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

OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

marc.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 415 posts

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#371

Post by aortega »

rodgerd wrote: post #327
aortega wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And at some point in the last 10 years, didn't OpenBSD's distro servers get owned up? Yes, a cvs bug I believe. No kernel will protect you from bad user-mode code that really wants to execute everybody's shell script. > Among security research insiders, OpenBSD's reputation became a little bit farcical. I spent lots of time looking through the OpenBSD Kernel, togheter with FreeBSD and Linux kernel. It was my job fo…

> Don't use a big browser. It's not in the default install :) Missing entirely the point of the parent post. I can claim anything is secure if I seal it in enough concrete.

But the reverse is also true. You cannot realistically claim that anything with over a million lines of code is bug-free.

That may explain why unlike all other operative systems out there, OpenBSD distro gets smaller as time passes.

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#372

Post by cytzol »

SwellJoe wrote: post #239
weland wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's an important point. The Linux manpages are a joke, they're half useless almost all the time.

The most offensive man pages are GNU project pages that effectively say, "for real documentation read the info page". Which, as someone that can never remember how to use info, is frustrating and just serves to piss me off...my first thought is "and a big fuck you to you, too". And then I look it up online so I don't have to read how to use info before I can read how to use the command I was looking for docs on. I do…

GNU's stance on man pages is entirely correct! For real documentation, read the info page, but you rarely want real documentation, you just want a quick example or the command-line invocation syntax, or what a particular argument does. And 99% of the time, that will be in a man page.

The problem lies when you want to find something 1% of the time, and it's here that man pages become sprawling unindexed messes. For example, take a look at the man pages for perl or zsh: you'll have no chance finding anything, as those programs are so large that they need a wealth of documentation to go into them. At the same time, the info page for ls contains the things you rarely need to see such as exactly how things are sorted or the minute details of timestamp formatting. If this were all in the man page, you'd complain that you couldn't find anything in it.

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#373

Post by mrbill »

I can see their point about "We need to keep this VAX around because building on actual hardware is different from building on emulation", however I'm sure there's bits of infrastructure, CRTs hooked to KVMs, etc, that could be replaced with newer and more efficient gear that can help with the power bill. You don't have to run the ENTIRE place on cast-off donations and stuff out of a dumpster.

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#374

Post by faboo »

cytzol wrote: post #372
SwellJoe wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most offensive man pages are GNU project pages that effectively say, "for real documentation read the info page". Which, as someone that can never remember how to use info, is frustrating and just serves to piss me off...my first thought is "and a big fuck you to you, too". And then I look it up online so I don't have to read how to use info before I can read how to use the command I was looking for docs on. I do…

GNU's stance on man pages is entirely correct! For real documentation, read the info page, but you rarely want real documentation, you just want a quick example or the command-line invocation syntax, or what a particular argument does. And 99% of the time, that will be in a man page. The problem lies when you want to find something 1% of the time, and it's here that man pages become sprawling unindexed messes. For ex…

I don't know, I always found the perl and zsh man pages to be rather pleasant. They were sprawling, sure, but having long ago given up on brevity, they have no fear of meticulously describing how a feature or flag works. And they're just man pages, so you don't need to read the manual-for-the-manual first like I always find myself doing when I'm forced to use info.

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#376

Post by gonzo »

chrissmithuk wrote: post #324
nailer wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point, I didn't know MIPS is still used in the embedded space, I thought it was all ARM these days. But OpenBSD could be testing on an embedded MIPS development device at any data center they want.

MIPS is on the rise again as recent SoCs are more power efficient than ARM. I don't have a source for this unfortunately. Sony Bravia EX series televisions are MIPS and Linux based for example.

It's not power efficiency, it's money.

MIPS SoC licensing is less expensive than ARM licensing at the smaller volumes inherent in low-end routers (.vs phones and tablets).

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#377

Post by _cipher_ »

markmark wrote: post #279
wmf wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I had a choice between, say, donating $10 to OpenBSD of which only $2 goes towards OpenSSH development and letting Google take over OpenSSH, I'd take my chances with the latter. I don't see why Linux or OS X users should subsidize OpenBSD.

Yeah, there's plenty of people here saying "hey, you use OpenSSH on x86, you should donate". But the the reason they need the donations is to pay the power bills for running things like Vax servers for OpenBSD development on ancient platforms? Not the most convincing argument.

And if you and many more were interested in 'why' there are some strange ports, you'd get your answer. Search and you might be surprised.

It's easy to just say "hur, they be stupid to port on vax/macppc/sparc/whatever". Do your homework.

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#378

Post by gwu78 »

chrissnell wrote: post #96
nailer wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD's main value is high security standards. - Is there a significant amount of people with high security standards and an interest in SGI workstation hardware? - What about people who have high security standards and Sharp Zaurus hardware? If these groups aren't as important, as say, ARM and x86 users, perhaps it could be worth dropping some of these platforms?

As a longtime OpenBSD fan and advocate, this has always fascinated me. I loved SGIs back in the day but they are slow as shit today and unusable for any kind of modern desktop usage unless all you do is write code in a terminal. These platforms survive in OpenBSD land because somebody still cares enough about them to enjoy hacking on them. There's no point in saying "Drop them!" because the devs working on them proba…

"... and unusable for any kind of modern desktop usage unless all you do is write code in a terminal."

Sounds good to me. Many times (actually most times) I have no need for a "desktop" metaphor on my screen in order to get things done. I actually get more done big jobs done faster without the desktop metaphor in the way.

"... the devs working on them probably could care less what the rest of us think."

That's what makes them so special.

Perhaps in the long run the most "powerful" and sought after computers will not be the ones with the latest chips, but the ones that the user has the most knowledge of and control over.

Can you imagine the old-timer reminiscing: "Remember when computers didn't have backdoors built-in?" or "Remember when you did not have to pay for a license to write programs for hardware you bought?"

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#379

Post by markmark »

_cipher_ wrote: post #377
markmark wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, there's plenty of people here saying "hey, you use OpenSSH on x86, you should donate". But the the reason they need the donations is to pay the power bills for running things like Vax servers for OpenBSD development on ancient platforms? Not the most convincing argument.

And if you and many more were interested in 'why' there are some strange ports, you'd get your answer. Search and you might be surprised. It's easy to just say "hur, they be stupid to port on vax/macppc/sparc/whatever". Do your homework.

All of the explanations I've seen are related to encouraging OpenBSD developers and surfacing bugs in OpenBSD, how does that help the typical x86 OpenSSH user? "We want $20k to help maintain this other thing we do that you have no interest in."

Re: OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have the funding to keep the lights on

#380

Post by nknighthb »

justin66 wrote: post #315
protomyth wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the feeling the people Theo yelled at are the same people Linus would yell at. Given Theo's behavior when RMS was trolling the misc list, Theo seemed quite calm.

There's a lot of fuzzy thinking in this thread. The idea that the emails which somehow come to our attention because they appear on internet blogs or something due to their OMG WTF value are representative of their author's normal, everyday output has as much merit as assuming, for example, that that photo of rackmounted OpenBSD computers on the openbsd.com page represents the entirety of the project's electricity us…

I notice that yet again, only bald assertions come forth, never evidence.

What do Theo and the project have to hide, exactly?

Post reply on HN