Loonix security fags on suicide watch. > OpenBSD Will Ge

>>61256323
Linux has had KASLR since a long time, now it even comes turned on for retards like you
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=KASLR-Default-Linux-4.12

>tfw even linux has zfs support
>tfw openbsd has no jail support
>using a *BSD without the only two reasons to use *BSD

>>61256332
You didn't even read the article but you still needed to post your shit. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH KASLR.

>"It still loads at the same location in KVA [Kernel Virtual Address Space]. This is not kernel ASLR!," said de Raadt.

Instead, KARL generates kernel binaries with random internal structures, so exploits cannot leak or attack internal kernel functions, pointers, or objects.

Also

>Kernel Address Space Layout Randomization (KASLR) turned on by default in Linux 4.12, released last week

BTFO LINUXFAGS

>>61256377
see >>61256364 or you can fucking read the article

>>61256357
If you think that those two are the basics of having a secure system son, you have a problem.

>>61256357
It's still a cool idea and if othrr oses use it then it has done well

Of course openBSD has a long way to go before it becomes a viable os for anything other than pf, but has that ever been the goal of the project?

Would like to see them try a better filesystem though, i remember there was talk of HAMMER at one point

>>61256436
>Of course openBSD has a long way to go before it becomes a viable os for anything other than pf,

>Citation needed

I have used it as a desktop for years. The developers all use it for their everyday needs. The only downside is the not bleeding edge packages (for stable release) but everything else is top notch quality.

>>61256364
No other operating systems has KARL, but the Linux kernel itself has KASLR. The difference between the two is that KARL loads a different kernel binary in the same place, while KASLR loads the same binary in random locations. Same goal, different paths.

>>61256395
the article doesn't say jack shit
does it randomize the layout of structs?
does it randomize the layout of the text section?
does it do both?

>>61256463
For prod*

It's a great desktop/laptop os. I love the userland

>>61256467
>https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/openbsd-will-get-unique-kernels-on-each-reboot-do-you-hear-that-linux-windows/

Are you a baby that needs to be spoonfed? Just click on the fucking links that lead to the developers discussion at openbsd-tech.

>>61256490
>For prod*
What exactly are your needs for prod*?

>there are people out there
>RIGHT NOW
>still using shitty Linux

HAHAHAHA

>>61256465
>Same goal, different paths.
The article is very nice to loonixfags because Linus HAS NEVER FOCUSED ON SECURITY. There are tons of sec joles in the linux kernel.

>>61256323
I like how BSD has been absolute smoking lincucks for the past few years and their reaction has been to spread FUD about it instead of recognizing that more OSS alternatives are always a good thing. They're so beholden to this tribal identity that they're willing to do the NSA's work for them. Maybe it's because so many of them unironically derive a sense of pride from maintaining an over-engineered ersatz piece of shit that the mere presence of something as simple and secure as OpenBSD makes them shite their knickers with rage

>>61256512
Robust filesystem

Mature virtualisation technology (ideally with containers)

Software support

To name the obvious ones

File: linux_users_after_that_post.jpg (31KB, 360x200px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 360x200px

>>61256530

>>61256542
>>61256542
>Robust filesystem

FFS is aging but reliable, robust and SECURE.

>Mature virtualisation technology (ideally with containers)

You are spot on. OpenBSD doesn't have this. However this is because virt does not guarrantee sec. They recently started to support xen.

>Software support

I don't understand this. Openbsd has a huge port collection.

>>61256332
>hurr durr i don't even know that KASLR was developed by the people from OpenBSD.

wew lad just neck yourself straight away

>>61256357
>tfw zfs has no official linux support because of license issues
>tfw openbsd doesn't need jail because it's a shit version of a hypervisor running in a loosely secure chroot
>not having any fucking idea what the fuck im talking about hurr durr

>>61256542
you don't run containers on virtualization! containers are a replacement. literally you add an abstraction layer onto another abstraction layer onto another one. you have an OS with the hypervisor, then another OS as guest and then you have another abstraction layer which are containers. You are wasting a shit ton of resources and storage latency is a bitch, even if you'd run shit on full flash.

>>61256502
yeah I'd prefer a yes or no answer to my question
surely you can do that if you're familiar with this thing

File: IMG_1329.png (34KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 633x758px

>>61256323
>tfw no Linux asmr
Why éven live?

I'll switch to BSD when it supports my fucking 10 year old sound card.

>>61256653
surely you don't actually care about acquire knowledge, just the bullet points so you can pretend to know stuff about the topic. there is no need in answering your question, do it yourself you lazy fuck

>>61256626
Containers are a form of virtualisation

>>61256671
Which BSD have you tried that doesn't support it?

>>61256676
you're right, I don't care about openbsd enough to read up on this shit

>>61256676
That's another reason i admire OpenBSD. They are clean from SJWs and pretencious faggots that want others to do their work for them. Their mailing lists is a breath of fresh air full of pragmatism and no-politics.

>>61256692
they are, which is why i said they are a replacement and not to be put on top of it.

if you think a bit further; a lot of modern enterprise applications are java based, so you have another virtualization layer on top of that

hypervisor > OS > container > java/python/perl/ruby

not only does that sound inefficient on paper, in reality it is even worse. if your java application creates heavy I/O you are basically fucked, and enterprise grade storage ain't exactly cheap

File: raccoon.webm (2MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x404px

Honestly, I've been ignoring OpenBSD before.

Is it harder to learn than other Unix OSs?
How is the desktop state of it?

I was thinking of giving it a try, have been using Windows 7 since it came out.

>>61256742
I never said you would put it on top.

>>61256756
my bad then. it sounded like you'd be running containers on top of your virtualization. that shit just triggers me

tfw linux can use OpenZFS but OpenBSD cant

why even live without zmirrors or raidz?


btfo

>>61256743
It's one of the easiest to use, doesnt require too much setup

Be warned that some of the stuff you are used to having on windows wont be available, and unlike linux there arent any hacky ways to get things working.

Coming from windows i'd be inclined to use linux first and see how you like it.

>>61256767
because if you really want to use ZFS professionally not some lousy ganoo plas leenox zfs meme without any official support. but you debianiggers and ubunturds wouldn't know about, just gobble the shit that canonigger mark shittleworth and rest serve you

>>61256767
they didn't add zfs because it's a bloated, poorly factored piece of shit that uses tonnes of RAM. There are some nice feature of zfs but not nice enough crap up your system with lots of unnecessary and probably insecure code. When OpenBSD gets those features, it will be done right.

>>61256743
it is harder in a way, I had a lot of experience hacking on linux since redhat 3 days. The difference with OpenBSD is that the man pages and docs are much better than linux and will apply to the exact OS you are using (so while it's bare bones, you do get a lot of help, that is rarely if ever wrong). I alway used to struggle with linux (back in the day) because the docs were distro specific and redhat had all these shitty scripts that did things in a non standard way...

I love linux and OpenBSD, why you fuckers have wars about this stuff? Too poor to own more than one computer...

>>61256806
how exactly is zfs bloat? how is it a poorly factored piece of shit?
>uses tonnes of RAM
oh now i get it, you actually don't understand how ZFS works.

>There are some nice feature of zfs but not nice enough crap up your system with lots of unnecessary and probably insecure code.
ZFS by far with ext4 and xfs are the most robust filesystems on this planet, and ZFS issince over 10 years leading on functionality, capacity allocation and redundancy.

you have just no fucking idea what the fuck you are talking about kid, go post in a desktop thread

>>61256799
>triggered user without ZFS

we do have official support idiot ;)

>what is OpenZFS

and OpenBSD doesnt even have unofficial support

cry some more though :D

>>61256806
>he doesnt understand realtime checksumming
>bloat

poor baby cant even use a archival format

>he still uses raid

>>61256799
Does FreeBSD have ASLR yet?

File: 1490114291068.gif (1MB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 499x499px

It all sounds nice, but in reality, how well BSD would work on ryzen 8 core CPU and nvidia GPU?
Oh, and of course, will I be able to use virtualization with BSD and compile my usb wifi adapter driver for it, even if driver is not updated anymore?
Checkmate, atheists.
BSD is obsolete for daily use.

>>61256849
OpenZFS is a fork of ZFS which includes code that is licensed under CDDL, which is why Linux and OpenBSD do not include it into their kernel.

you are just uninformed

>>61256858
since 10 i believe

>>61256806
>dedup/redup
>checksumming
>hashing
>raidz
>zmirror
>zsnap
>importing/exporting pools
>hotswap/coldswap drives
>compression
>zpools which can be "partitioned" and "formatted" without wiping the whole drive
>drive spanning
>ecryption

what do you use as archiving?

BFS?
LOL!!!!

>he doesnt know that ZFS is the longest used archival format in the enterprize

ZFS grew up in the enterprise with SUN and has decades of testing and stability

>>61256871
>There has been a tremendous effort in getting ASLR upstreamed over more
>than two years. We would supply a patch, a few FreeBSD developers would
>review it and make note of a few things we need to improve, we'd make
>those improvements and submit a new patch. [...]
did the freebsd devs write their own implementation?

>>61256837
no you have no idea you stupid fuck, do you think that OpenBSD could not import code from Solaris which is also from the BSD family? There were very good technical reasons that you seem to not understand. OpenBSD developers are far superior to you lincuck.

>>61256530
There is an argument to be made about the license also, which is a lot of the reason gpl people won't use it.

>>61256837
also, ext* filesystems are not robust at all, there are even mailing list posts from the developer showing how the linux version of fsck had to have so many more ways of fixing the filesystem in it than BSD and in some practical ways won out. (but not because the filesystem was good). How about read some code and learn something some day, and stop sucking angry finn cock.

FreeBSD > OpenBSD

You will never get ZFS support loser ;)

>>61256856
>uses checksumming for torrents easily downloaded off the internet.
>redundant resource usage
yes bloat.

>>61256884
the point is it mixes in a lot of stuff OpenBSD already has and is not written well enough to integrate in a clean way. half of the things you listed, OpenBSD already has, but in a cleaner more secure fashion.

SUN are the same faggots that produced java and look at the security mess there, enjoy your faggot zfs applet, enjoy when your false sense of security raidz and checksumming failed because they just hacked that shit into linux without thinking about it.

>>61256990
how do you explain FreeBSD?

face it OpenBSD is a step down

>>61256919
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126925938625682&w=1

you already look pretty stupid, just stop, because you can't damage control this anymore.
its a license issue, always have been, nothing to do with code quality. you are just as uninformed as the other faggots.

>>61256940
there was some fs fuzzing, maybe i can find the slides. in comparison to all existing file systems ext4 and xfs are the most securely designed

>>61256940
here are the slides:
https://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/AFL%20filesystem%20fuzzing,%20Vault%202016_0.pdf

>>61256919
also Solaris is not BSD related, SunOS was. nigger get your facts straight, you joke. go post in an amd/intel shill thread, this is to high level for you

>>61256990
you can't really compare a programming language to a file system. a file system does one thing and it does it forever, save data on a disk. a programming language has a lot more complex tasks to accomplish and technology evolved around design patterns, etc.

you are comparing bananas to planets

>>61256323
>corporate cuck license
no thx

>>61257019
>slides comparing linux filesystems and ntfs using genetic fuzzer
...

what is a kernel?

>>61257040
you can literally just read the wikipedia page to see the heritage you wanker. I used to admin sparc stations for a living, lick my scruds pleb.

>>61257114
ok, just linux, i thought they included some bsd file systems as well. still, good enough measure than none at all. i'd like to see something similar for hammer, ufs, etc.

also shove your "..." up your ass.

File: a8ab5c3805e76a36e2c0542ead00bc0a0ecec02fc642c0e4b476509678a5cd2f.png (160KB, 490x480px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 490x480px

>>61256463
>everything else is top notch quality
The core system is upgradable since one or two major release. The auto mounter is shit legacy crap and the scheduler is a garbage and so on...

Used it for few months and has much more compromises than on loonix.

File: i_used_to_admin_sparc_stations_for_a_living.png (101KB, 335x555px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 335x555px

>>61257135
must have not been good at it if you didn't even know the heritage

File: arse.jpg (23KB, 550x309px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 550x309px

>>61257160
...

>>61256676
No one gives a shit about your "but i dont want to spoonfeed you, noob. read and learn yourself" smoke screen.
Answer his fucking question.

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

38KB, 512x384px

Why compromise for OpenBSD,
when FreeBSD has all the newest gadgets?

The people trying to down play ZFS,
are unknowledgable on the subject.

>>61257205
wew man you sure told me to tell you. i'm actually amazed that you managed to read past the first post

>>61256323
What documented attack would this have protected against? This is security theatre pure and single. Make a lot of noise about how you are making a difference without any evidence, basically trying to sway the ignorant.

>>61257207
The weaknes of this solution is that it requires double hdds, nobody can afford to buy fucking two NASes and waste one on raid

File: i_used_to_admin_sparc_stations_for_a_living_2.png (48KB, 282x860px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 282x860px

>>61257135
here in english for the uneducated

>>61256525
>Linus HAS NEVER FOCUSED ON SECURITY
Neither did C. C and Linux focuses more on performance.

However OpenBSD and Rust puts security first.

>>61257240
you miss undertand the openbsd philosophy

lack of support/features =/= increased security

:^)

>>61257250
youre a retard you know that?

zmirror is raid 1

theres also raidz which covers 10/5/6/0

>two nasses

you just need 1 nas with two drives or a single drive partitioned

>using a nas without redundancy or any failproofing

what a idiot

>>61257240
probably time based attacks during boot, kernel manipulation, maybe some memory allocation stuff too

File: 1475260740920.jpg (61KB, 690x460px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 690x460px

>>61256323
>binary blob

>>61257250
>redundancy
>waste

>using a nas
>poor

the whole idea of using a nas is you have more money to spend than just using your pc

also nothing is stopping you from getting flash drives and a usb hub

>>61257186
systemv came related to bsd as well you gymboid. this ain't linux. SVR4 took the FS from BSD... kids these days... it would be easy enough to put zfs in openbsd, they decided not to, ... reasons...

>>61257315
this wouldnt prevent boot attacks that initialized before the kernel though

>>61257256
>security first
Peer review isn't enough for that.

>>61257250
>he uses a single drive as backup
>thinks he needs to use a NAS for this

why use a nas without multiple drives?

youre just complicating shit when you can just use a single flashdrive in your router

>>61257332
no it didn't, how about you check your cs history before you talk with grown ups, kiddo.

literally, stop posting, you making yourself look even more stupid. systemv was a separate implementation of unix next to bsd, read those fucking wikipedia articles you uneducated piece of shit

>>61257338
well, load order appears to be linked, therefor i assume, that you can't inject modules during boot time

File: bsd-unix-burning-man.jpg (87KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 960x720px

>>61257378
Don't scar the poor lad.
lol

I want to use *BSD but openbsd doesn't support 3d acceleration my old Nvidia card, and I don't want to use proprietary software (nvidia-driver) with FreeBSD. NetBSD has basic nouveau support, which looks perfect, but is it a viable desktop OS?

> BSD is a cuck licence! if nobody gives back the project will die!
> Somehow it's superior to Linux
hhhhhmmmm...
really makes u think

>>61256530
>lincucks
>They're so beholden to this tribal identity
oh the ironing

File: UFS.png (58KB, 946x401px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 946x401px

>>61257378
>>61257415
Pic related.
>UFS

>>61257429
well....
i..
uh..
hmm..

penguins r stewpeed :^)

hue hue

>>61257438
so you are agreeing now that they imported features from BSD which is a seperate implementation?

>>61257438
ok wow it they took the FS, great you won a tiny argument by shifting from your initial statement where you implied that Solaris was *BSD based.

File: Wejustdontknowbirdgif.gif (1002KB, 250x251px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 250x251px

>>61256323
Isn't this a good thing? I don't understand the criticism and lulz coming from this thread.

>>61257478
Not the same guy, lad; I just knew what he was talking about.

>>61257486
im surprised you can follow this dudes conversation flow. started with zfs support on openbsd and now we are back in the 80's talking about UFS being introduced in systemv

>>61257472
we're talking about the FS and how easy it would be to put ZFS in OpenBSD. It's a related implementation at best, look at some code and learn unix, this is not your linux hacked together shit. (I do like linux for things though, cos hacking shit is what you need some times, just gotta realise it's inferior to doing it properly).

>>61257378
if you read the original point was that it would not be hard to put zfs into openbsd, but they didn't, cos they had reasons, SVR4 is close enough to BSD to do it ..

>>61257472
What are you on about? UFS and ZFS coexisted in Solaris for many years. You couldn't have /root ZFS until recently (using UNIX timeline scales)

>>61256332
/thread

>>61256626
It was developed by the PaX team for linux. Linux has had it available a whole decade before openbsd. But you people are the most intellectually dishonest in the world so I wouldn't expect your version of reality to accord with the truth.

>>61257558
it is not even hard to put it in linux but as mentioned somewhere above, it has always been an issue with the license. because CDDL is not an open source license. as far as i understand it oracle still has the last say in it, if they change CDDL to something else openzfs would die

>>61257520
>inferior to doing it properly
It's still the best among OSS systems. Even proprietary lately became a clusterfuck, so i dare to say linux is currently the best os and can be used for everything except for some special RT embedded cases.
Currently *BSDs isn't less "hacked together shit" than linux anyway.

>>61257580
not the same thing dildo

>>61256866
OpenBSD could include it, CDDL is a non-viral license. CDDL is strictly a defensive license that prevents the license on code from ever being modified or changed without the original author's consent. OpenBSD devs do not include ZFS because it is simply too big for them to handle they see it like they' would have to incorporate a large chunk of the Solaris kernel into their OS and their base system utilities could be pushed out of the base system into the ports tree

>>61257637
/retard

>>61257641
>too big for them to handle
"forking" openssl was a good idea though :^)
Excuses are like assholes...

>>61257592
not a hole decade, just 2 years actually according to wikipedia. but you are right

>>61256524
t. Winnigger

>>61257657
Ah, I must be counting from the wrong date, like PaX dates instead of just aslr dates.

>>61257644
poopoo willy bumchum

File: elephant.jpg (49KB, 640x472px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x472px

>>61256799
Why don't you stop shitposting for 10 seconds and actually convince people to use OpenBSD (I've used it by the way) or tell people how they can get it rather than "HUERRR DURRRR RETARD LENOOSFAGS"

>>61257641
i would say that's more of a license issue, if it really boils down to porting solaris code to openbsd. if you can't adjust zfs code basis to be more platform independent, which is what openzfs tries to achive, it stays uninteresting for them. probably because they can't adjust security features at the core, at least that's what i understood from lurking the ml years ago

>>61257641
pretty much explained here, http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/ZFS-on-OpenBSD
Either way, linux is good, openbsd is good. spins and roundabouts or something.

>>61257700
That's literally the extend to the bsdtard intellect though. In 2005 when I was considering going windows to linux, people acknowledged the flaws and offered solutions (both workarounds and future solutions). As for bsdtards, all they can do is lie, deny and cry.

>>61257700
there is no use in convincing someone who persists on their view, there is a psychological term for it, can't remember what it was called. but it basically states, the more you try to argue for a subject for a person who is convinced that the matter is not to his interest, their opinions don't change and even get stronger against the parties arguments

>>61257751
examples?

>>61257780
This very thread.

>>61257814
example posts

OpenBSD and Linux serve very different purposes. OpenBSD is very good for a very specific set requirements but most people have other requirements that Linux suits better. I don't understand the constant need to have supremacy of a particular OS, they have coexisted for decades and will continue to do so.

>>61257762
Sunk Cost Fallacy

>>61256323
I don't get why it's a "suicide watch" meme time

One system makes a new, more secure way of doing things

Why would this put anyone else one "suicide watch"

and that image

>>>/msn/

>>61257862
For (you)s. Shitposting gives us, the attention starved, attention. That's why trolling is such a huge thing.

>>61257840
this is true, however most people have other requirements that windows suits better. this does not however indicate the technical excellence of windows. you have to balance, support for things you can do with how well you can do the things you support.

>>61257892
It also genuinely makes /pol/ more tolerable than /g/

/pol/ is bad but at least it makes new memes

/g/ has been "haha [product or service] ON SUICIDE WATCH HOW WILL THEY EVER RECOVER" for at least the last 2 years

>>61257862
If you are not inflamatory/use memes/ use provocation people won't read your info. Emotion drives people to click links and post posts. Meassured posts get very little to no reply and interest. Just look what get's most hits on youtube, stupid music video with som korean jumping up and donw and some gay jewish swede screaming, making stupid voices and grimaces while he plays dumb games

>>61257931
I honestly think bowing to that way of thinking is the way to kill civil discourse and drive everyone into echo chambers where their opinion is reflected back at them, because otherwise they'll get shouted at for BEING ON SUICIDE WATCH DEAD AND BURIED or some other inane catchphrase

>>61257907
Literally the only use case of windows post-7 is video games. The OSs have become so bad they're downright unusable for other purposes. 7 was still usable as a general-purpose OS but was equivalent (not better) than GNU at the time. Sadly, modern GNU is an order of magnitude worse than windows 7.

^F TCCBOOT
>no results
neo-/g/

>>61257946
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSwAd2T41-o
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Revolt_of_the_Masses
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Revolt_of_the_Masses

>>61257946
It only gets worse from here.

> OpenBSD Will Get Unique Kernels on Each Reboot.
Literaly AIDS.

>>61257369
Why even multiple back for movies and shit? it's pointless, and important data is never larger than several gigs, so you can just back that shit up int he cloud or on flash sticks

>>61256323
I don't know too much about this, but couldn't this make it really hard to debug kernel panics?

Whenever someone sais something positive about OpenBSD on /g/:

> blah blah ZFS blah blah
> OpenBSD btfo

If you like ZFS go use an OS that supports it. If you like quality software that:

-has a proven secure base system
-is simple and elegant in design and implementation
-has a small developer base that constantly deprecates old code
-has security by correctness as a foremost goal

then go try OpenBSD and stop bitching about it while being on windos/lunix.

>>61257986
Hey anon, why do you think all children still use windows (any version)? For gaymin of course. I think this is perfectly rational. However, if those kid mature as users, they may look for a better OS.

>better OS doesn't mean better UI/DE

Respect for Theo to still actively working and implementing his own stuff at the point where he could je be accepting commits. That guy is an inspiration.

>>61256433
>you cannot have a secure linux system
who is even paying you to shill? surely not berkeley

Who pays these shills?

File: 1496331369095.jpg (56KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 600x600px

>>61258700
>has a proven secure base system
Also useless with its dumbed down tools. Only ssh is the good thing from them. ASLR and W^X maybe the other two, but KARL will fail everywhere else as it brakes userspace.
>is simple and elegant in design and implementation
Simple and stupid. It's good if it's your crush, but it's 2017, so most people won't touch an OS without complex and easily configurable automation for basic and not so basic tasks. TrueOS got it right in BSD world.
Elegance don't have anything to do with OS development.
>has security by correctness as a foremost goal
Though the first stable release of doas couldn't provide good error messages for config syntax failures. Without automated testing you can't tell how secure is their system. Also less code line isn't always better especially performance wise.

>>61256323
botnet

>>61257207
because no one uses freebsd. ports/packages is broken for years.

>>61257207
zfs is garbage since it takes over 9000 TB of ram to use its features. Without that, it's slow as fuck and you can't actually make use of its features.

>>61262395
FreeBSD userbase is about 1000x bigger than OpenBSD's for a reason.

>>61257429
Do you have permanent brain damage? Linux has more hardware support, more features, is significantly faster, and has a significantly larger market share? Explain how BSD is superior to that.

>>61262395
>what is pfsense based on
>what is nas4free based on
>what is freenas based on
>what is trueos based on
>what are the other multitudes of projects based on

FreeNAS

idiot

File: saiyan.vegeta.gif (414KB, 500x244px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 500x244px

>>61262500
>kid who has never tried zfs is talking out his ass

you can have freenas userland running with a full ZFS pool on 1 GiB sodimm ram

nice job showing your power level sapien

>power outage while relinking kernel

>>61257914
>>>/pol/

File: freebsd-stolen.jpg (809KB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

809KB, 2448x3264px

Well,
this thread was trash.

File: 9834214353.jpg (583KB, 865x1338px) Image search: [Google]

583KB, 865x1338px

>>61256332
This ladies and gentlemen is the average Linux fanboy that populates this place.

He has no fucking idea what he is talking about, He only knows how to spread FUD about better operating system, He uses Linux because he hates Windows.

OpenBSD just introduced a new innovation and what does this Linux zealot does?

He reads the word KARL and then thinks "omg there is no way Linus doesn't have whatever the fuck this is, oh wait Linux seems to have something called KASLR, it sounds similar, hehe I won"

A then of course another fanboy goes and agrees with him >>61257580

Meanwhile OpenBSD just ads sensible security feature after sensible security feature, while the GNU/Linux community is overrun by the Freedesktop/Pulseaudio/SystemD people which try to turn the Linux userspace into a bad copy of Windows.

File: 1167769.jpg (95KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1000x666px

>>61263532
>He has no fucking idea what he is talking about
Compare
>GNU/Linux community is overrun by the Freedesktop/Pulseaudio/SystemD people

Seems like you haven't fed up either with bs.

>>61257914
You can thank /v/ and their apathic mods for this shit. Making obvious ruse threads should be an instaban on every board. As things stand, the boards are flooded with this trash.

>>61263700
Who is this semen daemon?

>>61263532
see >>61256465

>>61256525
Yes, Linux cares more about usability which OpenBSD hasn't got any. If you have no drivers/software you won't have any security vuln too.

>>61263532
Just because you deny reality doesn't make it go away.

File: 1480716175249.png (220KB, 800x832px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 800x832px

>>61263195

>>61263195
openbsd is trash after all. It's inevitable.

i wish the portable variant of cwm was updated lads

>>61256323
i only reboot my linux machines when there's a kernel update, so my kernel changes every reboot anyway

>>61268541
i think the point is everyone will have a differently linked kernel