OpenBSD Journal

Review of OpenBSD 3.5

Contributed by grey on from the dept.

OpenBSD 3.5 review:Computerworld review

(Comments are closed)

Comments

  1. By Anonymous Coward (131.202.163.30) on

    Not a detailed review, but at least it seems fair and accurate. I really don't see how the reviewer can deem 2.6 to 2.8 as 'too awkward to be be useable' and be fine with 3.5. That aspect of OpenBSD hasn't changed much (which suits me fine) -- perhaps he has reviewer has acquired significant amounts of experience since then.I pretty much agree with his criticism of the (official) patch system. It is probably OpenBSDs biggest weakness -- the patch system becomes too much of a pain if you need to patch any number of machines. Yes, there are many ways to work around it, but I still think an slick, integrated, binary patch system would be a welcome addition to the OS.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (68.18.4.26) on

      rather than a 'binary' patch system that would have to be maintained...how about just upgrade to a relase,,, man release, to make your own. Sure you will end up untarring and writing over many files that may not have needed updating... but upgrading the whole can have merrit and keep everything in step. And it really does not take that long for an upgrade or install to extract the files from a cdrom or folder with the upgrade/install tgz files. Granted you should run the port mergemaster, however running mergemaster is not a bad idea and a good way to check your configuration files for a stable system that you may suspect to need edits in /etc and so on..... - ta da. a solution that works with the existing infrastructure, and can work from cdrom or net or filesystem. and remote in most cases. This is a known way of doing remote upgrades, http://google.com/search?q=remote+upgrade+openbsd

  2. By Anthony (192.208.10.217) on

    I can crash it by giving it too much traffic with an Intel gigabit card in a slow computer. Other than that, it can take everything I throw at it, just like usual.

    Comments

    1. By almeida (66.31.180.15) on

      And I can crash it by booting up with a Linksys LNE100TX network card. I've had a lot of problems with 3.5 because of this card (which has worked fine since 2.9). I made the mistake of rebooting two weeks ago. With /etc/hostname.dc0 in place, the system hangs at "Starting network." I have to boot into single user mode, remount / as read/write, move that file elsewhere, boot normally, move the file back, run /etc/netstart, and hope it doesn't crash. Other than that, things are good.

      Comments

      1. By voilatiel (170.35.224.63) tdeath@uniksystems.com on ircd@uniksystems.com

        I had that same prob, if I let it sit for 1-2 mins it would continue working, if not I'd just user break out and bring the interface up manually if all else fails...

        Comments

        1. By almeida (66.228.92.116) on

          How do you break out when it is sitting at "Starting network"? The whole box seems frozen for me. What can I do to make it keep going?

    2. By Peter Hessler (208.201.244.160) spambox@theapt.org on http://theapt.org/openbsd/

      Please send in the trace. your machine shouldn't panic from receiving too much data (it should tell the sender to stop sending so damn much data)

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]