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

OpenBSD 7.0

openbsd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 229 posts

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#51

Post by agumonkey »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #19
tbrock wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things are where you’d expect, patterns and conventions cary on throughout the system, etc… Vs the disjoint feeling linux has.

Part of the job of a Linux distribution is to provide policy, conventions, and similar consistency. If you install everything from sources directly, or directly from upstream vendors, you may get inconsistencies, but if you install everything from your Linux distribution, you should get reasonable consistency, just as if you install everything from your BSD distribution.

even in a distro, you'll get various syntax variations for instance

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#52

Post by ToddWBurgess »

ksec wrote: post #45
bluGill wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD split from NetBSD years ago for political reasons. So it isn't a surprise that 20 years ago politics and the issues thereof were high on everyone's mind.

>OpenBSD split from NetBSD years ago for political reasons. I was naive in thinking it was always about the focus on priorities, as in Security vs NetBSD's portability. So I decided to read up on it [1]. Since Wiki seems to be purposely quiet / unclear on the incident. Turns out Open Source Politics isn't that much different 25 years later. [1] https://www.theos.com/deraadt/coremail.html

Theo de Raadt wanted to make security the number one priority and the NetBSD team did not. So Theo de Raadt forked NetBSD in order to create OpenBSD which would become security first. It was a political decision. My source on that is a NetBSD kernel dev.

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#53

Post by gtirloni »

yabones wrote: post #37
nanna wrote: post #6

Any BSD fans out there wish to persuade a happy Debian desktop user to take a BSD for a spin?

Linux systems are made by dozens of disparate teams, and it shows. Every command has a different syntax - just think about how "help" could be -h, --help, -help, -? etc BSDs are very tightly integrated. The entire OS is very consistent and 'correct', down to the tiny and pedantic details like putting things under /usr that are usually installed in /bin, because that's the way it's supposed to be . (Ex. `/usr/local/bi…

And that would make me switch from Linux why exactly?

Don't get me wrong, I was a BSD user for many years (FreeBSD 3.5-5.0) but I don't think that's enough reason to switch.

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#54

Post by gtirloni »

mrweasel wrote: post #48
Koshkin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coherency, security, stability, ZFS... Perfect on a server (e.g. a VPS), may not be as good as a desktop or as something to run on a laptop (depending on hardware).

> Coherency, security, stability, ZFS... My only sort of complaint in regards to FreeBSD is actually ZFS. Not that it's not fantastic, or that it shouldn't be there. ZFS does however clearly comes from Solaris, and there have been no effort to make the ZFS command line tools feel more BSD like. Changing the tooling around ZFS probably isn't a great idea, but coherency has clearly taken a backseat to features in this…

It's coherent with the other ZFS implementations in Linux and Solaris.

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#55

Post by mistrial9 »

tazjin wrote: post #35
School-Cotton wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re obviously curious and want to try it, or you wouldn’t have posted that, so why not go for it? You have nothing to lose. For me the coolest thing about OpenBSD is it’s the simplest OS that is still of practical use (i.e., not counting ones that are purely for research or education). So if you’re curious about how any part of the system works, it’s easy to just dive into /usr/src and figure it out. It’s also ent…

systemd is configured via simple text files

How are remote updates in Ubuntu configured by text file under systemd?

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#56

Post by enriquto »

nix23 wrote: post #42
School-Cotton wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What simple text file is, for example, the list of WiFi SSIDs to try to connect to stored in?

/etc/systemd/network/25-wireless.network https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/systemd-networkd#network_fi... But simple i would not call it...compared to bsd ;)

This file does not exist on my rather plain ubuntu 20.04 LTS.

I tried finding similarly named files, to no avail. Knowing the notorious ADHD of the systemd developership, I wouldn't be surprised if this file is moved, renamed, and uses a different format every six months.

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#57

Post by noja »

0xdeadb00f wrote: post #32
noja wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^^ The wording of this response represents exactly why many people don't choose OpenBSD.

They make a good point though. OpenBSD is not known for it's stability.

I was referring not to the content of the comment, but the wording of its delivery.

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#58

Post by drewpc »

nanna wrote: post #6

Any BSD fans out there wish to persuade a happy Debian desktop user to take a BSD for a spin?

Be curious; learn it. Figure out pros/cons for yourself. You'll have more breadth of knowledge, more depth in specific areas, and will likely make better architecture choices in the future because of it.

Re: OpenBSD 7.0

#59

Post by JoshTriplett »

agumonkey wrote: post #51
JoshTriplett wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the job of a Linux distribution is to provide policy, conventions, and similar consistency. If you install everything from sources directly, or directly from upstream vendors, you may get inconsistencies, but if you install everything from your Linux distribution, you should get reasonable consistency, just as if you install everything from your BSD distribution.

even in a distro, you'll get various syntax variations for instance

Syntax of what?
Post reply on HN