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

OpenBSD 6.5

openbsd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 208 posts

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#51

Post by yarrel »

Spivak wrote: post #30
mises wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are probably less upset because it doesn't take the "systemd all the things" approach of getting rid of huge chunks of old stuff for what is ostensibly an init system. I don't have much of an issue with systemd (except binary logging; I hate that) and just put up with it, but the reasons for which people objected to systemd don't seem to extend to this.

The only connection that systemd-resolved has to the init system is the name prefix. Seems odd to praise the BSDs for developing everything in a single repo but faulting systemd for the same approach.

The BSDs are operating systems. SystemD hasn't yet admitted that it is.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#52

Post by throw0101a »

Spivak wrote: post #30
mises wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are probably less upset because it doesn't take the "systemd all the things" approach of getting rid of huge chunks of old stuff for what is ostensibly an init system. I don't have much of an issue with systemd (except binary logging; I hate that) and just put up with it, but the reasons for which people objected to systemd don't seem to extend to this.

The only connection that systemd-resolved has to the init system is the name prefix. Seems odd to praise the BSDs for developing everything in a single repo but faulting systemd for the same approach.

> Seems odd to praise the BSDs for developing everything in a single repo but faulting systemd for the same approach.

I think it is more accurate to say that the (supposed) problem with systemd's approach is actually tight coupling as opposed to a single repo.

OpenSSH, OpenSMTP, OpenBGPD, LibreSSL, Mandoc, the recent Unwind, etc, may all be in the same repo, but none depending on each other. Try taking systemd-resolved (or journald) and running it on its own.

If the various systemd "components" were actual components that could be swapped out for something else there would be fewer complains IMHO.

systemd-as-init-replacement is/was fine. systemd-as-kitchen-sink is where things went sideways.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#53

Post by mises »

Spivak wrote: post #30
mises wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are probably less upset because it doesn't take the "systemd all the things" approach of getting rid of huge chunks of old stuff for what is ostensibly an init system. I don't have much of an issue with systemd (except binary logging; I hate that) and just put up with it, but the reasons for which people objected to systemd don't seem to extend to this.

The only connection that systemd-resolved has to the init system is the name prefix. Seems odd to praise the BSDs for developing everything in a single repo but faulting systemd for the same approach.

I didn't praise them for that. It's more that I don't like the systemd way of making everything systemd. The difference is that the stuff openbsd develops is largely standalone applications, whereas systemd wants to take over the world and replace everything.

This makes it very hard to tweak a system, and I would again bring up the logging issue. Systemd-journald stores files in binary format, which is a pain. I was working on something where I accidentally bricked the system (VM, thankfully) due to configuring some in-depth security stuff. I mounted the disk and tried to read off the log, but couldn't. It's also a pain to replace it, and non-systemd alternatives are becoming increasingly poorly supported.

Systemd wants to take over temporary files, journaling, and much, much more. Many of the implementations are imperfect. That's fine; I understand it's hard to get that much right. Which is why I wish they made it easier to replace systemd components or didn't use it.

The init itself (units etc.) is good, and I actually like it. I just wish they got that polished, then made another, separate project if they thought they could do another piece better.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#54

Post by pimeys »

gsruff wrote: post #41
pimeys wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD does not yet have kvm support, so you can run qemu, but it'll be very slow.

Not sure if this helps, but OpenBSD does have vmm/vmd. Some have reported success running Docker within a Linux guest. https://medium.com/@dave_voutila/docker-on-openbsd-6-1-curre...

Something to try next weekend, thanks for the link.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#55

Post by chousuke »

yarrel wrote: post #51
Spivak wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only connection that systemd-resolved has to the init system is the name prefix. Seems odd to praise the BSDs for developing everything in a single repo but faulting systemd for the same approach.

The BSDs are operating systems. SystemD hasn't yet admitted that it is.

Hasn't admitted?

As far as I know, it is an explicitly stated goal of the systemd project to provide an integrated (compared to whatever each distribution assembled together to provide one) base system on top of the Linux kernel with the intent of making the best use of the features provided by the kernel.

It seems to me that Lennart looked at the tightly integrated base system + kernel approach of the BSDs and decided he wanted that for Linux too (in addition to whatever other influences he had), and then he made it happen.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#56

Post by zmyrgel »

crest wrote: post #31
snazz wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean that I can’t startx on a machine that I rarely use X on? Is a display manager now required for running X? From a security standpoint this makes sense, of course, but how are you supposed to deal with a half-desktop-half-server system?

No. It just means that startx no longer requires root to start X. It removes setuid root from one more executable.

I thought it means exactly that for X you need to run xenodm. But if you don't want to run it by default you can use "doas rcctl start -f xenodm" to start display manager when needed.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#57

Post by ixtli »

cpach wrote: post #47
ixtli wrote: post #18

Of all of the places a Bee and Puppycat fan might expect to find Natasha Allegri's work ... release art (?!) for OpenBSD 6.5 is perhaps the last I would have expected.

I love it when software projects does whimsical artwork like this :)

It's pretty great. As someone said below: I'd buy a tshirt.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#59

Post by ixtli »

dcbadacd wrote: post #58

Why doesn't OpenBSD do KASLR?

You'd be shocked to know how long after this was shown academically to be a Good Idea™ it took to get it into operating systems like Windows. The reason back then was because application programmers depended (incorrectly!) on sequential allocations so when you started randomizing things you'd break stuff.

Idk if that's the case here but its been a big reason historically.

I know OpenBSD doesn't prioritize new features but KASLR is a pretty significant security improvement, right?

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#60

Post by MuffinFlavored »

pimeys wrote: post #2

Been running 6.5 snapshots in my travel laptop for some weeks and everything just works. The laptop is a ThinkPad X200 which is a bit slow for my needs, but upgrading it to ThinkPad X230 later this week should help. I really enjoy how simple the system is after all these years with Linux. I will always continue using Linux in my main computers, but for surfing, some hobby programming and as a travel OS OpenBSD defini…

> but for surfing, some hobby programming and as a travel OS OpenBSD definitely won me over.

Mac OS X has won me (and many others) over when it comes to these topics. I'm curious why BSD would be your choice. It sounds painful?

Post reply on HN