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

91–100 of 208 posts

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#91

Post by aquabeagle »

bigato wrote: post #76
brynet wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because perl is part of the base system, and not a package, harmless files are typically not removed by the OpenBSD Installer. You don't have to remove those files, the upgrade guide simply indicates they're no longer required.

> harmless files are typically not removed by the OpenBSD Installer I also don't understand the reasoning behind this.

It's your system, the installer doesn't know what you're doing with it. Maybe you have your own programs depending on those files?

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#92

Post by DblPlusUngood »

quotemstr wrote: post #27

Still no unified buffer cache. :-( The lack of coherence and memory reuse between mmap(2) and read(2) is my single biggest beef with OpenBSD right now. It's a great system in terms of robustness, documentation, and philosophical unification. It's a shame its kernel still thinks Ronald Reagan is president.

What coherence is lacking? OpenBSD supports msync(2), which is the only POSIX mechanism I know of for ensuring coherency between read(2) and shared file mappings. Otherwise relying on unspecified behavior sounds dangerous.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#93

Post by tedunangst »

arendtio wrote: post #90
tedunangst wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you manage to get an OpenBSD install that didn't include awk?

I downloaded install64.iso started it and entered the shell. Next, I entered 'awk' and got the response: sh: awk: not found Maybe their live cd doesn't include the whole 'base' set?

The installer is not a live CD. It's only enough tooling to install openbsd.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#94

Post by tedunangst »

brynet wrote: post #86
ernst_klim wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but manual upgrades with `tar'ring userspace, copying kernel and removing files seems abysmally error-prone to me.

You're reading the manual upgrade guide, for remote systems where you would otherwise cannot boot the ramdisk kernel to upgrade, which handles all of that for you. If you have console access to the machine, serial or glass. Things are far easier.

More evidence the hard way instructions should simply be deleted.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#95

Post by floatboth »

Hello71 wrote: post #25
justinsaccount wrote: post #11

> First release of unwind(8), a validating, recursive nameserver for 127.0.0.1. It is particularly suitable for laptops moving between networks. When systemd-resolvd was first released it was the biggest mistake ever to write a new recursive resolver instead of using unbound or dnsmasq. Also since DNS ".. wasn't broken, so it did not need fixing". I wonder if unwind will be received with the same hostility.

> new recursive resolver instead of using unbound or dnsmasq systemd-resolv e d is a non-recursive resolver. so is dnsmasq.

What's the correct word for "something local that talks to 8.8.8.8/whatever and caches responses" if not recursive? Forwarding?

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#96

Post by asveikau »

mikece wrote: post #9
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…

>I really enjoy how simple the system is after all these years with Linux. I still shake my head when I think back to the 90s and how Linux managed to overtake the BSDs. Good to see they are still very much alive and moving forward.

The weird thing, though, is that 90s Linux felt a little more like the BSDs than Linux usually does today. I mean, the BSDs were always a bit more coherent, but the default install of a typical Linux distro felt a lot less "heavy" in the past. You can switch from Linux to one of the *BSDs and feel like you are bringing back the glory days.

Maybe this is a complaint about Ubuntu, or gnome, or systemd.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#97

Post by wahern »

asveikau wrote: post #32
justinsaccount wrote: post #11

> First release of unwind(8), a validating, recursive nameserver for 127.0.0.1. It is particularly suitable for laptops moving between networks. When systemd-resolvd was first released it was the biggest mistake ever to write a new recursive resolver instead of using unbound or dnsmasq. Also since DNS ".. wasn't broken, so it did not need fixing". I wonder if unwind will be received with the same hostility.

OpenBSD has done a few of these daemons over the years, where they reject existing popular implementations to do their own with their own priorties. I started typing a list but really there are too many, big and small. They tend to have the OpenBSD minimalist, security focused, "no bullshit" approach. It's not very much like systemd.

unwind uses libunbound, so it's a little different then some of their other greenfield projects. (See my post elsethread.) Like with OpenSSL/libressl they're not reinventing the wheel so much as just inventing a new kind of vehicle to place atop the wheels.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#99

Post by makz »

kbenson wrote: post #45
asveikau wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenBSD has done a few of these daemons over the years, where they reject existing popular implementations to do their own with their own priorties. I started typing a list but really there are too many, big and small. They tend to have the OpenBSD minimalist, security focused, "no bullshit" approach. It's not very much like systemd.

In a way, OpenBSD isn't really written in C. It's written in a special subset of C that uses some different, more secure core functions and any where any trade-off for performance instead of security is ruthlessly weeded out when reviewed by the people involved. I'm of the opinion that using C and C++ for future major work where there's not good reasons forcing you to is more trouble than it's worth, but I wouldn't m…

As far as I have seen, every time a project uses C, they end up transforming it in some subset and if you want to contribute, you must learn that C subset. It’s almost like DSLs.

I think that’s expected, and cool, given that C is a general purpose language and very flexible.

Re: OpenBSD 6.5

#100

Post by badsectoracula »

fstephany wrote: post #46

This is some serious OpenBSD artwork. I would love that they reconsider the 'no product' policy. I understand the logistical nightmare of pressed CDs though...

Well, at this point it'd be pressed dual layer blu rays though, i downloaded the entire version and just the amd64 directories are around 45GB in size. I do not understand why they feel the need to associate OS versions with 3rd party packages though, why have an OpenBSD 6.5 version of -say- the 0ad game instead of an OpenBSD version of it that you say it needs at least OpenBSD 6.5 (or whatever) version to run?

(same question about Linux distros in general, FWIW... i just do not see the point of packaging so much stuff for a single OS version, it is like if Windows did the same thing - ignoring licensing - Windows 10 would include Photoshop, Steam, DOOM, Visual Studio, Maya, 3ds max and pretty much every other program with a bit of popularity ever made)

Well, at least a single arch version still fits on a single disk medium, last time i checked Debian needed several DL BDs (although perhaps a single BDXL disk, once they become available, will work... assuming we also ever burners for those).

Post reply on HN