t-shirts to help support the project
Yes , PCMCIA cards will work I use 2.6 on my Thinkpad 755CE currently. Make sure and check the README.i386 (assuming you have an i386 of course) for suported NICs and SCSI controllers.
"We must not, my friend, be the bubbles of our own liberal sentiments"
--John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
We are a small Internet development shop, running a few servers and a mixed bag of development stations. Currently, there are three Linux boxen on our network, running the latest RedHat releases. We are looking to put in three more systems, for a total of 5 running some Linux/UNIX like OS.
When we perform this upgrade, we are willing to change operating systems if there is a demonstrable benefit. Due to recent slashdot postings we have started looking at OpenBSD as our server OS. Now, we do understand that RedHat is not the only Linux distribution available, but we don't really want to get into a Linux/Linux war here. We don;t mind changing if we should for technical reasons - but the Linux world seems more hip and vibrant, and we really like the penguin T-shirts we have... so if we can stay on Linux then we want to.
So far, we like what we hear about OpenBSD - but we don't know if the things we like are inherent in the relative designs of OpenBSD or if they are results of policy choices by the OpenBSD team. If they are the results of policy decisions, then with any luck a Linux distribution could be found that exhibited the same characteristics?
Features we like about OpenBSD:
Assumptions:
These systems will be running the server software they need, and X11 + (Gnome||KDE) for administration and so on. They will not be running the latest stuff from Linuxberg or a bunch of things that would be on a desktop OS. So we are going to try very hard not to introduce any instabilities. We aren't going to be compiling running games, sound drivers and the like that integrate directly into the kernel.
The questions are:
Thanks for taking the time, and hopefully we can keep the flames down to nothing and talk about technical issues this time.
--> Fight tyranny and repression.... read
It's impossible to say since you haven't specified which models they are. There are devices in each of the categories you metioned listed in the release notes for the i386 port, though, at http://www.openbsd.org/i386.html
Can someone fill in how far along *BSD's support for USB is?
I see a lot of references to it, on Linux-USB, but everyone's rather vague about just how much of USB (which is a big wide spec) has landed in the various BSDs
Linux, I do know, will have HID (mouses, keyboards and stuff), modems, printers, some cameras, SCSI-like things and various other stuff in 2.4.0 when it arrives. Sound would be nice too, but that looks like a really eeevil specification.
ISTR That enough of Linux's USB support was available at 2.2.x time for USB based iMacs to be usable, but maybe my memory is blurry.
Harbinger... good sir... long time no chat... The CD's look great and so do the T-Shirts... finally a wardrobe change.... :) Cheers...
And as for the last bit about the *BSDs being "too late", the BSD kernel codebase has been around for a lot longer than the Linux kernel...
Correct. However before the first free/open source BSD could get going it get held up by legal disputes over AT&T code in the BSD source preventing free distribution. By the time that got straightened out Linux was already out and had gained considerable support from kernel hackers. In that sense *BSD was "too late." I once found this story burried on the FreeBSD web site and I am probably missing some details.
Without a doubt. Use RedHat as an example - out of the box, it is shamefully exposed.
It is perfectly reasonable to assume that a linux distribution could be made as secure as OpenBSD, if the effort was made
2.Is OpenBSD more stable than a well maintained Linux distribution?
Generally speaking, both are considered stable enough to not make it a significant issue, although the increased competition in the linux distro market will force more frequent releases and less testing. Look at the flack Debian is catching for their slower release schedule.
3.Will the OpenSource software we normally need (firewall, Apache, PHP4, Perl, Python) and so on probably compile on OpenBSD?
Of course. There is no question that the packages you mention will work well on OpenBSD. Some of the packages you mention are developed on a BSD variant.
4.Does OpenBSD have something like clustering support (Beowulf) and failover?
No.
5.Is the performance of a well maintained OpenBSD system better than a well maintained Linux distribution?
This really depends on what you are doing. For network performance, I put my chips on BSD. For other system functionality (disk throughput, etc.), linux may be better. It really depends on the type of application.
6.Does Linux have anything like the one time use password system?
No.
7.Does OpenBSD support multiple CPU's
The BSD's are making some inroads with SMP, but linux is out ahead.
I should have been clearer - the "bastard" comment was not specifically referring to either Theo or Tom.
That said, Theo has never had much patience with anyone (more politely put, he does not suffer fools gladly), and his replies on the OpenBSD mailing lists tend to be rather terse. Tom tends to be a bit "inflammatory" in his comments about the GPL, and don't try and tell me that he doesn't get emotional about that particular subject.
As for the flamewar thing - I didn't say that the previous poster was starting one; I just didn't want to say anything that would be picked up by some frothing GPL/BSD/Artistic/etc. maniac and turned into a flamewar.
*Sigh*
I know about that - see my comment about the AT&T dispute earlier in this discussion.
However, the original poster didn't make clear in what way he thought the *BSDs to be late; too many people seem to think that Linux was the first free OS.
I would love to try OpenBSD, but I can't afford the $30 they want for the CD.
:)
I understand they need all the money they can get, but $30 (USD!) seems excessive. Factor in shipping, and the exchange rate, it thats like $50 CAD. It would be nice if they had a lower student rate or something, so all of us starving student types could get a shiny new CD and support the cause. Ah well.
I might buy a t-shirt though. Only $16 USD.
WTF: the artwork is the #2 issue about OpenBSD? How the fuck did this get to where it is? Come on people, this is an OPERATING SYSTEM, not an advanced form of cosmetology (sp?). Besides, I think the cat/fishbowl thing rocks regardless.
Um... I may be wrong here, but IIRC, the USB support originally included with Linux/PPC was based on NetBSD's USB support.
Full OpenBSD distribution is available on FTP, if you have tools, NOTHING stops you from making your own _bootable_ OpenBSD ISO image, I have done that, it took 5 minutes to figure out how.
or many of the mirror locations.
Hehehe...The cat is a 'Script Kitty'! :D
(Really. It mentions it in the T-Shirt section...)
--Kevin
=-=-=-=-=-=
"I think the P-Funk Mothership just landed in my back yard!"
A line by line code review is great, and I would agree that OpenBSD is the most secure OS you can get your hands on, but it cannot prevent all possible exploits
If you think you can just install OpenBSD and not have to know a thing about security, you need to get you head checked.
---- There is a fine line between sayings that make sense.
Now I know what I am asking Santa for Christmas!
If the older PC (like mine) has installed an Adaptec 1542 and a Soundcard (SB compat.) then the system will hang during probing as IO address 300 is default for both cards.
It might be a good idea to start with a completely "stripped" PC - only with video card and HD controller.
followed the link to find: ... well, nuff said.
...
"Vulnerable Systems: OpenBSD 2.2 and earlier"
If you are running software that old
I agree that you can't prevent all possible exploits. However
installing the latest version of OpenBSD and applying all the posted security patches is going to make your system pretty darn secure.
(even if you don't know much about security)
now if you go and start changing the default install without security knowledge you are asking for trouble.
He's not talking about the codebase. Because of the lawsuit early on, Linux was able to get a head start on BSD (not sure what flavor, though). Since then it has been playing catch-up. Otherwise, it would probably have been the dominate *nix OS.
Here's my DeCSS mirror, where's yours?
The whole distribution is on ftp. .ISO image.
If you have the bandwidth and a cd burner, nothing stops you from making your own bootable
Well, I just finished installing OpenBSD 2.6 Nov. 30 snapshot (which would probably be pretty damn close to the release if not identical. OBSD developers can chime in if I'm wrong.
Here's what I have.
With a few minor adjustments to BIOS (i.e., changing from the settings I had with Linux and FreeBSD on the same machine to switch IRQs for my serial devices, PCMCIA was supported by the default install floppy.)
I had installed OpenBSD 2.5 and gave up on it, because I needed a working system in short order and did not have time for the learning curve, so I was used to the partioning scheme.
Here's my secret recipe for OpenBSD's partioning scheme: Go download kern.flp and mfsroot.flp from FreeBSD's site and boot those. Pick the 'Novice' install, which will then lead you to FreeBSD's partitioning which is automatic. Then after FreeBSD is done doing the newffs on your HD, pop out the floppy, pop in the OpenBSD install floppy and reboot.
Then when OpenBSD asks you for partioning, it's already done, and you can just change the labels and mount points with 'p' to see your partitions and 'n' to rename them.
boom bam bing... *woop* there it is. Reboot.
X11R6 was easily configured now that Neomagic is well supported in 3.3.5. APM is well supported in both BSDs.
Brief performance review.
In a nutshell, OpenBSD is slightly slower than FreeBSD on the same hardware, which was slightly slower (but not much) than Debian GNU/Linux on the same hardware. Here are the applications I run always. I'm a law student, so my main needs are text editing, archiving and searching.
Whenever I test a system, I always use my laptop b/c it's what I like to use most, and my goals are to have X, pcmcia, and apm running flawlessly.
In Debian, X and pcmcia worked great, but when I would suspend my box I would have problems with pcmcia modules and would have to insmod them or rmmod them and re-insmod them. This was an annoyance. I eventually got a hold of a script that allowed me to disable pcmcia before suspending. I would then have to run the script again to reinitialize pcmcia; I quickly grew tired of this.
Enter FreeBSd 3.3. Went and bought it, and downloaded the PAO install floppies and the PAOBIN pcmcia drivers. This was very nice and great, I loved everything about FreeBSD except for one thing, the pcmcia drivers seemed to treat my pccard as a 10baseT rather than 100. That kind of sucked. I knew eventually my legal work would require an IPSec network so I moved on (I highly recommend FreeBSD). It suspended and resumed like a breeze, the clock had not lag upon resume, and the pcmcia daemon reinitialized all pccards excellently. Very Nice. And FreeBSD has the best collection of applications for GNUstep of any Unix I've seen (much better than the Linuxes I've used).
Enter OpenBSD 2.6.
Yesterday I downloaded and installed OpenBSD. Everything that applies to FreeBSD applies to OpenBSD except in OpenBSD my pcmcia card is supported better (I have full bandwidth on my LAN). APM, etc are excellent.
Drawbacks. I miss my FreeBSD WMaker desktop! But I think the FreeBSD ports I want will work on OBSD so that I can have the best of both worlds.
OBSD's ports collection is not as vast as FreeBSD's, and it's package collection is no where near that of a Debian or Red Hat. But that is for a reason. What you get is secure, and they have everything you *really* need. All the applications I mentioned above that I use on a daily basis are all in OBSD with the exception of Midnight Commander, which I will try to make use of FreeBSD's port. I will also try to make wmapm, wmnet, and wmmon from FreeBSD work in OpenBSD, then I will be quite satisfied.
Speed. There is a noticable speed reduction with OpenBSD. It is not as optimized for my hardware as FreeBSD was. But my hardware is not all that spectacular anyway so it was never all that fast to begin with. Compile times are roughly the same. However, for some reason X has never performed better, even with FreeBSD. Opaque moves have no hint of jerkiness
Bonus. OpenBSD recognized my sound card! This is new. If I can make that work, I'll really be an OpenBSD fanatic. Another added bonus is mount_ext2fs. This allows floppy transfers from Linux to OBSD, something that FreBSD does not have yet.
In sum, OpenBSD is perfect for a Desktop OS if data security is really really important to you (i.e., if you carry confidential material on your laptop around with you). There's enough applications for document creation that you could need, and with linux_lib all things linux are possible. And binary compat with all other BSD's is there as well. OpenBSD is solid, super secure, and I'm breathing easier now that I know my client materials are under the blowfish
Later y'all.
Ok, now that there is a new release, I won't have any qualms putting open bsd on my 486 for NAT. I like the idea of an ultra secure firewall for everday browsing ;-).
In the immortal words of Cartman's Sensei,
"RESIST THE ASS!"
--
I like to watch.
My Toshiba notebook loses its sound interrupt after suspending, but it's not too hard to set up apmd to rmmod stuff that doesn't handle suspend well, and then modprobe for it when you come back from suspend. Give it a try - worked fine for me.
Why is that the the BSD and Linux people can never get along? It seems like it is all the same cause to me!
When I go to the Perl website, I see links to resources that compare Perl with Python, C, Tcl/Tk, etc. Great! Horses for courses. It would be extremely helpful to see the same kind of links from each of the unix sites.
I ordered OpenBSD at the beginning of October (then at version 2.5) and it still hasn't arrived. When I sent an email to see what the problem was, I was sent a reply stating they were have "production problems" and that they were 2 weeks behind schedule. I sent that email at least 2 weeks ago and still no software. This is somewhat understandable, but now they have released v. 2.6. This makes me more than a little angry considering that 2.6 seems to be a considerably better product. Yeah, I know that this release would still be out even if I had my 2.5 release right now, but it just adds to the adjitation a little. Oh well.
.ISO?? I tried to find one of 2.5, but it was virtually impossible. I know about helping to support the developers by purchasing. No problem with that. They have my $45 and change (I also bought one of their cool shirts) but, I still have no software. Wo is me :-(
Anyone know where I can get an
----------------
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
...when a someone who would take that into effect when selecting an OS for an important server has any part in selecting an OS for an important server.
--
Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
The only quirk is that Xfree86 support for USB mices has been added after the 2.6 freeze, so you'll have to CVS upgrade and recompile your xserver to use those funky M$ ballless mices...
We don't have to waste -core's time with having them review each and every update to the kernel sources (though there are obvious cases). Basically we have to use our own judgement. If it's something simple, like ripping out unused declarations or whatever, it doesn't need -core review.
You probably either misunderstood the way review works with FreeBSD, or who -core is.
In any case, hopefully this clears it up.
You can read or search the OpenBSD mailing lists via deja.com - seed &ST=IF&DBS=2
http://www.deja.com/query_profile.xp?QRY=openbs
for a list of OpenBSD-related mailing lists that have been gatewayed into news. I'd guess the gatewaying is 2-way so you should be able to post to these newsgroups and have it pop up on the mailing lists.
If you're actively using OpenBSD you probably want to be on the mailing lists directly, details at http://www.openbsd.org
Oh, I hope that whoever moderated this one down is truly ashamed of themselves. A perfectly sensible post, an entirely legitimate question.
Anyone got moderator points to move that one back up?
Greg
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
Big rounded nightstick.... those weird contour lines around the crotch... that smirk that reminds you of the Village People singer.... u-u-u-uh-h-h-h-!
I'm just glad that's gone.
-jpeg
My reasoning? The quality of design in packaging conveys to me the amount of effort that was put into the whole of the product. Not just the coding, but other things like support, interface design, etc... It's possible that this might cause me to misjudge a product. Oh well, their loss. Most of the stuff I use is Open Source anyway, and in those cases there usually isn't any cover-art to speak of.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Not completely true!
Only the OpenBSD OS and a portion of the Ports & Packages that are on the CD are audited. The majority of the Ports are just that: working Ports of the respective Software. Just want to make sure that people (new to OpenBSD) installing third party software (like Ports) are not left alone with a false believe of security. :)
However, running insecure software on a secure OS could potentionally reduce the effect, but it remains dangerous, nevertheless.
Major Kudos to the OpenBSD team - a job very well done!
Anyhow, I did an FTP install of OpenBSD 2.5 on an internal "testbox" and I was impressed. I had first read the "review" at Linux.com, and was intrigued yet "concerned" about the unfriendly partitioning program (I just didn't have the time at that time. Yeah, so I wanted a PartitionMagic type of thing... so sue me.)
However, I got my brother (high school, and *not* a Unix guru) to install it... heh heh. He got it up in one night (although messed up the swap partition setup).
I'm running it on a P100 with a 1.7 GB drive (anyone want to donate old Pentium, Pentium Pro hardware??) on a 100TX internal network.
After I reinstalled it, I started looking at the ports, and installing other programs. I am very impressed! I thought I'd miss the RPM way of installing - but the "make" function automatically updates or gets the latest version -now that rocks.
The docs, man pages are Excellent! They've really paid attention to what's going on. The install and the post-install process is very tightly integrated - check the afterboot man page, for example. I like the layout of the files - it's not a big "mess" like in RH where you go, "What the heck is this for, and this, and this..."
But seriously, I'd like to see more info about OpenBSD!! When I checked for OpenBSD here on /. about a week ago, there were only some 3 posts about it. I'd like to know what other servers out there are running on OpenBSD - I'm really interested in which e-commerce sites run it.
I'm still going to run RH behind my firewall, but OpenBSD has garnered my respect... So cheers Theo and gang!
I managed to "make my own" on my Windows-based CD-ROM burner (I haven't transitioned it to a real OS yet). I downloaded the appropriate files from the site, and after a serious "Doh!" momement, remembered that .tar.gz is "equivelent" to .tgz (if you download them in Windows, don't forget that you have to end up with ISO9660 file names!), put them all in a directory called:
\2.5\I386
and it worked great. (My burner machine/software wouldn't make a bootable CDR off the OpenBSD boot disk. I used the floppy boot disk)
Cost me a couple blanks to get it right, but it worked. 8-)
I'd guess they probably held up your 2.5 order to send you the new 2.6 version (this is JUST a guess). I put my 2.6 order in a week or so ago. We'll see how long it take. I'm not too worried, myself. I found the FTP install worked great through my Cable Internet Access, I was just sending them money because I think it was worth supporting some people who have put some serious work into a very good project.
Nick.
Out of curiosity (NOT flame!), what is your definition of *real* Unix?
A friend of mine contents that AT&T is the "One True Unix". I've seen people argue that *BSD could, due to the development history, be "A True Unix (but you could get sued if you say so)". SCO, as owners of Unix Systems Labs could probably claim to be Real Unix. Anyone I'm forgetting?
It sounds like you have something in mind, just curious what? Esp. curious if it is something other than the ones I have mentioned! You refer to "a couple", I'm guessing you aren't one of the "One True Unix" people. 8-)
Diversity is good.
Nick.
One important point that somehow didn't make the announcement is (drumrolls) gcc 2.95.1 which was the most current stable distribution of gcc available at the time. There have been quite a few problems with the linker/assembler debunked in the process of upgrading. This does mean a huge improvement in C++ support. Lots of things that were hard to compile suddenly work. Also, the current state of the compiler is much closer to the official Cygnus/FSF gcc release. Yes, most changes have been folded back, and the remaining changes are either policy disagreement with the FSF, or bug-fixes that weren't yet in gcc 2.95.1.
That sounds like the sort of BS I expect from traditional media, and it's exactly the sort of thing Slashdot is ordinarily good for - working around journalists who spin and release stories to suit the needs of businesses instead of their readers, or because they want to emphasize the special access they've got with publishers that ordinary people don't have. Can you imagine holding back on a story because Microsoft PR or AOL PR people suggested it would be better for them if you just sat on it for a few hours or a few days or a few weeks?
OpenBSD is a wonderful thing, but I'd hate to see Slashdot endorse a double standard for treating some software vendors with kid gloves and others with skepticism. If you keep that sort of thing up, we'll just end up with a new version of slashdot, and you guys can just do some sort of cross-license with the other lapdog media. ZD-dot, anyone?
Look a little closer at the fishbowl itself.
This being said, I fully support the catoony, "fun" look that OpenBSD uses. (Linux too.) I think that "Script Kittie" is hilarious! LOL every time I read that. :-D The product speaks for itself. A fun mascot gives the product personality. And makes marketing easy. Every time I see a penguin now, anywhere, I think of Linux.
But...
Major corporations and the executives that run them are very conscious of appearing professional. Ever wonder why many of them expect employees to wear ties to work?
So unfortunately, even though a BSD or even a Linux distro might be more appropriate for a company's specific applications, many will choose a big name, "professional" UN*X like Solaris.
And I don't have anything against that. I like Solaris. But you have to admit that when a suit (particularly one who doesn't exactly know what he's talking about) is reviewing Solaris, the name recognition and professionalism help.
My preference? Screw the execs and keep the fun cover art. Go Kittie go.
--
I like to watch.
From the very beginning, Theo has been very much against releasing ISO's. He says that ISOs hurt the progress of OpenBSD by not encouraging people to purchase the CD.
_ rn=md]/jump/http://x37.deja.com/=dnc/viewt hread.xp?AN=521151289&search=thread
A link to a long discussion on this topic is below.
http://www.deja.com/[ST_artlink=x37.deja.com,ST
Plankeye
Who the hell told Carrot Top he was funny?
As we know, the cat is "Script Kittie" (har har). He's looking to get some fish. In the fishbowl, we see Blowfish, the mascot of the OpenBSD crypto. Script Kittie (a security threat) will "choke" on Blowfish (OpenBSD crypto).
Is it just me, or does the fish bowl look like the GNU gnu? Perhaps they're lambasting Linux's lack of security?
I think Script Kittie is great. Whoever came up with that, good job! ;-)
--
I like to watch.
Just my two yen.
--
I like to watch.
undocumented? how's that? ever used a man page? I only have OpenBSD so I can't speak for the others, but if you want to do it, there is probably a man page on it. like man skey, or man ipsec, or man md5, man ccd (which looks to me like it's written in plain english)
Fags? They rip us off? By charging a mere $30 for the CDs? Ergh, I'm mad at myself for even dignifying his childish comment.
The fish bowl is definitely the BSD demon mascot.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Upwards on this thread it stated that one could make changes under the BSD license and release an executable without releasing the source code. Doesn't this imply that they can thus also produce MyVeryOwnBSD, placing themselves in the MyVeryOwnBSD governing elite in the process? (of course they had better be a damn good coder to justify it).
"In a world without walls, who needs Windows" - Someone from LinuxToday
make world, not war
My point exactly...
"Hey, can't we all just get along?"
It would be nice if you'd back that statement up with some kind of information. However, I suspect your logic is a eloquent as your writing is, which spares us the possibility of enduring a rant from you on this. $30 is *cheap*. Look what Windows costs--three times as much. Look at what Windows NT costs... Please help support the OpenBSD team.
Ay ay Flynn... 'tis been a while. I'm still thinking about comming out to visit you in March. Could I sleep on your cot in the basement (and bask in the warmth of your PCs...)? Cya
Be smart and work to create. Don't ride on the backs of others.
Even Windows has "BSD sockets." I don't think this refers to requireing a BSD OS.
BTW, anyone know of a good website comparing Linux to the BSDs?
Here's some Linux v FreeBSD arguments - but it's FreeBSD advocacy - mostly.