OpenBSD Journal

Return of The BSDs

Contributed by jolan on from the bsd-never-left dept.

Internetnews.com has an article up on their site called, "Return of The BSDs". It's mostly a review of all the goings-on in BSD land with respect to version releases but there's a few good beck@ quotes such as:

"OpenBSD doesn't chase features at the expense of stability and security."

(Comments are closed)


Comments
  1. By Bayu Krisnawan (203.191.40.226) krisna@versalite.com on http://orchid.versalite.com

    OpenBSD FreeFreakStrictUnix!!.

    Comments
    1. By Hengky Anwar (203.77.222.252) hky@corebsd.or.id on http://corebsd.or.id

      And we love it !!! :)

    2. By Anonymous Coward (24.207.218.168) on

      Did you know I'm a stupid stupid faggot?

  2. By Anonymous Coward (66.12.209.210) on

    "OpenBSD doesn't chase features at the expense of stability and security."

    Of the many reasons I choose to use OpenBSD, this one has always been high on list.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (84.12.143.212) on

      Clean, readable code.
      Man pages that are in sync with reality.

  3. By Forest Gump (68.124.58.147) on

    "from the bsd-never-left dept."

    And that's all I have to say about that.

  4. By Harl (67.165.214.212) on

    Now what would be great is a live CD of as many as would fit, OBSD, NBSD, FBSD, DBSD, DARWIN all on the same media, allowing you to boot to a working system, albeit memory based. Select which one you want to try from the initial screen. Giving each one 200 Mb of space, you could maybe fit all on a CD, or it may take a DVD if getting a working system takes more space.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

      w0w yeah that's soooo 1337! Sh0wing 0ff 411 7hi5 wi11 g37 |\/|3 ch1xx0r5!

    2. By Anonymous Coward (84.12.143.212) on

      I doubt you would be able to fit a live version of Darwin in 200Mb

    3. By Anonymous Coward (213.93.38.239) on

      I think this is a nice idea, but i guess you'll need a DVD to show all the BSD goodness in full galore.

  5. By Anonymous Coward (24.126.56.226) on

    "OpenBSD doesn't chase features at the expense of stability and security."

    I thought things like bioctl, openssh, openntpd, etc were features. OpenBSD seems to add features while keeping security and usefullness in mind rather than just haphazardly adding stuff that a) isn't really needed, b) adds no real value, and c) is designed so poorly it causes security issues.

    I like OpenBSD. It's definately no-frills Unix, but that's the beauty of it. When you need to get the job done (jobs: firewall, router, web server etc), OpenBSD is a good choice.

    One of the things I'm looking forward to is OpenCVS. I have no experience with CVS, but since I've been put in charge of web mastering at my place of work I needed a way to keep track of source changes and stuff. I figured it would be great to start with OpenBSD and OpenCVS for that task. It only makes sense to have the most secure operating system store the source to our ecommerce web sites.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (66.11.66.41) on

      Those are features. Read your own words, "OpenBSD doesn't chase features at the expense of stability and security.". That doesn't mean they don't add features, it means they don't compromise stabilty and security in order to add features.

    2. By Anonymous Coward (24.207.218.168) on

      Did you know I'm a stupid stupid faggot?

  6. By Anonymous Coward (216.202.62.2) on

    I have no use for openbsd. Its archaic, needlessly a pain in the ass to do the simplest of things like partioning a disk for installation, or installing packages. Any idiot can write a secure os that barely has any feature or functionality that doesn't require a lesson in cryptology and geek logistics to install and operate. This whole "Won't chase features at the cost of security and reliability" sound to me like saying "We won't seek progress at the cost of perfection" which nothing short of fool's gold. openbsd will never me anything more than what it is today. FreeBSD is making decent progress, well featured and very usable and can be secured fairly reasonably. I don't see any reason to run openbsd.

    Comments
    1. By m0rf (68.104.17.51) on

      so, what is wrong with what openbsd is today?
      oh, its not freebsd, we're happy with that, you're not. since you have no positive contributions to make besides whining, please go whine somewhere else.

    2. By brundle (209.210.200.49) on

      Funny, if OpenBSD means nothing to you why are you here reading the OpenBSD Journal?

    3. By Anonymous Coward (143.166.226.17) on

      I am sure you prefer to run GNU/UnFreeBSD. Please do that and go away. Your opinion is as useful as a bag of shit.

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (65.198.20.164) on

        Hey, but a bag of shit can be turned into manure. :p

        Seriously, is he trying to convince us the OpenBSD is no good? Obviously, if we're here and have made it through the install and have found a use for OpenBSD then it would be hard to convince us of that.

        He's just trolling.

    4. By Shut Up! (203.191.40.226) on

      Only talk no action, kick ass!! that's your opinion about OpenBSD.

    5. By Anonymous Coward (69.70.207.240) on

      While most of us don't agree with you, or think otherwise; you do have the rights to your own personal opinion. No offence, but my opinion of you is that it shows that you either don't have the necessary intelligence to use anything non GUI point, click and pray, or you simply lack the understanding as to why and how OpenBSD's installer is far superior to many others.

      For the partitioning of disks, when I was new to it, I too thought it looked archaic and a pain, but once you understand it, it's BY FAR the easiest/quickest installer than most others, even easier than a Linux GUI installer and gives so much more control.

      As for adding packages, "make install" or "pkg_add *", those are hard to do??? You're kidding right? Do you expect control-panel, add-remove programs?

      So if you know you can secure FreeBSD as much as OpenBSD and as easily, then that sounds a lot like you're auditing userland, kernel code, making improvments, importing from OpenBSD, etc? Why not provide some diffs?

    6. By Anonymous Coward (68.106.232.57) on

      Its archaic = I don't understand UNIX,
      needlessly a pain in the ass to do the simplest of things = I hate having to read man pages to understand how to do anything,
      ...like partioning a disk for installation = I've never gone through the installer myself,
      ...or installing packages = pkg_add package.tgz is too much for me to type,
      ...a secure os that barely has any feature or functionality = I've never really used OpenBSD.

      Yes, the troll bait smells delicious this time of year (release time), and I took the bite. It's amusing. I'm baffled that so many stupid people find their way to this site, but then I remember reading Slashdot and how I'm stunned at the number of misinformed idiots that any OSS project has to put up with.

    7. By Anonymous Coward (128.151.92.148) on

      May I remind you that it was you, by your own choice, who decided to come on OPENBSD JOURNAL. Obviously OpenBSD must be worth something if you bothered to spend your time here.

      Don't like OpenBSD and yet frequenting a site called OpenBSD journal... That reminds me of something I saw reading the misc archive: a guy who was subscribed to the list(!!) felt the need to post about how he hates OpenBSD and won't use it. Does this make any sense to you people?

      Comments
      1. By Brad (128.118.75.177) on

        They like to troll and try to have all attention from developers when they're supposed to work on OpenBSD. Does that make sense to you?

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (128.151.92.148) on

          No.

      2. By Anonymous Coward (24.207.218.168) on

        Did you know I'm a stupid stupid faggot?

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (24.207.218.168) on

          Did you know I'm a stupid stupid faggot?

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.]