Live data from Hacker News

OpenBSD 7.9

openbsd.org

121–130 of 314 posts

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#121
post #108
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD's primary purpose is to create artwork ( https://www.openbsd.org/artwork.html ), releasing an OS is a side project.

That's 9front where CSP, GeFS and the like are futuristic artwork, kinda like modern DaVinci. We are not ready yet.

9fronts site will always be one of my favorite place on the net. I don't like plan9 (architecturally it is amazing, I just am to bigoted to stay sane on its userland) but the humor is so my style of humor

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#122
post #10

Anyone here using OpenBSD? If so, for what purpose? I’ve always wanted to use NetBSD for an application for an embedded system / IoT device but never had the pleasure (yet!).

We use OpenBSD for our VPSes on Hetzner, bare metal (for security focussed clients) and older (but still good) hardware in our Home Lab. OpenBSD is excellent on older (no longer supported by Cupertino) Apple hardware. We have an Intel Mac Mini Cluster with near-perfect uptime. If you need to run any kind of server (Web, Mail, DNS, NFS, Database) where you need stability & security, look no further. Some learning curv…

I want to use OpenSMTPD so badly, but it doesn't have proper support for authentication via LDAP (at least, as far as I can tell). It insists on reading plaintext passwords from the LDAP server, rather than BINDing as the user in question.

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#123
post #90

With all the security issues constantly being uncovered in other Operating Systems - which will only accelerate with Ai - it’s time everyone considers OpenBSD. Their decades-long security-focus is second to none. We have fully converted from Ubuntu/Debian to OpenBSD. No looking back.

Is OpenBSD actually more secure than Linux? I have not been able to find any data to support this—only some vague opinions.

No. (It's fine!)

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you care about security, why not consider Qubes OS? Related discussion: https://forum.qubes-os.org/t/qubesos-vs-openbsd-security/790...

Qubes OS uses the Linux kernel. Without wanting to start a flame-war and with all respect to Linux, it’s not even close. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBSD_security_features

https://isopenbsdsecu.re/

(This site is extremely good and has fairly recent coverage, point-by-point, of all OpenBSD's mitigations. An important subtext to take to this is that OpenBSD has a reputation for introducing mitigations that exploit developers make fun of. Some of them are great, some of them less so.)

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you care about security, why not consider Qubes OS? Related discussion: https://forum.qubes-os.org/t/qubesos-vs-openbsd-security/790...

Qubes OS uses the Linux kernel. Without wanting to start a flame-war and with all respect to Linux, it’s not even close. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBSD_security_features

The “kernel” in Qubes is arguably Xen rather than Linux, and that’s where the security boundaries are supposed to be defined rather than within VMs that may be running any OS. VM compartmentalization as a security mechanism is hard to compare to a more conventional Unix like OpenBSD.

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#126
post #73
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was FreeBSD and NetBSD. NetBSD supporting many platforms while FreeBSD supported just x86. There was some contention between NetBSD developers and Theo and crew left to create OpenBSD. They all more or less have common ancestry being derivatives of 386BSD.

Yeah, i knew there was some aspects of decendancy across the different BSDs. And, I mentioned NetBSD for embedded stuff...but really, i *think* its that NetBsd is simply installed on tons of different hardware....so not only embedded....i kinda remembered that about NetBSD. But, its the other BSDs - in particular FreeBSD vs OpenBSD - that i always forget the differences...but got it now. Thanks!

freebsd = utility

openbsd = security

netbsd = portability

freebsd: performance, features, drivers, software compat - closest to linux in utility & usability though unlike linux in execution

openbsd: safety for exposed services

netbsd: portable across many cpu & hardware platforms - big-endian powerpc sun, hitachi sh3 jornada, etc, easiest to port to a new arch

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#127
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(technically it's just a Linux kernel. GNU doesn't do any kernel work aside from deblob scripts)

Yeah, I'm aware of FSFLA and Linux Libre, but Hurd is not ready yet and it's being worked on with LLM's (something really anti-GNU, as it's propietary SAAS). https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2026-03/msg00100... In the end Hyperbola BSD will be more free than OpenBSD and the former GNU maintainers themselves...

I don't really see the LLM use as anti-GNU. It would be no different if the code was written in a proprietary IDE with fancy code completion. GNU doesn't restrict contributors to using exclusively free software for their contributions (if they did, they likely wouldn't have gotten very far considering how much work apple did on GCC). As long as the license is free and GPL compatible, it isn't inherently non-GNU (though, they'd encourage you not to use a SaSS for your own sake)

Now, is LLM code in the hurd a good thing? No, absolutely not. Ignoring the licensing limbo of LLM output that still isn't settled , LLMs make pretty bad code often enough that I wouldn't trust it to work on something as niche and relatively undocumented as the hurd.

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#128
I would really love to adopt OpenBSD but the one thing I can't deal with is the absence of journalized filesystem.

Just the idea not to be able to recover after a power cut and work is hard to accept to be honest.

I have been recently considering running it on a minimal Alpine ZFS host but I am not sure how much I can optimize the display experience since I do not think OpenBSD support QXL/SPICE.

I would be curious if someone found a way...

Re: OpenBSD 7.9

#129
post #6
post #4

BSDs are interesting projects. As I understand it there's a broad difference of them all doing things reasonably well but a) Free is general-purpose, b) Net is especially portable/many architecture and Open is security focused

OpenBSD's primary purpose is to create artwork ( https://www.openbsd.org/artwork.html ), releasing an OS is a side project.

Based on the CD covers I used v2.3 and v2.4. That's been a while. I might still have the CD sets somewhere out in storage with other legacy stuff.
Post reply on HN