OpenBSD 7.9

That's too bad. I might need bluetooth on keyboard, mice, headphone/earbuds, etc. OpenBSD seems so nice, but right now it is limited to running as a server, and not a desktop, which could be considered a good thing, as it focuses on simplicity. However, I do wish it had more hardware support.

EDIT: Running openBSD in a VM might get me the best of both world, with hardware support on host OS (linux/win) and the benefit of running OpenBSD.

I’ve been using it on an old PC Engines router (great hardware, by the way! I wish they were still around.)

It ran for over 8 years without downtime, but I’ve had repeated problems in the last year or so.

I used the default partitioning scheme, which makes /usr tiny, and /var huge, and since it is a router, did not install X11.

At some point, they made x11 mandatory for auto updates. This is dumb, because all the upgrade tool is doing is untarring a list of tarballs. So, I had to perform partition surgery from the upgrade ramdisk to make room for X11.

Now, they made some ASLR relinking scheme mandatory, which makes sense, except the relink directory is 1.5GB (larger than the entire rest of the distribution, and far larger than the parts I voluntarily installed!).

For some reason the relink output files go in /usr, which, by default, won’t hold it at upgrade. It really belongs in /var, because it is not immutable, and also, there’s room there! So, I had to repartition the router from a rescue environment again.

They also removed the ability for ntp to sync on machines without cmos clocks, and the alternate config options don’t seem to work. That’s a bit more niche, granted, but my router hw is reasonably common for openbsd use and has that property. You can make it work by using a second utility to force clock sync at boot.

I like that they keep things simple, but they also recently pulled out any semblance of power loss safety for their file system. I’ve had to serial console in a few times to run fsck, which isn’t really the behavior I want from the home router!

They don’t have any way to setup DDNS in the base install, so you have to use a port or pkg. The port I chose was EOL’ed by upstream (ISC), so I’ll probably need to switch to dnsmasq as a dhcp server / dns server, which is fine, but those services are a significant fraction of the attack surface of my router. DDNS seems like a pretty simple thing to implement, and would be really high value for router use cases. Without it, I’d have to assign static addresses to everything on the LAN, then edit DNS records.

I think all this stuff is fixable, but wish they’d take the niche of “rock solid secure infrastructure” a bit more seriously. This used to be a nice “set and forget” weekend project but now it requires attention every few release cycles.

7.8 barely managed to fit in my duct tape and bailing wire partition layout. I’m probably going to switch to freebsd on a box with faster NICs when I finally get a > 1GBit internet connection (hopefully in the next year or so).

If I upgrade to 7.9, I’ll have to give up on using the openbsd hypervisor, since, with the partition scheme that the installer chose, there will no longer be a partition large enough to hold the download sets and also the vm image.

This is particularly frustrating because the boot drive is under 50% full. I’d just do “one big partition”, but they warn against that for good reason - it complicates manual fs repair at boot.

Anyway, I really like the project. It would be nice if they did a “fix common papercuts” release, since I doubt many users are as patient as I am.

If you are looking to install it, either use fewer partitions, or way over provision storage (I was 10x over provisioned at install, and the stuff I use hasn’t grown more than 10-20%) and also make sure you choose much larger partition sizes than recommended. This will add under $100 to your hardware cost, even with the storage shortages.

It has been my daily driver for years.

While I daily Linux on my workstation, OpenBSD is my favorite OS, by far, and I use it wherever it makes sense for me.

If you need root to set up the escape, then yes that is relatively uninteresting. Like, we know chroot can't contain root.