BSD And Other Things

>>56095450
Just install Linux already. Enjoy your FBI backdoors. No MAC! No jails! Enjoy no software and no games BSDcucks! BSD stole from GNU/Linux!

There, I got all the shitposting done for you, now the real thread can begin.

File: wavebreak.webm (2MB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x576px

Gonna try to implement an L2TP/IPSec VPN service on FreeBSD in an attempt to learn more about how the OS works

>>56095450
Installed OpenBSD 5.9 in vitual machine, my host is gentoo.
Applied security patches from errata, installed xfce4.
Chromium and firefox in ports for 5.9 seem to be frozen at old versions.
Are browsers in ports patched against expoits?

What's a tool like wget that comes with BSD?

For those of you running OpenBSD, what sets do you install for a completely minimal install?

I just did my first install of it today (piece of piss to install on an encrypted partition by the way and how fucking awesome is fw_update? Detected my 7260 during boot and downloaded the firmware for it over ethernet without me having to do a thing, nice) and just installed all the sets. Now I have FVWM and all that installed...

What's the minimum numbers of sets you can install for a working system upon which to build?

Also, what do you do after you install the base? Do you immediately start ricing the fuck out of it, or do you prefer to run through the .conf files locking it down and shit?

>>56097167
Ports do not get the extensive auditing or patches that base gets because it's maintained by whoever volunteers to maintain ports.

File: _20160813_113744.jpg (8KB, 192x193px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 192x193px

>>56097252
I think it is called fetch.

>>56095522
you forgot

>i defend the GPL but you have no proprietary drivers ecks dee

>>56097596
i'm pretty sure all you need is baseXX.tgz, but it's really not recommended

openbsd is a whole operating system, cutting parts out of it is bound to cause problems

as for the conf files, they're mostly sane by default, that's one of the biggest selling points for me, the tiny bit of ricing i do is with cwm, which you should definitely check out (read the man page for cwm and cwmrc.

>>56097252
you could use ftp

some ftp clients support downloading files through http, i know the openbsd one does

>>56097898
Thanks man.

>>56097596
The sets that are selected by default are recommended. You can install others but you should definitely not uncheck the defaults to prevent issues down the line.

>>56098101
Right. With Ports and Packages in OpenBSD, your mileage will definitely vary.

>>56098049
>>56098164

Seems kind of pointless to install something like game59.tgz if you're never going to use it. And how is that ever going to have a negative affect on the install? There's only two required sets anyway. bsd and base. You might choose the other sets because you need the tools they offer. But you can completely forget about any of the x*.tgz sets if you want a completely minimal install and intend on building a graphical install from the ground up.

>>56098276
>x*.tgz
some things don't build without X

>>56097596

https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html#FilesNeeded

>Can't even use rutorrent
BSD is a piece of shit

>>56098292
And they can be pulled in if required. If you're going for a full on DE, you can install the lot to save yourself hassle. But if you're going for a minimal WM et cetera, you don't need those sets. Just build or install as required.

>>56098276
Oh I forgot about the games, yeah I'm pretty sure you can leave those out without worry if you don't need them. The X sets are default because some applications need the X libraries to build or run.

>>56098364
>bsdgames
>tfw it doesn't come with rogue anymore because of unclear licensing issues that were resolved eventually
and good luck convincing the openbsd devs to put code back in

i use so much openbsd stuff like openssh/openntpd/libressl/opensmtpd that i'm thinking about just switching over completely.

what is you guys favorite openbsd man page

mine is release(8)

>>56097596
Typically I work on getting X11 to work first, then I proceed to work on .conf files, since it's easier to do when you have multiple xterms available. However, I don't rice.

>>56098574
That rogue feel. At least there's still hack.

Is there a recommended browser for OpenBSD? The ports tree is as said above is pretty oudated. OpenBSD should honestly come with a browser.

>>56099034
They could probably include something simple like lynx but a browser with scripting, plugins, and media support is probably out the question.

>>56099282
>>56099246
>>56099230
>>56099212
>>56099190
Quit shitposting

>>56099268
Oh looks like they had lynx in the base at one point but it was removed.

>>56099190
>>56099212
>>56099230
>>56099282
>>56099304
>>56099326
Holy shit, someone got triggered pretty hard by BSD.

>>56099345
Probably a FreeBSD user mad about the update vulnerability.

>>56099034

Both Chromium and Firefox are in ports and pretty up to date. Use firefox-esr if you're on the -stable branch.

>>56098276
You can't build a graphical install from the ground up without the X sets. X is not available in ports/packages.

>>56099629
>not compiling everything from source yourself.
Pleb.

bump now that the butthurt spammer has been removed

>>56099034
Xombrero is a neat minimalistic webkit browser developed by some OpenBSD devs.

But yeah, you have Chromium and Firefox.

>>56100073
i don't understand him

what drives him to do this shit

>>56100454

Which OpenBSD devs specifically? I'm not aware of any active developers working on it.

>>56100528
Marco Peereboom is one, I believe.

Honestly, I think OpenBSD should look at Spectrwm (done by the same guys) to replace fvwm. But I assume that'll never happen because I bet Theo prefers fvwm.

>>56100473
Autism

>>56098276
>building a graphical install from the ground up
discouraged

>>56100566
>Marco Peereboom

He hasn't been a dev in a long time.

>>56100987
There might be more too.

In any case, seems like they take great care when writing stuff. Their stuff is also ISC licensed so spectrwm COULD be included in OpenBSD if the devs wanted to.

>>56101018
But yeah, I really like spectrwm. It's kind of like dwm but without all the bullshit that comes with that territory.

>>56097998
is that man okay or does he have an illness?

>>56100566
>Marco Peereboom is one, I believe.
didn't he move on to the fork called bitrig?

>>56095450
News at 11 ; install now FreeBSD vulnerable by default !!

>>56100566
my default wm for openbsd is cwm

>>56101265
did he? that's another thing i think the openbsd devs should look to for some inspiration

bitrig actually has a somewhat up-to-date toolchain unlike openbsd, which is really one of my only complaints about openbsd

i could always not install the comp set and comment out the GNU lines in the src tree Makefiles and use the ports one instead, but it's a little too late for that

>>56101272
learn how to speak english before coming here please

>>56101283
having more alternatives is always good

that, and the fvwm in base is so outdated, im not even sure if its fvwm2

>>56101312
>bitrig actually has a somewhat up-to-date toolchain

Bitrig is mostly dead now. The main developers (patrick, natano) moved back to OpenBSD. Check their github. Clang or a newer GCC are just a pkg_add away if you need them.

>learn how to speak english before coming here please

Agreed that broken English is annoying, but he's right. FreeBSD is in a very bad place right now.

>that, and the fvwm in base is so outdated, im not even sure if its fvwm2

Newer fvwm releases are GPL3; can't be included in base. Also just a pkg_add away if you want the new ones. Not everything is a fit for the base system.

>>56101418
>Bitrig is mostly dead now. The main developers (patrick, natano) moved back to OpenBSD. Check their github. Clang or a newer GCC are just a pkg_add away if you need them.
Yeah, that's why I said somewhat. In any case, it's annoying as fuck to have more than one toolchain unless one is for cross-compiling. Shame that GPLv3 and C++ is unacceptable for OpenBSD devs. I heard Theo even considered the Plan 9 C compilers just to avoid C++.

>Newer fvwm releases are GPL3; can't be included in base.
Which is why I think it should be replaced with spectrwm. ISC licensed, like all the original OpenBSD software and it seems to be very well written.