BSD And Other Things

What is the best option for a BSD desktop? Freebsd?

File: 1490694351408.png (219KB, 264x338px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 264x338px

>>60780834
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

today i learned that openbsd has support for MML through /dev/speaker, what the fuck
http://man.openbsd.org/speaker

>>60780870

depends

File: depends.jpg (40KB, 450x430px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 450x430px

>>60781807

>>60780870
FreeBSD devs don't even use FreeBSD, OpenBSD's actually dogfooded

macOS Sierra user reporting in
I love BSD/Unix .. much better than Linux imo

>>60780834
Novice Linux user here. What does BSD make BSD? What's so special about it?

I found an old thinkpad t410 in my basement. I will install openBSD on it tomorrow. Please keep this thread alive so I can use it for my personal support tomorrow

>>60782862
>openbsd
Man what a waste of machinery.

>>60783041
OpenBSD's the best.

File: 1484611950148.jpg (38KB, 600x375px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x375px

>>60783053

>>60783072
ebin

Do people actually use BSD on the desktop?

>>60783987
Yes

I tried TrueOS and FreeBSD in a VM. The pkg system is nice (almost like Slackware's slackpkg) but there's just not enough software for me to switch.

>>60783992
How is it? I heard its pretty secure if you don't install anything additional. What is the fucking point if you can't install additional software though?

>>60784047
It's pretty nice
>What is the fucking point if you can't install additional software though?
I don't use it for muh security, I use it because I like it. So I install whatever I want.

>>60784069
This, plus it comes with things you'd need anyway. Want to serve a static site? Httpd is there. Wanna scale the site? Relayd. Switching platform? Switchd. Firewall? Pf.

Anything more may not be vetted as heavily, but are at least for the most part configured sane on install.

>>60784110
I often use my computer for downloading torrents and watching .mkv videos. Does OpenBSD support that out-of-the-box?

>>60784162
no but you can easily add those through the package manager

pkg_add mpv (i believe mpv can read mkv containers)
pkg_add torrentclienthere

>>60784175
Thanks for the info.

My only complaint with openbsd is trying to turn it into a desktop or laptop system requires some work and rice to make it feel okay.

Can FreeBSD play league of legends?

If it can I will get my friends to switch too

>>60784464
Install Windows

[20:18] <&theleft> SO THIS IS MY ROOM
[20:18] <&theleft> AND THESE ARE MY SONICHU POSTERS
[20:18] <&theleft> AND THIS IS MY blakkheim HUGPILLOW

File: wrinklebabyjuggalo.jpg (6KB, 251x251px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 251x251px

I gotta check out the new GOATMOON album, they're such a great band...

>>60784884
>>60784916
>>60785141
what the fuck?

>>60780870
Open.

>>60781918
Each one has its specialty. FreeBSD has ZFS, OpenBSD is very secure and simple, NetBSD runs on strange/old/exotic hardware.

>>60784029
Almost everything you could want on Linux will work on BSD, with the exception of proprietary software.

>>60785230
What makes OpenBSD the best?

>>60785383
For desktop use specifically? The developers all use it themselves, in contrast to both Free and Net. This produces a much smoother experience since desktopy things actually get tested.

>>60781872
Why not? FreeBSD looks like the best choice for a desktop.

>>60785474

freebsd devs all use it in virtualization on their macs.

>>60785567
fuck irc and fuck white people

>>60782862
>/g/
>support

>>60785593
white power, nigger

>>60785526

that is actually a myth, there was a post on one of the old threads where they claim they use it on their thinkpads with no problem, freeBSD has no problems running on most hardware, but me personally I would rather install hardenedBSD, its freeBSD but with a ton of security patches

>>60786165
>that is actually a myth

Go to a mainly-FreeBSD event like MeetBSD. All the devs are using Macbooks. Now go to a multi-BSD event like BSDCan. See all the Macbooks? FreeBSD people are easy to identify. NetBSD people are the same. Only OpenBSD devs actually use their OS as a desktop.

>freeBSD has no problems running on most hardware

Very broad and inaccurate statement. How about the newest Intel graphics? Nope, not on FreeBSD. Maybe tucked away in some "development tree" somewhere, but not with regular FreeBSD (even -CURRENT).


>but me personally I would rather install hardenedBSD

Lipstick on a pig. Stay far away from FreeBSD if security is a concern.

>>60786224
doesn't mean that they're not just running freebsd on baremetal macs

>>60786243
Hope you don't need wifi then.Because it won't work. The graphics might not either, depending on which generation of MBP it is.

>>60786298
maybe it's an older gen macbook with a USB wifi adapter

>>60780834
What happens after you admit you're BSD curious?

>>60786400
you try BSD

>>60785230

another cool thing I like about NetBSD is that it's not just a portable OS, it has a portable build system that can bootstrap itself with whatever cross compiler you need for your target platform.

>>60786243
Wasn't there a FreeBSD release that didn't even work outside of a VM? That should really say something about how little the devs use it.

If openbsd devs use openbsd with a desktop. Then why does their base still ship fvwm as default?

>>60786867
you can choose between fvwm, twm and cwm

>>60786867
My guess would be that they all pkg_add their preferred window manager or desktop environment.

Totally wild guess here.

fuck opnsense.

that is all.

Im going to give it a try

its true. even Marshall Kirk McKusick uses a mac and he's the godfather of freebsd

>>60786224
This guys is correct, FreeBSD devs do not use their OS for desktop usage.

Not dog fooding your own OS has its pitfalls.

>>60787547
well he's gay

>>60787571
Actually you're wrong, it's just that the FreeBSD devs have money to get Macs alongside their dev laptops, unlike the OpenBSD devs who run around with 10 year old laptops. Really makes you think ;)

>>60788203
If you develop an operating system, you use that operating system. It's like seeing Torvalds with a...

Oh wait, didn't Torvalds run Linux on his MacBook Air?

>>60788203
yeah they're poor. thats why the devs give presentations at conferences all over the world.

>>60780870
Depends on what you want to do. I prefer OpenBSD, but FreeBSD has better video drivers.

>>60786909
Maybe they use cwm, like I do.

>>60784175
Does OpenBSD (or FreeBSD for that matter) support hardware acceleration of video decoding, something like VA-API? Can I watch 1080p/60 youtube without having 50%+ CPU usage?

>>60789802
http://man.openbsd.org/intel

>>60789965
So, it doesn't support it, I guess I won't be switching to it anytime soon then.

>>60790010
VA-API is a software thing, I think it depends on the video player you use and whether you have X or not. OpenBSD does have X.

>>60790217
>VA-API is a software thing
No? It's a software interface to the hardware video decoder in your video card, to use it you have to have it implemented in the video drivers, and my googling says OpenBSD doesn't support it. And it has nothing to do with X, you can use it in Wayland too.

>>60784047

What bullshit did you hear?

OpenBSD is a nicely configured system out of the box, secure and stable with a well timed release schedule. Just like Ubuntu.

File: pledge.jpg (140KB, 1300x804px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1300x804px

>>60785383

Real-world scenarios.

>>60790856
http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/experiments-with-prepledge

Kind of sounds like sandbox for untrusted sw is possible with pledge(2)

So, I've been reading www.netbsd.org/about/features.html and I can't help but cringe a lot:
>CVS repository
>Their main platforms are Alpha systems with lots of RAM and diskspace (terabyte and up)
>the first free OS to make a y2k statement.
>latest high end hardware available in Alpha
>High performance PCI IDE
>NetBSD supports large capacity DVD
>NetBSD was the first free OS to provide USB support
>NetBSD fully supports IDE disks of over 34GB in size
It's like they're still in the late 90s.
I mean, what's even the point of NetBSD nowadays? Linux supports more CPU architectures and more platforms, among them the actually relevant ones like AArch64 and Risc-V. NetBSD can't even run on RaspPI 3 because it still doesn't support AArch64, nor does it support USB 3.0.

>>60791086
But will arch install on an embedded microcontroller in your fucking toaster?

No. Ask the folks at netbsd? If it doesn't already than if enough people care to it will soon (tm).

File: RMS_Linus.jpg (118KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 600x600px

>>60780878

>>60791069

Pretty clever adaptation. Like strlcpy/strlcat it's the simple stuff which can make a difference. It's really only glibc that keeps this stuff out of standard C.

how to add other keyboard layout in openbsd, because by default keyboard layout for my keyboard is missing

>>60791174
See src/sys/dev/pckbc/wskbdmap_mfii.c

>>60791174

apropos keyboard

>>60791118
No, but openwrt will.
>If it doesn't already than if enough people care to it will soon (tm).
Lel, they can't even implement AArch64.

HardenedBSD is great to use on servers.

>>60791086
NetBSD supports most architectures, Linux is really limited.
NetBSD has some really cool things and driver development is easy with it.
PS Vita uses NetBSD afaik

>>60791600
This is objectively false, NetBSD was the most portable OS back in the late 90s - early 2000s, but now Linux supports more CPU architectures, more platforms, and more importantly, it supports all the new architectures and platforms, meanwhile, more than half of platforms in http://www.netbsd.org/ports/ have been dead for decades now.

I mean, just look at this sad page: http://www.netbsd.org/ports/history.html , in the past 10 years NetBSD has been ported to one new platform only, and it was back in 2011. Nowadays you can't even run NetBSD on AVR32 controllers, POWER (not PowerPC) processors, AArch64 (i.e. PasbPI 3), not you won't be able to run it on lowRISC once it's released, because NetBSD doesn't support RISC-V. As a result, no one runs NetBSD in production, no one releases products based on NetBSD, all the home routers, access points, toasters and cars out there run Linux.

https://hardenedbsd.org/content/easy-feature-comparison

Just needs more developers :D

>>60792538
So, why FreeBSD is so bad, don't they care about security at all?
And why fork an already half-dead OS, why not merge all that back?

>>60792586
upstreaming problems, just like Linux has with grsecurity.
But the Linux one just escalated : http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/06/03/14
Security wise FreeBSD lacks things but in terms of features all *BSDs have something good and things that are missing in one or another BSD for example FreeBSD has MAC & jails
OpenBSD has privilege separation & quality code & some more features & LibreSSL
NetBSD has PaX ASLR & MPROTECT & veriexec & kauth
HardenedBSD has what FreeBSD has + LibreSSL + jails + MAC.

It's just choosing the right tools for what you need.

>>60792728
basically summing up security features for different *BSDs

I tried openbsd in a laptop once, but it doesn't have support for my WiFi card.

>>60794155
sucks to be (you)

>>60794155
It's the other way around. Closed-source hardware refuses to support many OSes.

For what kind of operations would you recommend BSD ?
Which one ?

What's so special about ZFS ?
Gonna build a NAS and it looks like ZFS is the shit.

>>60794450
FreeBSD for a NAS.

>>60794670
What exactly is superior in FreeBSD for a NAS ? ZFS ? It looks like it's the "same" as BTRFS (and I still can't understand why everyone praises it).

>>60794908
brtfs is not yet production ready, atleast they say..
ZFS is being used in production systems and more stable.
FreeBSD has ZFS, don't use Linux with ZFS since it might break more often?
Jails is also very cool if you want to run services but jailed.

File: screenFetch-2017-06-07_19-10-54.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

I just installed openBSD on my media center to play around and it's super comfy.

I'm considering to detach it from my TV since it's basically just my old notebook and use it again for a while to see if OpenBSD is OK as m main system and consider switching completely.

Does any of you run OpenBSD as main system here or is it a bad idea?

>>60795197
It's a bad idea if you want to watch 1080p/60fps youtube videos without 100% cpu usage.

File: Screenshot_2017-06-07_19-23-35.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>60795239
It's not 100% butt it's pretty bad. Why does this happen?

>>60788486
They ARE poor dude. OpenBSD is barely alive from a lack of funding, so help them you moron instead of shitposting about how rich they are. Fucking idiot I swear to god

>>60795331
-> >>60790284

>>60794908
BTRFS has a better feature set and is an order of magnitude faster than ZFS.
>>60795196
jails are garbage
systemd-nspawn is much better. It will automatically setup bridged networking and a snapshot of your environment to work from.

File: btrfs_is_kill.png (85KB, 1213x1029px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1213x1029px

>>60795379
> is an order of magnitude faster than ZFS.
I'm not a bsd-fag, but stop spreading blatant lies m8, btrfs is slow.

>>60795196
>>60795379
It looks like BTRFS is better if I have to replace an HD than ZFS, what about it too ?

>>60795379
namespaces are fine but you shouldn't want to use user namespaces since it is complex and had tons of vulns.
Jails are different than the Linux namespaces.

>>60780870
TrueOS, anytging else is irrelevant and infinitely obscure. All these people recommending anything else are just retarded.

What are the differences inbetween Linux and OpenBSD kernels?

Also, what are the package managers like?

>people shilling hardenedbsd

why?

it's literally an insecure os with badly ported grsec patches applied to it. do you think that suddenly makes it secure?

what about the twenty years of poor coding practices? does aslr fix that too?

>>60795599
The kernels are completely different, probably sharing almost no code at all beyond things that have been ported from one to the other. Linux's kernel is lacking a lot of exploit mitigations that OpenBSD has (and enables) by default. Linux's kernel has more modern SMP support, though. In everyday use, OpenBSD works fine for me on both desktops and servers.

As for the package manager, check https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html

>>60795418
OpenBSD doesn't support any of those filesystems dude.

>>60795678
OpenBSD looks quite appealing to me. A highly secure UNIX-like enviroment with support for many of the things in GNU/Linux, competent devs and a good package manager seems comfy.

>>60795697
I know, it doesn' even support ZFS for that matter. My point is, btrfs isn't fast at all and you shouldn't recommend it to anyone in its current state.
t. someone who formatted root with btrfs and now has to live with it

>>60795711
>literally UNIX
>UNIX-like

Can BSD Users even see their own logo: ?

>>60795742
Sorry, I am ridden with GNU/Linux autism.

>>60795599
Linux is much more feature-complete since it's written by thousands of people and its development is sponsored by dozens of big corporations. OpenBSD is a hobby project so its kernel supports a bare minimum of features to be usable.
>>60795742
There's not a line of Unix code in *bsd, they spend the early 90s clearing it out. As a result, there's as much Unix in BSD as in Linux or MacOS X - none. All these OSes are POSIX-complaint so none of them is "more unix" than others.

>>60795658

if its so bad why do big companies use freeBSD in their systems, and what are your arguments against hardenedBSD, I think most people who shit abut BSDs just do it because they are linux fanboys

>>60795733
Its kind of beside the point that I was making, that mostly was ZFS is dogshit slow and unusable.

>>60795805
Stop being a fanboy and lurk more, ZFS is both fast and stable, even on Linux. Just watch https://youtu.be/7iTm7UD1RUw?t=991 , the guy knows that he's talking about.

>>60795842
It isn't fast though.

>>60795851
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux-44-zfs&num=2
You can see, it's more stable than btrfs, and it's definitely not slower than btrfs. So your original post was false, and ZFS is a better choice for now even on linux.

>>60795795
Loaded explanation from a Linux user who can't stand the thought of people using something other than what he likes.

When you stop being a teenager, you'll realize that people use different software for different tasks. Fanboyism pushes people AWAY from whatever it is you're advocating.

>>60795795
Linux is only a kernel, *BSDs are an entire OS.
You can pretty much use the same userland applications as on Linux.

>>60795842
filter (or just ignore) tripfags and /g/ becomes a much more civilized place.

ever notice it's always the ones with a tripcode that want attention?

>>60795658
Any OS is as insecure as the user behind it.
You can pretty much make any OS insecure by just installing insecure things, most applications are insecure so there you go.

File: nas4free.png (34KB, 800x520px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 800x520px

>>60780834
>lists freenas
>doesnt list nas4free
>doesnt list the original "freenas" project that in continuation of the name nas4free
>instead lists a inferior and privately owned os that stole all the glory and community

for shame OP.
for shame.

>>60795337
foundation received over $500k last year alone

>>60795954
>he's annoyed by loaded statements
>on 4chan of all places
Prove my core points wrong tho. Linux kernel supports more platforms, more devices, more network protocols, more file systems, more advanced features like cgroups, namespaces, KVM, LVM, evdev, etc. There's a reason why docker and likes are impossible on OpenBSD.
>>60795975
I know, m8, I was talking about the kernels.

>>60796044
>they can pay for 5 people working full time on the OS
Wew, I bet more people work full time on Linux kernel in Microsoft alone

>>60790856

This is a wonderfully accurate image.
Surprised I've never seen it before.

>>60796106
OpenBSD has been around for over 20 years. They have never missed a release. They're more well funded now than ever. They're not going anywhere.

>>60796065
Linux has better support for most things and is faster, it is also more bloated.
OpenBSD has clean code and much smaller than Linux codebase.
OpenBSD can pretty much cherrypick what drivers they want to include while Linux will have too include that 200k line big patch.

File: zfs-checksum-and-mirrors.jpg (38KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 512x384px

anyone who says zfs is slow is a idiot

in the case of mirrors for example the I/O is multiplexed per drive.

ie it acts like raid 0 where it gets faster every drive you add

imagine if you had x20 mirrored Zpool SSDs and a 10Gib NIC

way faster than btrfs for reading as a NAS
also the hash checking that goes on constantly for every file is pretty cool and ZFS timed snapshots is handy you can create a snapchat that is editable or a read only that can be burned to a opitcal disk or flash for cold storage

Zraid covers raid 1,5,6,10 ect

ZFS also has the ability for deduplication or to make multiple copies of important files within a folder without effecting others passively

my favorite is datasets and zpools though
it allows you to create partitions or delete them with different filesystem rules (like automatic compression or password protected or jailed)

you can do all of this while in userspace without restarting (no more reformating to change partitions)

lastly btrfs is unstable and id trust xfs or f2fs more as a archival fs (which is kind of ironic)

ZFS has been in the works for decades and its very prevelent and tested

>>60796208
On that, I totally agree with you, if you care more about the quality of the source code of the kernel you're running, OpenBSD is the obvious choice. But most people don't care about such things, they care more about features.

>>60796237
how can you say the linux kernel is bloated when its the distro maintainers choice what to include or not include??

you have secure distros that pick and choose what they want
for example forked hardened linux or kali is similar to openbsd

while others include it all so you dont have to mess with it like ubuntu which is like freebsd with its massive support and constantly newer hardware drivers or features

like it or not gnu/linux has way more support than *bsd/unix

the distro maintainer will decide what to use

just like the trueos or dragonfly choose what to include

alot of people would argue to me that trueos is too bloated because they are used to netbsd

>>60796228
>a idiot
idiot detected

>>60796318
what do you have to bring to the table?

it appears the countless people who are claiming ZFS is slow are the true idiots

>>60796349
Ext4 is better than zfs

>>60796353
t. localhost system administrator

File: Girls.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>60796309
>a lot of people
>are used to netbsd

>>60796353
for a root filesystem?

id agree

but for archival or NAS related storage id disgagree

id even go as far to say EXT4 is greater than UFS as a general journaled filesystem

>>60796309
>kali
Kali is not secure, Linux kernel is bloated because all the lines of code in it compared to OpenBSD.
Distro maintainers just use everything since you will get complains about things not being supported.

>>60796379
the point being TrueOS(PCBSD) ships with Xorg and a desktop GUI with utility programs that are expected in such a environment

NetBSD is pretty small in comparison

>>60796309
why

did you use this

type of formatting

it's really painful

>>60796426
once again linux isnt bloated its like a yard of parts where people pick what they want to build

there is specialized distros for security that run in read only locked in ram and you remove the flash storage

this is exactly what nas4free does and it was present in linux way before

>>60796458
its easier to see on a small monitor

When is OpenBSD going to get ZFS and Jails?

REEEEEEEEEEE

>>60796426
> all the lines of code in it compared to OpenBSD.
openwrt runs modern Linux kernels on wireless routers and it has no problems fitting in several MB flash space they have. Now I think of it, all wireless routers run Linux out of the box. Hell, you can run linux kernel on actual ucontrollers like Cortex-M and AVR32.
So, what's the minimal OpenBSD distribution out there?

>>60796475
It is still bloated, you can only make it less bloated by compiling your own kernel and removing everything except the things you use on your computer/laptop.
That leaves you with a kernel that can't be used anywhere else but your current hardware.

>>60796522
bloated in terms of lines of code not in megabytes..
OpenBSD is an OS there are no distributions.

>>60796527
how is that any different to *bsd?
are you retarded young child?

>FEATURES ARE BLOAT HUE HUE

also we have the embedded kernel which is way smaller than bsd and supports the majority of active devices on the net

>>60796546
But these lines of code are modular so you can just cut most of them and the kernel will still work just fine. Openwrt distribution has fewer actual lines of code compiled into it than OpenBSD, so it's less bloated.

>>60796546
>muh lines
too bad linux can compute way faster than bsd so it doesnt matter how many "lines" because not all "lines" are equal idiot

>non programmer detected

>"bloat"
>taken seriously

it would be like psychologists using the word crazy

>>60796546
you can have 20k lines from a master programmer and have 10k lines from a scrub

which one will be a more to specs of the requirements?

now do you understand how silly you sound?

>>60796584
Again.. Openwrt serves a different purpose than being an entire OS for general use..
>>60796586
Not to mention that the quality of the code in OpenBSD is way better than Linux.

>>60796619
You can have 20k lines of code from Theo or you can have 20k lines of code from Linus.
I would choose Theo over Linus to be fair.

>>60796309
>how can you say the linux kernel is bloated when its the distro maintainers choice what to include or not include??

Does this matter when they all include everything?

>you have secure distros that pick and choose what they want
>for example forked hardened linux or kali is similar to openbsd

Let us define what "secure" or "security" means here to eliminate your misconceptions. OpenBSD includes many kernel-level exploit mitigations and enables them by default. Linux distros do not, and in fact it will be much harder for them to now that grsec is for paying customers only. OpenBSD also routinely audits their source code for bugs. Linux distros do not audit any of the source for the things they package. They're essentially nothing but package maintainer monkeys. This is a huge difference between Linux and OpenBSD.

>like it or not gnu/linux has way more support than *bsd/unix

No one is arguing this. Like it or not, Windows has way more support than Linux. Does that make it better? Popularity does not equal quality. In most cases, I'd even say that it equates to lack of quality (due to the need to provide something "everyone" can use).

The rest of your broken English reply is too painful to read again, sorry.

>>60796627
>Again.. Openwrt serves a different purpose than being an entire OS for general use..
We're comparing kernels here, and OpenWRT uses the same Linux kernel every other Linux distributions use. You said Linux kernel is bloated and I showed you how it can be smaller than OpenBSD's.

>>60796627
>way better
>citation needed
do you have 10Gib nics support?
usb 3.1?
usb c?
4k?
proper VM with chroots or jails?
SLI/crossfire?
effecient modern cpu and gpu support that isnt shit? (newer than 2012)

you dont even have ZFS support which linux has

what about wayland and vulkan?

you dont have shit

>>60796662
No you dumb shit it uses a shrinked down kernel that only has specific drivers.
You can do that on OpenBSD too by just compiling your own kernel and removing things you aren't going to need.

>>60796686
He said quality, not features. Fucking moron.

>>60796686
The quality of the code has nothing to do with features.

>>60796716
haha right.

so its a specialized OS like openwrt correct?

not a general purpose OS?

lol checkmate bsdfags

>>60796686
>do you have 10Gib nics support?
Yes
>usb 3.1?
Yes
>usb c?
Yes
>4k?
Yes
>proper VM
Yes
>chroots or jails?
Yes
>SLI/crossfire?
Unlikely, but people who need 1000fps Call of Duty won't be using BSD anyway.
>effecient modern cpu and gpu support that isnt shit?
Yes, where it's available without proprietary blobs. (Meaning, no nVidia)

>>60796724
well your quality of code doesnt mean shit

>has a pistol that is machined by nice quality metal

>machine gune made is slightly less quality metal but automatic and 5x the range with more ammo and accurate

have fun with your hobby OS while ours is orbiting the earth as we speak

File: openbsd_is_kill.png (65KB, 758x424px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 758x424px

>>60796693
So how is it "bloated" if most of the things are optional and you can just cut them out or compile as separate modules.
But hey, I've just googled it, and it looks like OpenBSD doesn't even support LKL *anymore*, so it has to have all the functionality you need literally compiled into it. It's funny how you can call any other kernel "bloated" after that.

>>60796738
No, you dumbass. It's a general purpose OS with better quality code and less feature support.

>>60796767
>general purpose OS
>doesnt have any nvidia gpu support

inb4 gamer

you understand the majority of laptops are nvidia

>>60796762
Because 99% of the users don't compile their own kernel so they are stuck with the distro kernels which are huge and have dangerous options enabled.

>>60796829
how is that the kernel devs fault?

its the distro maintainers fault

>>60796796
Isn't Nvidia terrible when it comes to open source shit? It's not OpenBSD's fault they won't release documentation. Also
>dGPU in a laptop
>Nvidia, ever

>>60796853
Because it mandatory to have a big kernel if you want to have people using your distro.
You can't really run a distro with a shrink-ed down kernel that only supports 1 kind of setup.

>>60796693
>>60796883
*shrunken

>>60796883
unless you want to put up users to compile their own kernel like Gentoo

>>60796863
youre trying to move the goal post but face the facts that openbsd isnt a general purpose os

it doesnt have modern day features or support for modern day hardware then its not a modern day OS

imagine telling a normie they have to buy a new laptop to use your OS

imagine telling them you have to make a VM to play netflix or steam

you act all high and mighty but what do you use as a email client or a browser?
>inb4 firefox

how is openbsd even unique?

its the shittiest of the BSD family without jails or ZFS the only reason to use BSD

otherwise you give up everything with compromises

>>60796909
>youre trying to move the goal post
I'm not moving any goal posts.
>face the facts that openbsd isnt a general purpose os
It sure as hell is, whether or not it works for you is another story.
>it doesnt have modern day features or support for modern day hardware then its not a modern day OS
Works for me.
>imagine telling a normie they have to buy a new laptop to use your OS
Like I said, just because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it's not a general purpose OS.
>imagine telling them you have to make a VM to play netflix or steam
See above.
>you act all high and mighty but what do you use as a email client or a browser?
SeaMonkey.
>how is openbsd even unique?
It's the best of the BSDs, the only one dogfooded as a desktop OS.
>its the shittiest of the BSD family
Quite the opposite.
>without jails or ZFS the only reason to use BSD
I couldn't give less of a shit about either of those and here I am, a BSD user.
>otherwise you give up everything with compromises
I've given up nothing.

Guys, we're getting retarded noobs who can't speak English in the OpenBSD IRC channel.

Please stop advocating it on /g/, I want it to stay leet and free of idiots.

>>60796829
>>60796883
So, how 5Mb kernel is "huge"? I'm running a quite popular general purpose distro with a stock kernel here.

Again, I understand your confusion here, since OpenBSD doesn't support LKM anymore, but with Linux kernel, most of the code are compiled into separate modules you don't load until you need them, and you can unload them afterward. As a result, actual running linux kernel is smaller than OpenBSD kernel because it loads only stuff it needs, and OpenBSD kernel has all the code statically compiled into it.

Gonna upgrade my NAS from FreeBSD 9 to 11. It uses ZFS for root as well, how likely it is that it will never boot again (doing backup right now)?

>>60797584
do not upgrade from 9 to 11. you must upgrade from 9, to 10, to 11.

>>60797656
handbook says otherwise: "The freebsd-update(8) utility supports binary upgrades of i386 and amd64 systems running earlier FreeBSD releases. Systems running 9.3-RELEASE, 10.1-RELEASE, 10.2-RELEASE, 10.3-RELEASE, 11.0-RC[123] can upgrade as follows: " https://www.freebsd.org/releases/11.0R/installation.html#upgrade-binary

You know, the beginning of these threads are always so nice, then the Linux fags come and fuck it up every time with their holier than thou attitudes, and their "prove your kernel is better than mine!" ... it's autistic as fuck.

>>60798030
It's funny how they all sperg about muh freedums then try to deny you the freedom to choose an OS that isn't Linux.

>>60798052
thats not what he's saying anon. this is nothing about freedom or licences. people like you are the problem

>>60798062
I never said they did it itt. I'm just saying that most of the Linux users on this board are freetards yet at the same time they're anti-choice.
>you want to use something other than Linux?
[autistic screeching]
>you're using non-GPLed software?
[autistic screeching]
>etc.

>>60798030
Well it all started with an anon asking about kernels, it's not my fault you have nothing to write home about.

>>60798098
let me be a little clear. I'm okay with Linux fags asking questions and having an actual discussion. Learning. That sorta deal.

But the Linux queers who come here with the intention to spout nonsense, or argue with hostility because they lack the brain cells to understand something or at least not be an asshole when they fail to understand something. Are those that ruin things.

As above, freetards get angry if you use anything but GPL and Linux apparently.

>>60798163
>who come here with the intention to spout nonsense, or argue with hostility
Right, don't you wish 4chan had some kind if, I don't know, Code Of Conduct?
>because they lack the brain cells to understand something
Technical discussion is pretty much on level itt, there's no point in doubting your opponent's mental capabilities as long as he provides valid arguments for you to answer. I mean, if BSD crowd call Linux "bloated", or say their kernels is somewhere near Linux features-wise, they should be ready to support their claims with facts. Oh, and no one said anything about GPL itt so far, you're projecting too hard.

>>60797374
Again. try to understand that there are things built in the kernel that you don't need.
And since anyone can load any module on Linux this is dangerous too.

>>60798295
> there are things built in the kernel that you don't need
Right, this is why maintainers of the repository I use either turn them off completely or compile them as separate modules. The resulting kernel - the total amount of kernel code in the RAM - is small because of this modulization.
> And since anyone can load any module on Linux this is dangerous too.
You have to be root to do it tho. And you somehow managed to compromise root, you're fucked anyway.

>>60798295
It is best practice to build a kernel without loadable modules and built them right in the kernel.
Reason why OpenBSD probably removed it.

>>60798398
no anyone can load modules few recent exploits use it to load vulnerable modules.
Reason why grsecurity has this : https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Grsecurity/Appendix/Grsecurity_and_PaX_Configuration_Options#Harden_module_auto-loading

>>60798240
>code of conduct
Would be nice, but I'm not going to limit people on an anonymous message board. Let me put it this way, hostile arguments doesn't serve to prove your points, especially if someone doesn't understand your point to begin with.

If I can't understand someone's argument because not only is it riddled with ad hominem, but because they refuse to actually explain it to me. I'm not to doubt their mental capacity to have rational discussion?

>no one said anything about GPL
It's like you don't know what a metaphor is. Besides we probably both know that license wars have been here in the past before as well. All I mean by this, is that some queer feel it's okay to say they're about software freedom, but then need you to prove why your os is better. When someone who cares about software freedom would actually only question why you think it's better, accept your answer, do their own research, decide if it's for them, and when it's not, respect other people decision to use that software.

>projecting
If I was I'd be happy because I would goto my psychologist next weekend and learn how to have the self confidence needed not to project. Sadly I'm just a regular old faggot with mild autism.

>>60796584
wow you really know how things work

>>60796228

Protip: fire up freebsd in a VM and experiment with ZFS there before you commit, just so you have a handle on the concepts and operation. ZFS is very good just learn how to use it first.

>>60796519

OpenBSD has solid chroot, and virtualization incoming. ZFS is nice but FreeBSD pulled in a fair bit of Solaris to make it happen, that's a big overhead for the OpenBSD audit.