*BSD General Thread, discuss BSDs.
IRC: irc.rizon.net #baot
News: http://freebsdnews.net http://undeadly.org
Linux user curious about BSD? Ask questions here and get answers.
old thread: >>>52254529
>another report about pledge
>the base tree (/bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin /usr/libexec /usr/games)
contains 652 ELF binaries. 451 use pledge. 201 do not. Approximately
47 do not need or cannot use pledge. Leaving 154 we could potentially
pledge in the future. Most of those are not very important. There
are a few hot spots, but most of what people use has been handled well
by the team.
>The sndiod subsystem now has been privsep'd, and also uses a new
"audio" pledge to contain the ioctl operations against the sound
chrome now supports pledge()
>Robert, with some help from Kettenis for a "drm" pledge to control
ioctls agaist the drm subsystem, recently started using pledge in
chrome. chrome is already designed for sandboxing (it uses seccomp
and various other technology no android and linux systems). pledge
turns out to be an incredibly simple adaptation. This does however
leave us in the strange situation where firefox has W^X but lacks
pledge, and chrome has pledge but lacks W^X.
Is anyone here familiar with the community around NetBSD, as well as comments about the project besides it's support for various CPU architectures?
>is freebsd and openbsd a linux distro?
Neither are, they're BSDs.
>What's stopping me from ditching Ubuntu and installing this?
If you're running Ubuntu I'm guessing you should stick with Linux until you gain more knowledge
NetBSD is relatively obscure even among the BSDs, it doesn't tend to attract very much attention.
NetBSD has security mitigations like ASLR, MPROTECT/Segvguard(from PaX), and stack smashing protection ("ProPolice").
NetBSD has support for the ZFS filesystem on 32bit and 64bit x86. In addition to ZFS it also has support for the extended filesystem(linux), ntfs, fat16/32, acorn risc fs, amigados fs,
"Rump kernel" allows you to run NetBSD's drivers in the userspace of an OS(not necessarily NetBSD). You can use this to debug hardware drivers or you can take the drivers and essentially load them into an entirely different OS using the NetBSD's kernel driver framework as a lightweight compatibility layer/shim.
Much like FreeBSD NetBSD has a Linux compatibility layer built in to let it run linux binaries without needing recompilation.
No, they're quite different. Open/Free/Net/DragonflyBSD all use their own kernels etc, while Linux distros all use the Linux kernel and generally have a GNU userland.
There are some similarities in stuff like Filesystem layouts and using X11 but they're generally wildly different(in some cases even from each other) with their own reasons for existing.
You might find a BSD more worth learning as you're looking at a whole package like Windows or OSX while with Linux there are many slightly different distros(each with lots of marketshare) and of course these slight differences can make development a headache depending on what you're trying to do.
Is another cool feature.
thats funny because i couldnt ever get a usb modem stick to work. pcbsd and freebsd.
but im gonna duel boot openbsd with slackware on my laptop so will it work? not a deal breaker because ive had no trouble with 3g wifi
>Is another cool feature.
Yeah I was meaning to mention that as well but it slipped my mind while writing that wall of text.
NetBSD is something of a middle-ground between FreeBSD and OpenBSD but it manages to be less user-friendly than either which probably explains the relative obscurity.
>thats funny because i couldnt ever get a usb modem stick to work. pcbsd and freebsd.
Maybe instead of buying a USB modem and expecting it to work you should try buying a supported USB modem.
i tried freebsd and its pretty tough.
networking is especially hard, i know that it has a cli on the installer that does it for you, but it still rarely actually connects. it also doesnt have netctl and wifi-menu like arch does, and i cant seem to get wpa supplicant to work. Is there a package that makes this easier?
Or he could just use Linux because most free software is supported.
Out of date monolithic development with no support or developers where you end up using a bunch of GNU shit that doesn't perform properly is where its at let me tell you :D it soothes the autism like no medication can!
mate for starters i dont use any bsd's i use slackware in which there is no problem.
i had the bloody thing long before i tried bsd.
second i just said i have no problems with 3g wifi.
i have no intention of ditching slackware for any bsd ever but ive never used open bsd so im curious.
>mate for starters i dont use any bsd's i use slackware in which there is no problem.
Yes, and you shouldn't expect some commercial device you own to work on a rather unknown operating system just because it works as intended on something else.
>second i just said i have no problems with 3g wifi.
oh by the way my usb 3g modem is over 3 years old so it goes to show the excellent driver support all the bsd's have. you know what will cure a problem such as this? get rid of that fucking lisence and adopt gpl...
Age doesn't just mean drivers should be available you fucking moron. Some things companies release first party Linux drivers, for some things drivers are developed for Linux under an NDA (which means they're closed source and only for Linux, same with the prior).
Besides, the GPL is cancer. Quit bashing things you know nothing about.
gpl is cancer.
bsd license is the whore that pays the client for sex. you wonder why nobody contributes anything decent back. because they dont have to. you know like apple and sony?
fuck it ill stick to slackware where shit fucking works. bsd will be dead soon anyways i dont even know why i was curious about open bsd in the first place.
you honestly think that they are contributing the very code that makes them money back to bsd?
you really think this?
this is why they are the leaders and you lot are almost dead.
they cant pinch code from gpl and make the best bits closed
its the license.
BSDs are not GNU, they don't have the same beliefs. The BSDs view their work as a public service, they would rather people make use their code over some poorly functioning PoS that makes everyone's lives worse.
I'm not saying what code they contribute, I'm saying they contribute code. They don't have to, but they do. It's not theft if they don't, the license states they're free to do so. BSD licensed code is more or less like here, look what I made, you can use it if you want, or not, I don't care either way. Just give me some credit if you do.
my problem is this.
you guys are being taken advantage of.
anyone who writes something decent has the right to close it off for further development when distribution occurs.
because of pure greed.
it is now left to the developer to maintain/improve said code and therefore nobody benefit from the codes potential.
Eh it's often used for hobbyists but the way the BSDs use it is more based in business. The BSDs know one of their main consumers are businesses who want the BSD license. Changing to GNU would just lead to those businesses leaving and no one on the GNU side would pick up the slack.
When GNU people stop being so unpleasantly political and shift focus to things BSD people care about like code quality, efficiency, and portability you'll probably have a number of BSD folks joining your ranks.
Until then you can have fun forking a five-times-forked Debian derivative while being the tech world's equivalent to hardcore christians who insist that you need to hear their "message" above all else while BSDevelopers will be spending their time intelligently pooling efforts and creating great things.
None of those things are BSD inclusive.
Poorly working inefficient stuff written to be as short and featureless as possible does not equal good software. Just take a look at anything that suckless makes, nobody uses that shit.
>anyone who writes something decent has the right to close it off for further development when distribution occurs.
The thing is, maintaining an OS all by yourself is really fucking hard. If you had the resources to do that from the beginning why wouldn't you just make your own? The BSDs realize that maintaining an OS is hard so at some point these companies that try to close off their OS will get sick of maintaining a fuckhuge patch list and just contribute upstream. Especially since there's absolutely no guarantee that your patches will continue to work 2 years later. If you want your patches to stay working you have to contribute them.
Oddly enough while we're talking about code theft Netflix just contributed a patch to FreeBSD to improve network performance
and facebook contributed to improve network performance on GNU/Linux. But here is the thing right, GPL keeps things always free. Freebsd keeps it sometimes free(unless you call the ps free software). So you can play steamos games(free or nonfree) on GNU/Linux but cant play ps games on BSD.
To make a ps4 "free" you have to hack it with GNU/Linux.
Yes, because BSD is nonfree and wont allow me to play PS games on a PC with BSD.
However, GNU/Linux games work across all GNU/Linux installs. Console or otherwise.
You are right about that. But in some cases making a OS from scratch isn't an option.
They have a clean and high-quality codebase only surpassed by OpenBSD, very good man pages. The multi-architecture portability helps achieve good and standards-compliant code meaning they share one of OpenBSD's main security benefits.
The community is small and somewhat elitist. Like with any OS that's not specifically targeted for normies you will get RTFM responses if you ask stupid questions. This isn't to say they are hostile or rude, though. The IRC channels are generally pretty quiet. Most of the users know what they're doing without having to ask many questions.
The documentation is great. NetBSD understandably doesn't quite have an Arch Wiki's abundance of information about every unix package under the sun, but the NetBSD guide is nowadays pretty up-to-date and the system itself is simple enough not to need much explaining to someone fairly Unix-literate.
Pkgsrc is good and pkgin is an excellent frontend to it. Like NetBSD, pkgsrc is also highly portable and one of the first things I install whenever I have to use OS X for work.
The default configuration is comfy, secure and sane.
>Binary backwards compatibility all the way to version 1.1
>Fairly good Linux binary compatibility
>Actively developed (recently got ZFS, KMS, support for new ARM evboards…)
>Kernel Lua scripting
>Obscurity points on /g/
>Less autistic than OpenBSD
>Best thing to run on VAX
>Not as much hardware support as Lunix
>Not as much software support as Lunix
>Less autistic than OpenBSD
>Few developers compared to other popular free Unices
>Write awesome code
>License under BSD
>Evil company steals your code
>Evil company doesn't give back
>Both you and Evil company offer awesomely coded thing
>Write awesome code
>License under GPL
>Evil company won't touch your code
>Evil company's monkeys write shitty hack code
Best case scenario:
>Write awesome code
>License under BSD or GPL
>Good company steals your code
>Good company gives back (even if they don't have to)
>Both you and Evil company offer awesomely coded thing
>fuck it ill stick to slackware where shit fucking works.
Unless you opt not to install fucking everything that is. The less you install the greater the odds of shit being broken is. Wasting 2+gb of space on drivers and shit you'll never need is totally reasonable though. I mean literally the only alternative would be to implement a modern package management system (complete with automatically resolved dependencies), which is just fucking absurd.
>bsd will be dead soon anyways
Which one? Net? People have been saying it was already dead for years, and maybe they're right, but the project itself claims to still be active.
Free? OSX and the PS4 are built on top of it, and a number of servers and corporate infrastructures run on it. Ever heard of Netflix? Yahoo? The Weather Channel? Apache Software Foundation? It's not going anywhere. Meanwhile Slackware is a one-man show, that is generally seen as being unsuitable as a production environment.
Open? The devs give less than a fuck if anyone else uses it. They are their own target audience. They can't stop you from using it since they've made it freely available, but if you ever attempt to interact with them in any way, they will very likely strongly discourage you from it, and by that I mean they will tell you to fuck off back to wherever it is you came from. Unless of course you be quiet, stay out of the way, and maybe make yourself useful to the project, and then they will warm up to you a bit.
>i dont even know why i was curious about open bsd in the first place.
Me either. Were you expecting someone to beg you? Did Slackware beg you to use it? You should stick to what you're happy with. Despite how negative my view of it may sound, there is a lot to like about Slackware. It's the distro that is the most BSD-like after all--you know those nice, simple-text init scripts you use? That's the standard in the BSDs as well.
OpenBSD people aren't even as unfriendly as you say. They can be genuinely helpful and supportive if you act intelligently. Even better if you're being helpful yourself. This even includes the dreaded bogeyman Theo.
There are just lots of people who don't bother reading before asking. Name a community where help vampirism is welcomed with open arms.
NetBSD has miraculously not died yet. It actually seems to be gaining more popularity lately, if only little by little. 7.0 is a really good release and is getting some well-deserved hype.
For one thing FreeBSD has a friendlier, more open community. The OpenBSD devs are a bit notorious for their lack of social skills. OpenBSD literally exists because of Theo de Raadt's lack of social skills.
As far as the two OSes themselves go, FreeBSD is the better choice if your server needs are complex, or if performance is a big concern. OpenBSD is better if you need a simple server that's reliable, and security is your top priority. FreeBSD just gives you more options and flexibility usually, but sometime that can be complete overkill.
One last thing worth noting is hardware support. You've no doubt heard that the BSDs can be a bit of a headache when it comes to getting hardware to work, and it's true. However that largely has to do with graphics cards and wireless adapters, neither of which are all that big of a concern when running a server. Other hardware is much more forgiving usually.
GPL fans said the great problem we would face is that companies would take our BSD code, modify it, and not give back.
Nope—the great problem we face is that people would wrap the GPL around our code, and lock us out in the same way that these supposed companies would lock us out. Just like the Linux community, we have many companies giving us code back, all the time. But once the code is GPL'd, we cannot get it back. ~~ Theo de Raadt
>Or ZFS good enough?
That depends. Are you talking about using it on a server, or a desktop? Is that server just a personal email server, or is it an enterprise server? For a personal server it's complete overkill. For a desktop it is complete overkill, and very likely detrimental.
I don't really know much about Dragonfly, except that everyone, including it's on devs say that it's not quiet suitable for a production environment yet.
You could also just chain load http://boot.salstar.sk if the client has WAN access