Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

OpenBSD 4.0 Released

Posted by kdawson on Wed Nov 01, 2006 07:55 AM
from the humppa-negala dept.
Operating Systems Software BSD
Undeadly Halloween writes, "On October 18th, OpenBSD celebrated its 11th birthday and ten years of punctual biannual releases. Now it's time for OpenBSD 4.0, which includes tons of new drivers for wireless, network, and storage chips. Consider helping the project by buying the new goodies (CD set, t-shirt, poster, Audio CD). And discover what's new and what battles developers must face daily to support new hardware in the traditional interview featuring nearly 20 developers."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

OpenBSD 4.0 Released 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Nice. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by JoshJ (1009085)
    Good stuff. Hopefully some of those free drivers will get spread around to Linux as well.

  • Now supporting the Amish (Score:3, Funny)

    by dsginter (104154) on Wednesday November 01 2006, @08:04AM (#16671537)
    Whew... On the press release, under "New/extended platforms", it says:

    "OpenBSD/armish"

    I read that as OpenBSD/amish. You can imagine the visions that swirled through my head at that point.
    • They proudly announce a reimplementation of CVS.

      Let me repeat: CVS. In 2006.

      The CVS replacement is already here. We call it Subversion or SVN. It works like CVS, but with several nasty defects removed. Most of us are hoping that CVS will pass into history, to be remembered only on wikipedia.

      If you want to reimplement a version control system, you could pick something non-free that doesn't already have a free clone. You could pick BitKeeper or ClearCase, neither of which are 100% sucky or obsolete.

      So yes, "a
  • is that it can run Linux executables!

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Even better is you can run them in a sysjail. This way, when your Linux executable is exploited, the whole box isn't compromised.

      This is a dream for those of us forced to have to run linux executables
    • By research, I mean the novel approaches they take to acheive new functionality in firewalling, routing, hardware drivers, and cryptography. They also have a reputation for coding "correctness" in improving the basic BSD/Unix utilities that are then used by other projects. I tend to think of the OpenBSD project as an extremely productive research institution run on the cheap. My opinion is that they are probably on a level close to Sun and its multi-million dollar R&D in pumping out Unix inovations.

      N
    • Just like OS/2 could run Windows executables. That didn't save OS/2 and I doubt this will do much for OpenBSD.
      • Just like OS/2 could run Windows executables. That didn't save OS/2 and I doubt this will do much for OpenBSD

        That is a silly comparison. OS/2 tried to compete against Windows, OpenBSD does not try to compete against Linux. OpenBSD does its own thing and doesn't really care what others do. It helps to keep in mind that the OpenBSD folks are a little more mature (obviously referring to the community at large and excluding Theo :-)) and are religious only when it comes to security, not regarding platforms.

      • Just like OS/2 could run Windows executables.

        I seem to recall having to reboot into some sort of virtual machine to run Windows under OS/2. However with OpenBSD Linux emulation, I can run a Linux executable as though it was a native one. The difference is that they they run on a more secure operating system and (at least with FreeBSD and NetBSD Linux emulation) they sometimes run faster. Now that the Sun JDK is running native on FreeBSD and NetBSD, the last reason I have for running Linux binaries on a

  • presumably this contains the installer, encoded into audio Commodore 64-style?
  • Has anyone actually gotten a straight answer from hardware vendors as to why they wont give out documentation? Can you build a modern x86 PC using only hardware that is fully supported by free software with no binary bits, blobs, non-redistributable firmware or missing functionality? Are there any hardware companies that DO give out documentation?

    • Simple
      WiFi cards. May run into issues with the FCC since they are are supposed to be not "easily modifiable by the end user".
      Graphics cards. May use technology from another company that is under an NDA.
      DMCA. Intel has released all the documentation for their graphics chips except for the MacroVision part.
      And last but not least, cost. It costs money to release documentation. Frankly for most companies the Linux OpenBSD market isn't worth it.
      The simple answer is no. If you build an all Intel system then you
      • lets set some definitions before we start talking.

        microcode: a binary piece that is loaded directly into the hardware
        binary blob: a binary piece that is loaded directly into the kernel

        microcode is fine. any OS on any arch can do that (provided it has the appropriate hardware, natch). you bought a kick ass RAID card? sweet. Vendor 'designed' it to run only on i386. you want to put it into your sparc box.

        if the vendor requires a binary blob, you're screwed. so you take it back and get your money back.

        if

  • It'll have to be another donation (Score:3, Funny)

    by DrSkwid (118965) on Wednesday November 01 2006, @09:22AM (#16672285) Homepage Journal
    T-Shirts - Hideous
    CD Set - More toxic landfill
    Posters - see t-shirts above
    Audio - got to be kidding

    • T-Shirts - Hideous
      Actually, I kind of like the 4.0 t-shirt, but given the Mobilix affair, I wouldn't expect them to last long. Get 'em while they're hot!

    • Even since OpenBSD started to "theme" each release I've been disappointed in the merchandise. The artwork is great, but it's just something I wouldn't want to hang on my wall or wear in public.

      Thankfully you can still order stuff from old releases. My personal favourite is the poster from 2.9 [openbsd.org], which is simple and illustrates exactly what OpenBSD is about but professional enough you could hang it your office. I'd buy something every release if they were more like that.

  • Is anyone using a hardware encryption accelerator with OpenBSD? I'm considering a purchase but finding good information has been somewhat problematic.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by raddan (519638)
      I have a Soekris vpn1401 [soekris.com] and it works well, although I don't believe all the features are supported. IIRC, this is because hifn has not been forthcoming with their documentation. The vpn1201 [soekris.com] is known to work as well. I'm not sure if later revisions (like the lan1461) work-- OpenBSD does not have a good relationship with hifn at the moment. BTW, I haven't done any benchmarking with my 1401, but the machine handles crypto much faster with than without it. That's all I can say.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by evilviper (135110)
      I can't run any of the stuff I need to run under OpenBSD,

      Name it, and stop trolling.

      OpenBSD is a normal Unix system (most software compiles), supports FreeBSD and Linux binary emulation. Has Wine in ports, etc.
        • Fair enough... No Wine, then.

          I doubt the great majority of Unix users make use of Wine, anyhow.
        • Oracle RDBMS
          Cisco IP Communicator
          Any brand of SQL based tools. Take your pick!
          • Okay... Well I can see your point. Goodness knows that everybody on the planet runs Oracle! I mean it is right up their with Firefox...
            It also doesn't run Solidworks, Halo, or Microsoft Word!
            Yes so it doesn't run a high end commercial RDBMS! Good grief and you claim it is a niche operating system for that reason!
            I don't use OpenBSD but good grief folks their are people that do and find it very useful. If you don't then don't use it but stop complaining about it!
            • Thank you for those kind words, sir. I happen to work for Oracle, so any other database is not an option. You may find that hard to believe but...
              • I happen to work for Oracle, so any other database is not an option.

                Well, I suppose you could just keep on complaining about how OpenBSD doesn't run Oracle or you could ring up good old Larry and get him to start supporting it. Either way, complaining about how it's not useful for your purposes is about as useful as someone complaining that they can't haul around two tons of construction equipment in a Prius. Right tool for the right job and all that. This isn't your tool.
                 
                • No shit Sherlock!

                  Why do you think I said it was not useful since it doesn't support any of the tools *I* need to run? geeezz Some people are just not very bright!
                  • Your comment is not very useful for me, so I'm replying just to let you know that it's not useful. Your reply was a specialized comment for an extremely small minority of readers. What a waste.
                     
              • You work for Oracle, and you are complaining it doesn't work under OpenBSD? The fault is your companies, not OpenBSD's. Geez, have your company support the platform or stop bitching about something completely rediculous.

                It's like someone working for a Winmodem manufacturer complaining they don't work well under *nix. Duh, write some supporting drivers since you are the one with the documentation and are the ones supporting the product. The documentation for the OS is already out there and available for
    • I'm quite sure you're trolling, but anyway...

      Could you please name what applications you need to run, and at which point they stop?

      If it's not too much hardware dependant, maybe there is a way to run it on OpeBSD. It even has linux/freebsd/solaris/others binary compatibility (to some extent).

      Post your problem and I'll try to help you (if you want, of course).

    • heh (Score:4, Informative)

      by ArbitraryConstant (763964) on Wednesday November 01 2006, @09:02AM (#16672045) Homepage
      Turns out a specialized OS for a small number of users often ends up being something that can't be easily replaced. PF has availability features no one outside of Cisco can match, and they can't match them for what it costs us to use OpenBSD for the job.

      For example, our Internet connection at work is managed by OpenBSD. If I rebooted our firewall, no one would notice, because the backup would kick in and it would preserve state for everything, even pre-existing TCP connections. You could be streaming music and it wouldn't even skip. How can I do that with Linux again?

      "I can't run any of the stuff I need to run under OpenBSD, so why the heck should I even care about it?"

      Hm. Whenever I have that problem, I just download the Linux version and run it under binary emulation.

      • For example, our Internet connection at work is managed by OpenBSD. If I rebooted our firewall, no one would notice, because the backup would kick in and it would preserve state for everything, even pre-existing TCP connections. You could be streaming music and it wouldn't even skip. How can I do that with Linux again?

        keepalived [keepalived.org].

        But, you know, your elitist attitude was fun too. Please, continue.

        • We use CARP, pfsync, and ifstated to have two redundant firewalls on two redundant net connections, with state tables all synced up and everything (if the connection goes down we have to get new state because the external IP changes, but for one of the machines/switches/net cards dying, it's totally seamless).

          Out of curiosity, how are you implementing failover with different external IP addresses? Or is this for outbound connections only, such as internet enabling an office?
           
    • So why are you posting?
      seriously, did you think you HAD to post on every slashdot topic or something?

      why dont you go waste your time elsewhere, no one cares about your opinion on OpenBSD.
        • Not only that, but has anyone actually used CD-RWs (or even DVD+-RWs) since they were a novelty when the priginally came out?
          • I use CD-RWs on a fairly regular basis, for test burns and for shipping medium quantities of data to other people's houses. I rarely use my (one) DVD-RW but I do occasionally do a test burn on it. It's only a 1x so if I'm in a hurry it doesn't help much; my drive is 16x :P

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Nimrangul (599578)
      If you had read the articles linked you'd know that OpenRCS is an almost completely compatible replacement for the GNU RCS, it is a clean reimplementation. The idea being security and reliability improvements. OpenCVS will more of the same once completed, and perhaps after it's features are all complete will add additional things, but until then it is seeking only to be a complete replacement for the GNU CVS.
      • Yuck.

        CVS has already been replaced by subversion (SVN). CVS sucks horribly. Subversion only sucks a little bit.

        I could see doing a BitKeeper or ClearCase reimplementation maybe. Let CVS pass into history.

        OpenBSD/amish indeed...
    • Theo being childishly abrasive and arrogant? You're kidding! Check out this masterpiece of social graces [freebsd.org].
        • You know... It would be fun to have a Theo x RMS deathmatch.
        • Oh, you mean like how he got pissed off when certain companies started preinstalling OBSD on machines and then told their customers the BSD mailing list was their support forum, without even the courtesy to tell anyone on the list what they were in for?

          I can't blame Theo at all for how he responds to greedy bastards like that.
          • Oh, you mean like how he got pissed off when certain companies started preinstalling OBSD on machines and then told their customers the BSD mailing list was their support forum, without even the courtesy to tell anyone on the list what they were in for? I can't blame Theo at all for how he responds to greedy bastards like that.

            Although I prefer *BSD to Linux for anything beyond consumer desktop type usage (ok, maybe embedded too), think Apple made a wise choice to go BSD rather than Linux, believe that

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Dan Ost (415913)
      Even if they're of one mind now, putting pressure on Dell, HP, and the rest might
      make them change their minds later. The key is to make this as visible an issue
      as possible.

      Talk to the chip manufacturers.
      Talk to the OEMs.
      Talk to the people who do the purchasing for your company. If you're lucky,
      they might start asking the right questions when they place an order. That's
      the kind of thing that makes Dell/HP/etc take notice.

    • Dell, et al. HAVE documentation. They signed legally binding NDA's and contracts. There is serious money involved. I still don't get why everyone thinks the community should be the ones to wirte the drivers. Make a stable ABI and allow manufacturers to write the drivers as they see fit and protect their IP.

      Other options is for OS people sacrifice any ability to work in their field and sign life-long NDA's and non-com's to gain acess to the info or have bounties to raise the millions to BUY the information a

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by Nimrangul (599578)
              You obviously don't know OpenBSD, it's the one that gets new drivers for wireless cards and removes ipf because of it's developer's interpretation of his licence. It's the one that will never move to a newer version of Apache, since it's licence is too restrictive. It's the one that rewrites compress to include all the functionality of gzip, just so it can remove gzip, and it's done the same for size, and diff, and grep...

              The gcc is one of the last remaining non-BSD licensed bits in OpenBSD, OpenBSD has

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.