OpenBSD 6.2
openbsd.org
OpenBSD 6.2
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#2Off topic a bit, but anyone here use OpenBSD? I'd be interested in hearing why you use it, and what your experience has been like.
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#3Off topic a bit, but anyone here use OpenBSD? I'd be interested in hearing why you use it, and what your experience has been like.
I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable.
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#4Off topic a bit, but anyone here use OpenBSD? I'd be interested in hearing why you use it, and what your experience has been like.
I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable.
>I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable.
The OpenBSD propaganda works I see...
Do you really think the tools you use like your web browser, mail client etc, have less vulnerabilities on OpenBSD than on any other BSD or linux distribution, please...
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#5> The i386 and amd64 platforms have switched to using clang(1) as the base system compiler.
Nice!
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#6Off topic a bit, but anyone here use OpenBSD? I'd be interested in hearing why you use it, and what your experience has been like.
I've used FreeBSD on my laptop (lenovo x201) for a long time, I've also installed OpenBSD from time to time. The rumors on the internet was that OpenBSD had better hardware support. I remember someone claiming that whereas FreeBSD developers use VMs to develop, OpenBSD devs used native machines (mostly laptops). I faintly remember that installing OpenBSD was harder than FreeBSD. FreeBSD came with a terminal graphical installer, partioning etc. happened automatically.
The problem I had with BSDs was that they were slower than Linux. Especially when it came to boot times, Linux booted up in seconds due to parallel starting of system services. On FreeBSD the same machine with an SSD took nearly half a minute to boot. Some people here on HN had advised me to use a parallel system initializer, or never completely shutdown my laptop. Always keeping the laptop at sleep did not work for me, because I was (and am) very paranoid when it comes to computers, I can't sleep if my computer is not shutdown and has an ethernet cable plugged into it. Using a parallel system initializer did not work, because I was too lazy to set one up.
Battery consumption was another issue. Although FreeBSD provided decent battery life, utilities like powertop did not exist for BSD platforms.
What I liked about FreeBSD was that it was a pure OS. When I opened htop, I could see only a handful of processes running, and I knew what each process did.
On the other hand, everything required manual configuration. I basically lived in the terminal to operate my laptop. But that is probably due to my lazyness to automate and write scripts.
I'd also be interested in the differences in day-to-day life between FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable.
>I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable. The OpenBSD propaganda works I see... Do you really think the tools you use like your web browser, mail client etc, have less vulnerabilities on OpenBSD than on any other BSD or linux distribution, please...
Actually "your web browser, mail client etc" do a lot of system calls to do networking et al, so yes, they do have less vulnerabilities than on Linux.
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable.
>I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable. The OpenBSD propaganda works I see... Do you really think the tools you use like your web browser, mail client etc, have less vulnerabilities on OpenBSD than on any other BSD or linux distribution, please...
That's not the point.
Of course that the software will have the same number of bugs/vulnerabilities on OpenBSD.
The question is how much damage an exploit/crash will do overall. OpenBSD has quite a few of protection mechanisms in place.
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#9Off topic a bit, but anyone here use OpenBSD? I'd be interested in hearing why you use it, and what your experience has been like.
It's generally easy to maintain on my server. With normally fewer than 40 processes/daemons running at any time, I can reason about what's going on, as opposed to Linux or macOS.
Downsides are that much of the system feels stuck in ancient times (there seems to be more support and documentation for tape drives than SSDs), the ongoing removal of sometimes useful software like sqlite from base, and anemic or absent support for secondary hardware platforms and features like Bluetooth.
Re: OpenBSD 6.2
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable.
>I've used it on my laptop. Primarily because it has had few vulnerabilities and is very stable. The OpenBSD propaganda works I see... Do you really think the tools you use like your web browser, mail client etc, have less vulnerabilities on OpenBSD than on any other BSD or linux distribution, please...
> Do you really think the tools you use like your web browser, mail client etc, have less vulnerabilities on OpenBSD than on any other BSD or linux distribution, please...
Yes. OpenBSD employs several mechanisms that improve the security of every application e.g. W^X and stack protector.