Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Operating Systems Security Upgrades BSD

OpenBSD 4.8 Released 176

Posted by Soulskill
from the new-and-shiny dept.
Mortimer.CA writes "The release of OpenBSD 4.8 has been announced. Highlights include ACPI suspend/resume, better hardware support, OpenBGPD/OpenOSPFD/routing daemon improvements, inclusion of OpenSSH 5.5, etc. Nothing revolutionary, just the usual steady improving of the system. A detailed ChangeLog is available, as usual. Work, of course, has already started on the next release, which should be ready in May, according to the steady six-month release cycle."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OpenBSD 4.8 Released

Comments Filter:
  • Kickass.

  • by tenco (773732)
    Does their installation fdisk still suck?
    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      lol, how's that?

    • Re:fdisk (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ashkar (319969) on Monday November 01, 2010 @10:12PM (#34097404)

      Their targeted users have no problem with the installation. If you aren't comfortable with the installation tools, you probably wouldn't be comfortable with OpenBSD. A pretty installation method is looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

      • by Narcocide (102829)

        Oh, the problem exists, I can assure you of that. The problem however lies between the keyboard and the chair.

      • It is good to call attention to features that need work.

        It is better to contribute code towards the solution.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by kestasjk (933987) *
        I think having to mess around with cylinders and whatnot is a bit silly these days, when we have "disks" which don't have anything resembling cylinders internally starting to become mainstream. It's a bit dated to say the least

        You can say "the targeted users have no problem with it", and that's fine, but that pool of targeted users is bound to shrink over time (again that's fine, but many would see that as a bad thing, worth some compromises to avoid)
        • by jimicus (737525)

          Disks always did have cylinders, it's just that they don't mean cylinder in the sense of "a whole bunch of toilet roll tubes taped together".

          Having said that, it hasn't been necessary to describe disks in C/H/S parlance in years.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Alioth (221270)

          I've been using OpenBSD since 3.3, and I don't think I've ever specified anything in cylinders when setting up. The BSD disk label tool accepts arguments in size, example 20M, 20G, 20T etc.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by TheRaven64 (641858)
          I haven't installed OpenBSD since around 3.8 (I've just done in-place updates since then), but you didn't have to specify C/H/S values for partition sizes. Values like 512M and 4.5G worked just fine.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by RichiH (749257)

        I had no problems installing Debian potato. Still, I prefer today's installer. Your point being?

      • I am a targetted OpenBSD user. I create Linux-based firewall router boxes regularly for clients. I would love to use OpenBSD instead but the installation process is too complex to wrap up easily for a customer. I can have a customer pop in a Linux CD remotely and VNC-install it from my desk for them over a VPN link.

        Good installers are not a bad thing.

    • Re:fdisk (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 01, 2010 @10:32PM (#34097492)

      I've only installed OpenBSD twice, both successfully, but their fdsik version was very nice.

      Different from Microsoft and Linux fdisk programs? Yes! Because you're not running/installing neither Windows nor Linux. Neither of these are identical systems.

      The OpenBSD fdisk is quite possibly better, and without a doubt far better documented, and not just in the excellent up to date man pages but also in official faq's and installation procedures available on the OpenBSD webpages. Stuff one should read.

      Who would read/read on Microsoft information when installing Linux?
      Who would read/rely on Solaris information when installing Windows?
      Who would read/rely on Linux information when installing OpenBSD?

      If you're having trouble with OpenBSD fdisk or more likely OpenBSD installation peculiarities and requirements that other operating systems either don't have or gloss over then I would recommend reading the OpenBSD documentation, it's all there, yes the issues that can trap someone entirely new too, usually even emphasized.

      A Windows poweruser or superuser can be and often is a total newbie on Linux.
      A Linux poweruser or superuser can be and often is a total newbie on OpenBSD.

      Don't assume different things to be the same.

      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by tenco (773732)
        I just think it's ridicolous that I have to compute partition/disklabel sizes in sectors myself while sitting at a computer. I own a computer because it can compute for me not because I want to compute for it.
    • There's a series of pictures at http://bsdly.blogspot.com/2010/01/goodness-of-men-and-machinery.html [blogspot.com] that tell you what the installer looked like in January. IIRC no huge changes have happened to it since then. But do try 4.8 or a recent snapshot (they come with installNN.iso files these days)
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Someone forgot the infamous song release for 4.8 to be included in article details: El Puffiachi [openbsd.org]

  • song (Score:4, Informative)

    by buchner.johannes (1139593) on Monday November 01, 2010 @10:26PM (#34097476) Homepage Journal

    The release song [openbsd.org] doesn't even have lyrics :-(
    How good can the release be then, I ask!

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I'm curious. Having never used a BSD-based system, how are upgrades managed? I understand that instead of installing packages, one uses ports. My impression of that is that you run a file in a ports directory and it compiles the software and installs it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    But how does one upgrade from, say, OpenBSD 4.7 to 4.8? Is there a script that is run that downloads and installs the appropriate files, or do you have to backup and install the new version on your system?

    • by the_brobdingnagian (917699) on Monday November 01, 2010 @10:49PM (#34097560) Homepage

      I'm curious. Having never used a BSD-based system, how are upgrades managed? I understand that instead of installing packages, one uses ports. My impression of that is that you run a file in a ports directory and it compiles the software and installs it. Correct me if I'm wrong.

      Ports are meant for building packages. Users should only use packages normally. You can update your packages after you upgraded your base system with "pkg_add -ui -D update -D updatedepends"

      But how does one upgrade from, say, OpenBSD 4.7 to 4.8?

      OpenBSD has excellent docs and FAQ's: http://openbsd.org/faq/upgrade48.html [openbsd.org]

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by resfilter (960880)
      ports are just a way to build packages for 3rd party (i.e. not in the base system) software.

      unlike a lot of operating systems, openbsd includes apache, bind, and other common network servers in the base install.

      there's no automated upgrade procedure that works well for the openbsd base system at all; but there's a manual procedure, which is well documented, for upgrading between major versions

      as someone has tried to upgrade many major linux distributions in various environments, i can tell you that
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Noryungi (70322)

      Upgrade to OpenBSD 4.7 to 4.8 is as simple as booting the machine on the CD, and selecting (U)pgrade instead of (I)nstall.

      Make sure you make a backup of your /etc/ directory beforehand and you are good to go. The upgrade process should keep your configuration intact, but it never hurts to be a bit cautious.

      I'll note that i have been upgrading the same machine from OpenBSD 3.9 all the way to 4.8 without major problems.

      Unless you have a very good reason to, do not use ports: use (pre-compiled) packages. Upgra

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by badger.foo (447981)

        Make sure you make a backup of your /etc/ directory beforehand and you are good to go. The upgrade process should keep your configuration intact, but it never hurts to be a bit cautious.

        For /etc upgrades, there's sysmerge.

        In fact, you can run sysmerge -x xetcNN.tgz -s etcNN.tgz and answer the friendly prompts before booting into the installer for the upgrade. Then after you've done the base system upgrade, set your PKG_PATH to something sensible and run pkg_add -u to upgrade your packages. Time needed is mainly a function of how good your connectivity to the packages mirror is.

  • by angus77 (1520151) on Monday November 01, 2010 @10:44PM (#34097532)
    They have suspend/resume now?

    I guess this will be the Year of the OpenBSD Netbook!!
    • Re:Suspend/Resume? (Score:5, Informative)

      by the_brobdingnagian (917699) on Monday November 01, 2010 @11:00PM (#34097618) Homepage
      Suspend/resume support has been improved enormously. I have been using it without problems on my Asus Eee PC 1000H for a while now.
    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by 101percent (589072)
      A super secure OS running on the most easily stolen machine.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Just Some Guy (3352)

        That's actually a great reason to use it on laptops (even if the pull of Ubuntu was too strong for me). A laptop without the password to the encrypted boot system and without any way to get it out of sleeping without knowing the login password might as well have a formatted drive for all the use it is to a thief.

        Yes, you can get most of that with a properly set up Linux system. That's what I'm banking on with my own laptop here. Still, should it get stolen, I'd feel a lot better if my personal data was lock

  • I hope they didn't break something when adding the ACPI features. From my experience, it is one devil of a specification. Just half an hour ago, I couldn't browse anything on my Ubuntu Lucid because I had changed one ACPI related setting in Bios, and XP failed to boot at all. I wonder how far-reaching and bizarre effects it has on other OSs, and in other scenarios.
    • This is why it's only being advertised now. They've had ACPI support for a while, but every ACPI implementation has interesting bugs. Most BIOS vendors test with Windows. A few test with Linux. None test with OpenBSD. OpenBSD therefore needs to include work-arounds for these bugs. They don't advertise the feature until they're pretty confidant that it's actually working. It's not Linux, where stuff gets pushed to the tree with a token amount of testing.
  • by n3v (412497)

    www.openbsd.org slashdotted?

  • Disable bce(4) in i386 GENERIC and RAMDISK kernels.

    Why was this removed? Makes my latop not useable with OpenBSD.
    • by IcePic (23761)

      Because it sucks by having hardware that cant handle memory above 1G, which means either it goes, or your 1+ G machine becomes 1G machine.
      (or you start doing the ISA-bus style memory bouncing for all network drivers since any device can DMA to/from the same mbufs that the bce later should handle)

      So either a massive rewrite of all other network drivers, OR, kill the driver for the broken hardware that pretends to be useful but isnt.

  • That was more than ten years ago, and OpenBSD is still the *nix OS that remains closest to the original Unix style and spirit.

    Being a BSD variant it means it already started to deviate from the Unix way long ago [cat-v.org], but with the notable exception of Plan 9 [cat-v.org] (not surprising given that the original Unix team were responsible for Plan 9, and by the way now are working on Go [golang.org]), all other *nix-like systems are much, much worse.

    The quality of OpenBSD code is also much better than that of any other popular OS, and its

Heuristics are bug ridden by definition. If they didn't have bugs, then they'd be algorithms.

Working...