Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenBSD 6.4 released

openbsd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 179 posts

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#151

Post by Mordak »

h1d wrote: post #133

Interesting, I've been running Linux for 15 years, yet I can't understand how to upgrade from 6.3, which I just installed on a cloud server, to 6.4 by reading the official document. (Specifically the part "instruct the boot loader to boot this kernel" because it says to type in the file name during the boot process, which is not exactly easy on a remote machine.) https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade64.html I have a lo…

Keep reading. The upgrade guide has two parts: the first part that assumes the common configuration (you have console access and are using the OpenBSD boot loader), and the second part[1] in the event that you do not. If you have console access and can boot from iso, you can also use the cd64.iso image to boot into the install kernel and follow the common upgrade procedure on the console.

There is an in-between case where you have a console, but do not control the boot loader (so cannot boot bsd.rd) and cannot boot an iso. It sounds like maybe you are in this situation? In this case, you can still follow the upgrade directions as if you do not have a console[1]. Alternately, sometimes when I am in this situation I just download the install kernel (bsd.rd), move it where the boot loader is hard-coded to look (/bsd), and then reboot. The boot loader will boot the install kernel and you can follow the usual / common upgrade procedure on the console.

There is also autoinstall[2], which can automate the upgrade procedure for you and reduces upgrades to just rebooting into bsd.rd and waiting a bit. There is a bit of effort to create the response file, etc., so this may be overkill for a single instance but is very useful for upgrading fleets of machines quickly.

[1] https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade64.html#NoInstKern [2] https://man.openbsd.org/autoinstall

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#152

Post by 4ad »

JdeBP wrote: post #150
4ad wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

url: "pkg+http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/${ABI}/quarterly" This is the default configuration.

Not originally it wasn't. That was a change in 10.2 . * https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/a-mini-faq-on-pkg.49694/p... * https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-announce/2...

It's the default now, and 10.2 was released over three years ago. What exactly is your point?

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#153

Post by fabioyy »

nineteen999 wrote: post #125
atmosx wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you live without docker containers? The fact that docker doesn’t run on BSDs is what drove me away.

Plenty of people live just fine without docker containers, even in the Linux world.

Plenty of people lived just fine without the industrial revolution, scientific method, cellphones, computers, fire...

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#154

Post by auslander »

trasz wrote: post #137
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For almost all of us. Companies extend the BSD OSs with proprietary additions, then abandon the work and it gets lost. With Linux, everyone is forced to play nice and release under the GPL, and the work gets to live as long as people value it. Hence the Linux kernel snowballing and taking over the world, whereas the BSDs have not, despite being at least as strong technically. The better Linux gets, the more people ta…

If that were true, BSD-licensed projects like PostgreSQL, LLVM, Xorg, or Apache would die off long time ago, replaced by their GNU-licensed counterparts. Yet we're witnessing the exact opposite happening. Licenses don't work like you think they do. In fact, they work backwards: the decision whether to release the source or not doesn't depend on the license, it's the license - and thus the choice of existing software…

> Juniper does

I hope they didn't. But if they try, triple check, or better rewrite :)

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#155

Post by na85 »

sverige wrote: post #117
na85 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD just isn't performant enough for me. I can't honestly say that it has what I need when I get multi-second system freezes when opening or closing tabs in chromium (though this was under 6.0) Battery life under OpenBSD is atrocious compared even to Linux. It's a great server OS but it's not ready for laptop daily driver use unless your laptop just sits plugged in all day.

I use it as a daily driver for my laptop. It's quite performant. I also boot a linux distro sometimes on that machine, and don't notice much difference in battery life between the two. They've been adding drivers like crazy for a while now, too, so there are many more hardware choices than there were a couple years ago.

Well, on my x220 the difference between OpenBSD and Debian was more than an hour of battery life, to say nothing of tabbing freezes.

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#156

Post by ahriman »

h1d wrote: post #133

Interesting, I've been running Linux for 15 years, yet I can't understand how to upgrade from 6.3, which I just installed on a cloud server, to 6.4 by reading the official document. (Specifically the part "instruct the boot loader to boot this kernel" because it says to type in the file name during the boot process, which is not exactly easy on a remote machine.) https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade64.html I have a lo…

Do you have console access, via VNC for example?

If so, download the new bsd.rd image and place it in /

Reboot, and at the boot prompt type:

boot bsd.rd

Then follow the prompts.

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#157

Post by h1d »

ahriman wrote: post #156
h1d wrote: post #133

Interesting, I've been running Linux for 15 years, yet I can't understand how to upgrade from 6.3, which I just installed on a cloud server, to 6.4 by reading the official document. (Specifically the part "instruct the boot loader to boot this kernel" because it says to type in the file name during the boot process, which is not exactly easy on a remote machine.) https://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade64.html I have a lo…

Do you have console access, via VNC for example? If so, download the new bsd.rd image and place it in / Reboot, and at the boot prompt type: boot bsd.rd Then follow the prompts.

Yes, I was struggling to do this from the remote shell but I had remote access to the console to specify the ram disk to get through the upgrade process but I'd consider I'm one of the lucky ones when providers like AWS doesn't have that feature to access boot process in real time.

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#158

Post by nineteen999 »

fabioyy wrote: post #153
nineteen999 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people live just fine without docker containers, even in the Linux world.

Plenty of people lived just fine without the industrial revolution, scientific method, cellphones, computers, fire...

None of which were branded Docker(TM) - https://www.docker.com/legal/trademark-guidelines

Don't get me wrong, sure it has its uses, but to pretend that Docker(TM) is just as big a leap (or as essential) as any of those things is laughable.

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#159

Post by mmt »

lmaximus1983 wrote: post #146
mmt wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> software that is only deployed on one or two servers on a company intranet and the general public will never see it. I thought that, in this case, it's the company itself who is the "user" of the software and isn't obligated to do anything to/for/about upstream (since there is no stream.. they're not re-distributing it). In that sense, they're not stealing anything, just using what was, explicitly, free to use.

The code was compiled, so they cannot make modifications. So it is in violation. You would be right if it was PHP / Python or something else that was interpreted. The real point to take away is that any modifications will never reach upstream.

I don't understand what compilation has to do with anything, if the company (user) in question isn't distributing the software outside the company.

How is it any different from an individual making changes to GPL software and using it (compiler or interpretted) on a personal computer? Surely that individual isn't obligated to share anything, either.

> The real point to take away is that any modifications will never reach upstream.

The GPL doesn't mention, AFAIK, any such concept. I thought the point was freedom for users of software, not implied benefit to some "upstream" programmer.

IOW, since the GPL is about the user, it's about protecting "downstream" and, without redistribution, there's none to protect.

Re: OpenBSD 6.4 released

#160

Post by exikyut »

toyg wrote: post #120
sverige wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. Unless of course you became an Iridium level donor with the caveat that someone promised to build a Docker clone for you. Edit: And in response to toyg's comment, here is a link to a video of a talk by the developer in question, who mentions in passing that he builds things for OpenBSD that help him put it into production. This is less than a minute into his talk. Please educate yourself about the proje…

> Please educate yourself about the project Oh, I am educated enough, don't worry. Which is why I was so surprised to see it finally adopt a solution for a problem that had been pointed out for 20 years, after spending those 20 years replying to everyone that it was just the wrong thing to do in principle . > It's unfriendly It's also unfriendly to gaslight away blatant problems, for whatever reason, until they get f…

I've read through this subthread with objective concern.

A criticism that seems fair has been presented here in a benign, non-antagonizing manner, and I am very perplexed as to why all comments arguing in favor of that view have been anonymously downvoted wholesale without anything approaching sufficient substantive explanation.

This is not the kind of behavior that (the) HN (community) is respected for.

Let me sum up what I see here.

- Someone argues in favor of Docker, and are downvoted by enough people their comment turned grey. I think this means it's at -5 or -10 or something. So, no explanation, no comments; just downvotes.

- The one reply that goes into a bit detail comes from a traditionalist UNIX standpoint, and is a bit passive-aggressive. (This comment isn't grey.)

- The next reply frames the parent as "THAT HackerNews response to Dropbox", and highlights that the implied simplicity and sense of "only one obvious way to solve this problem" is in fact not implied and that significant wheel-reinvention must (and presumably has) be done "on the ground". Docker's simplicity is highlighted along with its insecurity. This comment is grey.

- The next reply further brushes-off the stated arguments by (passive-aggressively) noting that the project seems successful enough, and maybe that's because they actually have it figured out. (This comment isn't grey.)

- I read the next reply as a gentle reminder of the importance of remaining relevant going forward - and the fact that this doesn't necessarily mean ground-up reinvention. This comment is also grey.

What is going on here?!

A nontrivial number of comments in this thread, and the other OpenBSD threads I've seen, are basically all chanting about OpenBSD's perfection.

Good customer service, good social skills and forward thinking are some of the most fundamental aspects of commercial success. Does open source think it can get away with "no shirt, no shoes" just because it's free? :(

Post reply on HN