Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
BSD Operating Systems

OpenBSD 2.6 released 228

Posted by Nik from the 'evening-all dept.
Lots of you wrote in with this -- we've been holding back at Theo's request until the CDs were available, but OpenBSD 2.6 is now released and available from the FTP sites, or by ordering CDs. There are lots of technical enhancements to this release (which are detailed below), and if they don't grab you, check out the very cool CD cover art.

The complete list of changes to 2.6 is too long to list here. However, some of the highlights are:

  • Add ssh (OpenSSH) to the base system
  • Reliability patches for the PowerPC port
  • Improved support for ext2fs
  • Perl 5.005_03 in the base system
  • Support Joliet filesystems
  • More security fixes
  • USB support
  • Fixes to the ATAPI support
  • Speed up the install process
  • Many manual page updates

and much more.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OpenBSD 2.6 released More

OpenBSD 2.6 released

Comments Filter:
  • If it was just more intuitive. ( i would be in heaven )
  • Oh oh oh... A new toy. Just in time for Christmas. I look forward to getting this and seeing what improvements there are. OpenSSH is the big on that I'm looking for. Just a note: the ports tree for OpenBSD has grown a lot. If you have tried OpenBSD as a desktop before but never any of the ports ... do so. There are soe pretty cool packages available, and the download/install process is really slick. Good going to the OpenBSD project team. Missin' Calgary. Have a beer at the Ship for me Theo. Dave M
  • ...improved OpenSSL integration and all the IPSec stuff.
  • Yeah, slashdot is a horrible forum for this and I know there's a dozen faqs and newsgroups, but the openbsd fans will be here in abundance and will love this chance to advocate... i hope. :)

    Do you guys support Aureal Vortex and/or SB Live?

    Also, I've heard about FreeBSD's linux emulation... does Open do this, too? How good is it? Can I run Netscape? How about unreal torney? :)

    -Chris
    (Someone who would LOVE the security of openbsd on the desktop, if it were possible)
  • Is there an iso CD-ROM image available for download? I haven't given *BSD a whirl in a while.

  • Re:BSD vs. Linux (Score:3)

    by pb ( 1020 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @05:23PM (#1491474)
    BSD and Solaris are both offshoots of the original (v7?) Unix source, one side developed by Berkeley, the other side by AT&T, with a lot of cross-pollination. Linux was independently developed to be compatible, without the original source.

    Read about the history of unix [bell-labs.com] by one of the original dudes... (dmr [bell-labs.com]).

    FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD should have no proprietary source left, they've been cleaned up so they could open the source. OpenBSD is a latecomer, basically a distribution/offshoot (of NetBSD?) designed for security, both by hopefully fixing security problems before they are exploited in the code and having a secure default configuration.

    I've messed more with SunOS, Solaris, and Linux than I have with any of the *BSD's, tho...
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail rather than vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • I like the graphic style for OpenBSD 2.5 much better than the one used for 2.6 (or the other cartoon ones from the past.)
    The cartoon look seems to lower its credibility with PHBs and other people you have to deal with.
    I want to promote OpenBSD as much a possible, as a 'professionl-like' in quality to new users to BSD or open source software in general.
    Just my personal preference. I'm sure a million of you disagree with me (and will violoently tell me), but does anyone out there agree with me?
  • Um... maybe it's just me, but the image of a cat rampantly having it's way with the fish in the bowl doesn't convey the notion of "security" very well IMHO. Admittedly, the picture is quite cool, but just incongruent with the rest of the cover :)
  • This is only vaguely on topic...

    I've been using Linux for a while now, but I know very little about *BSD. But I am becoming very intersted in getting into it as well. What would be the ideal BSD for me to start with? I have no real security needs, nor do I need to run on anything but x86 hardware. So, should I just go with FreeBSD then? Or would Open or Net be the ideal choice for a beginer?

  • I been wanting to check out this BSD for sometime. But I'm curious as to what games are available for the console? Someone told me that I can't use the regular games, such as Pokemon, from my N-64. Can this be true? Why would Nintendo create a game console that is incompatible with earlier systems?

    By the way: I've been coding lisp for about twenty years and I've just switched to Python. For some reason I'm not more productive. I've been thinking about buying a new mouse with one of those twirly gadgets in between mouse buttons. Would this speed up my Python coding? I sure hope there aren't any compatibilty problems with the N-64 and the new mouse!

    Will the twirly gadget work with BSD?

    W S B
  • Do them all!

    And don't just stop with *BSD, try out a couple of *real* Unix products. The results will suprise and educate you.
  • We just gave up on installing OpenBSD 2.5 on an older PC that we wanted to make into a firewall router. We never got past the first boot from the hard disk, it fails on the first line displayed (Reading from device xxx).

    If anyone can provide a pointer to installation support for OpenBSD, we would certainly appreciate the help. The online instructions and readmes are no help at all. I would love to support the project by sending more money for the new version, but there's no point if you can't get to first base....

  • The essential differences:
    FreeBSD is based on the original BSD source
    Linux was done from scratch.
    It's legal to distribute modified BSD without releasing the source.
    It's illegal (breach of the GPL contract) to release Linux without the source.
    Linux is developed by anyone and their dog.
    FreeBSD is developed by a smaller group of elite programmers.

    Oh, and Solaris IS unix--it's just a particular brand.
  • FreeBSD would be the choice for x86-only, no heavy security, getting started.

    Or at least, that's what they tell me. I'd have to free up some space on my 8GB of Linux and stuff to check it out... Maybe when I get my next computer. :)
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail rather than vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].

  • Re:Here's my questions (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The SB Live stuff just came out and wasn't ready in time for 2.6. The Vortex is not publicly documented at all, as part of Aureal's continuing efforts to not have UNIX customers.
  • OpenBSD's mascot is the blowfish. If you are unlucky enough to be in the fishbowl, do you want to be the blowfish, or one of the spinless but colorful, and soon to be eaten fish?
  • Not sure about the sound cards ... All I've ever used is SB16.

    OpenBSD does have linux emulation (along with SCO, SunOS...) but I've never used it. I understand that you can get MEsaGL and Glide going so you can play Q2 & Q3. Not sure about UT.

    You can deffinitely get Nescape going. It's actually very easy. If you go to Netscape's ftp site, download the BSDi version. The easiest way to get with 128bit encryption is through the OpenBSD ports collection. Download ports.tar.gz from ftp.openbsd.org and untar/zip it in your /usr directory. Go into the /usr/ports/www/netscape (something like that) and type "make" then "make install". It will automatically ftp, install it and apply the 128bit SSL patch. Very cool. Check out all of the other things in the ports collection too.

    Hope this helps.

    Dave M
  • To add a few points:

    FreeBSD (and the other *BSDs) may be *based* on the original BSD source, but they removed any AT&T "tainted" bits a long time ago.

    The GPL is not a contract. It's a copyright license. (Yes, there IS a difference.)

    Linux is *not* developed by anyone and their dog. Patches that go into the kernel are looked over quite thoroughly by a group of programmers that are just as "elite" as anyone on the FreeBSD core team.

  • Re:BSD vs. Linux (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Your right, its NetBSD. Go read Theo's archive (theos.com), its pretty interesting.

    You should also note that BSD license is different from the GPL, that BSD netowrking code is considered top notch and used in almost every OS, and that the systems are generally geared towards solving a project goal, not to do everything possible like Linux.

    Otherwise, the two are very similar, though Linux has many distributions and until Debian/FreeBSD, which may not deserve the title of distribution yet, the BSD OSes are from one source, and are considered for the most part to be better organized. For the goals of the projects, the BSDs outperform Linux, but on exterior goals, Linux may outperform, or may not, depending on the varients.

    Wouldn't Anon.. but found my recent history being 50+ posts was just depressing.

  • The significance of this... (Score:5)

    by Matt Bridges ( 97198 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @05:36PM (#1491492)
    As OpenBSD has been a lesser-known OS for a while, I am writing this post to tell any newcomers what it is all about. While to many this may seem like just another software release, anyone who has watched cryptography and security in general and OpenBSD in particular knows that this will have major significance throughout the industry. It may not be immediately apparant, or even obvious, but it will be important for the follwing reasons: 1. With the recent anti-cryptography crackdowns by the US government (see the article below this one on the investigation of William Simpson), having a complete system of VERY strong cryptography coming from outside our national borders, such as OpenBSD, will significantly weaken our government's efforts to stop cryptography. 2. OpenBSD is apparantly the only major OS that truly follows the saying, "Security is a process, not a product." Personally (and I know there will be much debate on this, possibly even flames), I believe that everyone from the Linux contributors to Sun (makers of Solaris) to, of course, Microsoft, could learn from the example of the OpenBSD team. For those of you unfamiliar with OpenBSD, here are a few examples of how the emphasis in this OS is almost entirely on security: A. Line-by-line security audit of *everything* that goes on the CD. B. Strong cryptography is built in on the most basic system level. C. All aspects of the default setup have undergone rigorous security testing. OpenBSD is, to the best of my knowledge, the only OS that can legitimately claim to be secure right out of the box. All of these factors combined have set a standard that the rest of the industry has yet to meet. Eventually, security will be seen as something not to be expected, but demanded in a product, and the OpenBSD philosophy will serve as a model for this shift. 3. Because many security flaws (such as potential buffer overflows) can cause security-unrelated crashes, the line-by-line audit also resulted in remarkable stability beyond just the security. I think we can all think of a certain software company that could learn from this example. 4. The overall view of the OpenBSD team that security as not just something that happens over time and numerous patches, but rather something to get right the first time, must be adopted by the rest of the industry as soon as possible. Anything less will hold back the advance of the Internet unacceptably. I hope that this has helped some newcomers to the OpenBSD world understand the underlying philosophy of this wonderful OS.
  • OpenBSD's Linux emulation works great. I am posting this with the Linux version of Netscape 4.7 running on a prerelease snapshot of OpenBSD 2.6. I just downloaded the communicator tar.gz from netscape's ftp site and ran their install script.

    But first you have to install the linux_lib port. I also had to snag a copy of libstdc++.so.2.8 off of a Linux box and put it in /emul/linux/usr/lib/, since Netscape relies on it.

    I think the Linux emulation should run most apps (unless they require kernel modules, like VMWare).

  • Out of interest - in what way is OpenBSD not "intuitive"? Compared to what?

    No, this is not a flame - I really want to know.

  • I don't mean to put a damper on your excitement, but given the heavy package load this time of year, and the fact that 2.5 took a few weeks to arrive just a month ago (when 2.6 was imminent)...

  • OpenBSD appears to be supported by donations and, drum roll, buying their CD-ROM. Because this is a very real form of support the OpenBSD team does not release an ISO image. The FAQ at openbsd.org [openbsd.org] has more details. I just installed v2.5 and have to say the sleekness of the complete install is very satisfying. It is running on an old 486 with a 314mb disk which is acting as a firewall and providing ip NAT to my LAN. Sweet! Now on to v2.6 in due time...
  • I would say FreeBSD is best for a beginner. The install process is VERY much easier than OpenBSD. It took me a few times to get through the OpenBSD partitioning software. Not very intuitive at all, but once you get used to it, its not too bad. Beyond that, the OS itself is not much different to use than FreeBSD (or even Linux or another Unix really). I have been running OpenBSD on x86 and Sparc for about a month now and am really enjoying it. I plan on setting up a firewall for a business with OpenBSD in the next few weeks. I like the fact that the default install doesn't install so much crap, like certain Linux distros. I really wish someone would create a Linux distro that had similar functionality of OpenBSD. Is there one?
  • is it just me, or do the scales on that yellow fish appear very similar to a certain flag...
  • As with most question, it all depends on what you wish to accomplish. I personally prefer OpenBSD because it is fairly secured by default. It is my favorite choice for anything server related... There are or were issues with UNIX socket connections with MySQL.

    FreeBSD is most probably your preferred choice if you plan to use the system with your desktop. I had attempted at one point or the other use OpenBSD as my desktop, but had very little luck moving GNOME or KDE over to that platform and not have problems.

    Since friends has a larger user base, the ports section (a nice feature of the BSD's) should make life easier to get a good desktop going. It also has more support for games et cetera.

    NetBSD, I have yet to try... But can be very useful if you want to consolidate multiple vendor hardware onto the same software. Of course, trying all of is probably the best way to determine your preference. My C0.02$
  • Now is the little devil guy the mascot for FreeBSD specifically, or for all BSDs in general? I notice a slight "devil theme" throughout all the BSDs, including BSD/OS from BSDi. Would it be inappropriate to put one of those little devil stickers on an OpenBSD box?!?!?

  • Does anybody know if the OpenBSD folks plan to have their product boxed up and sold off the shelf in local bookstores, like RedHat, Caldera, and many of the other Linux/BSD distributors are doing?

    I'd be interested in knowing if that is being considered. And, if so, what the timeframe on it is.
  • When you say "they" removed any AT&T "tainted" bits, which they do you mean? The original BSD people, or the FreeBSD people. I think the original BSD people removed all the AT&T stuff so they could release the source in the first place. I could be wrong though.

  • Use the OpenBSD mailing lists, rather than newsgroups. You'll usually get a response (if, sometimes, not exactly the kind of response you were hoping for) within a couple of hours.



  • Re:BSD vs. Linux (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Fair enough, your history must look like my history. I didn't really want to mention any of the other issues just because of their flame-potential, but here goes...

    From what I've heard about Theo, I'm not impressed. Maybe he can code, maybe he's got a point or two about securing the OS, but past that I don't think I'd want to work with him either.

    Yep, the BSD license is really free, while the GPL protects from what that freedom allows... Sometimes this is good, and other times it's a pain. For instance, I'd like it if Apple couldn't just take the BSD code and attempt to make an OS on top of it, and screw it up. However, if it ultimately replaces MacOS, that'll be an improvement. :)

    I've heard the same things about the BSD networking code, but I haven't really seen a good comparison. Of course, BSD was the first Unix to have networking, but that's no reason to assume it's the best at it. It must be pretty good just from the anecdotal evidence, but I have yet to see some proof.

    I like Linux because it has hardware support for the freaky devices I get. Of course, that means it might end up being less stable depending on how supported that is... However, for a good hardware configuration, that's well supported by the OS, it shouldn't really matter which one you use.

    The BSD's probably are better organized, and move slower, because of the way their development works. Contrast this with Linux: it's fast and sloppy, and furiously patched together, but it somehow works, and they spend time stabilizing the patches and looking for bugs too...

    Also, Linux is getting a lot of attention lately, with corporations funding its development in various different areas, and contributing back, in the hopes of getting a great, compatible Unix OS running on their hardware, and also getting good publicity and saving money in the long run...

    The same thing could have happened to BSD, but it was too late, and not as sexy, not as much of a success story about the lone hacker, etc., etc. And that penguin is just too darn cute. Aww... :)

  • Re:BSD vs. Linux (Score:3)

    by BJH ( 11355 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @06:03PM (#1491513)
    There's probably more detailed information on the FreeBSD web site, but basically what happened was:

    - USB released a bunch of UNIX code that was supposedly "free". This formed the basis for 386BSD, which begat FreeBSD.

    - AT&T sued USB (and also BSDi, I think) for infringement of copyright, claiming that some of the code in the original release was under AT&T copyright.

    - The case was settled out-of-court, and the FreeBSD team threw out all the AT&T-tainted code and rewrote those sections.

    Unfortunately, the AT&T lawsuit made corporations wary of BSD-based products, thinking that what had happened once could happen again. Luckily, most people aren't bothered by any of that now.
  • And they should be supported in whatever way is reasonable for every individual.
    Here's an attempt to cut-n-paste from the aformentioned FAQ.
    ---
    3.1.2 - Does OpenBSD provide an ISO image available for download?

    You can't. The official OpenBSD CD-ROM layout is copyright Theo de Raadt, as an incentive for people to buy the CD set. Note that only the layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else to just grab OpenBSD and make their own CD.
  • I hadn't noticed till you mentioned it... but now that I look at it again, you're right. It certainly does look that way. An intentional jab? :)

  • Take a look at Slackware. I've used the standard installer to install a very basic setup on a 48MB flash card.
  • Nope, not inappropriate at all. :)

    The Daemon (he's not a devil) is the mascot of all the BSDs...
    Marshall Kirk McKusick (the guy that holds the copyright on the daemon artwork)
    has a page devoted to the little Beastie [mckusick.com] and his history.

    --Kevin

    =-=-=-=-=-=
    "I think the P-Funk Mothership just landed in my back yard!"
  • This will be my first time having to order the disks. When 2.5 came out I just got them from Theo (benefits of living in the same town as him). Hopefully I won't have to wait too long, but the BSD box is up and running nicely so I don't really have to upgrade it. I just like to play. :)
  • Note the penguin-looking skull over the www
    Hey guys, can't we all just get along? ;)

    -Nick "Who told you I'm paranoid!!!" Gully
  • Did you RTFM grit-pouring-person? It may truly get even better if you follow the details specifically laid out in the FM (the manual).

    Thank you for your question. Please drive up to the next window.

    ...By the way this is supposed to be a stab at humor. Oh and by the way grit-person, have you ever thought about getting counseling?
  • as mentioned in the subject title..
    What do you want? A rainbow-colored window?

    Heck no! Just seeing that little window picture-thing gives me intestinal cramps.
  • Sure, Theo is not exactly a candidate for "Mr. Nice Guy 1999", but that can be said for a lot of people - take Tom Christiansen (please...) as an example. Many developers can change into real bastards if you push the right buttons, the same as any other person.

    I'm not going to get involved in a license flamewar, so I'll just ignore the comments on the BSD license...

    The BSD TCP stack is generally agreed to be very good. It has had its problems (just as the Linux stack, the Solaris stack, the WinNT (blech) stack...), but it performs very well.

    For freaky devices, take a look at some of the stuff that NetBSD supports on its various platforms.

    And as for the last bit about the *BSDs being "too late", the BSD kernel codebase has been around for a lot longer than the Linux kernel...


  • You can try to get the bookstore to order it. Just give them the ISBN number. I just did a quick scan of the OpenBSD web site and couldn't find it. They used have it posted for previous versions. Maybe mail Theo (mailto:deraadt@openbsd.org) to get it.

    Just an idea. Best of luck.


  • Oh, shit. Didn't catch that on preview, either...

  • hmm (Score:1)

    by SRT ( 120987 )
    I can not think of anything of value to say except OpenBSD rules. It has never let me down. Give it a try!

    Thanks to all those that worked hard to make it what it is. I have no idea what I'd have done without it.

    Everyone that does use it like me should buy some t-shirts to help support the project :)

  • Re:Artwork doesn't fit (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I think you are correct in your assessment of the yellow fish having the windows logo. The fish is quite bloated :). The stripes on the zebra fish are made up of Sun logos. And there is a penguin skeleton scattered amongst the remains. I assume the cat represents a cracker, considering that he has prison stripes. Who does the sucker fish, and that other tiny fish represent?
  • Yes , PCMCIA cards will work I use 2.6 on my Thinkpad 755CE currently. Make sure and check the README.i386 [openbsd.org] (assuming you have an i386 of course) for suported NICs and SCSI controllers.
  • it's just you, until you explain which flag? hehe. I see a flag, I don't recognize it.


    i dont display scores, and my threshhold is -1. post accordingly.
  • please post to misc@openbsd.org: 1) exact description of the hardware of the machine (cpu, mem, brand, HD, etc) 2) HOW u did the install (CD, ftp, etc) I'm pretty sure they'll help you. Alejo
  • I really love the idea of what openBSD is, but there isnt much documenation. It's not very intuative to someone who is used to system V trying to be productive with out good docs or nice utilitys.

  • OpenBSD and Linux - compare? (Score:3)

    by soulhuntre ( 52742 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @06:51PM (#1491547) Homepage

    We are a small Internet development shop, running a few servers and a mixed bag of development stations. Currently, there are three Linux [linux.org] boxen on our network, running the latest RedHat [redhat.com] releases. We are looking to put in three more systems, for a total of 5 running some Linux/UNIX like OS.

    • A MySQL [mysql.org] server box
    • A Firewall
    • A Mail/Fileserver
    • 2 Webservers running Apache [www.apache...argetblank] / PHP [www.php3.comtargetblank](Zend [zend.com])

    When we perform this upgrade, we are willing to change operating systems if there is a demonstrable benefit. Due to recent slashdot [www.slashd...argetblank] postings we have started looking at OpenBSD [openbsd.org] as our server OS. Now, we do understand that RedHat is not the only Linux distribution available, but we don't really want to get into a Linux/Linux war here. We don;t mind changing if we should for technical reasons - but the Linux world seems more hip and vibrant, and we really like the penguin T-shirts we have... so if we can stay on Linux then we want to.

    So far, we like what we hear about OpenBSD - but we don't know if the things we like are inherent in the relative designs of OpenBSD or if they are results of policy choices by the OpenBSD team. If they are the results of policy decisions, then with any luck a Linux distribution could be found that exhibited the same characteristics?

    Features we like about OpenBSD:

    • It seems like the release/testing cycle is extremely carefully controlled. While a freewheeling machine with lots of OpenSource code on the desktop is a good thing, for a server it seems that a smaller group exercising testing/release control is a more controlled system.
    • The integrated crypto [openbsd.org] looks great, the one time use passwords [openbsd.org] look like a big winner here.
    • There are a lot of references to OpenBSD's security and stability - but none with any specific examples or technical backing.
    • The file layout on OpenBSD seems like a winner, it looks like things live in a well thought out and logical set up - not in a mishmash like RedHat.

    Assumptions:

    These systems will be running the server software they need, and X11 [x11.org] + (Gnome [gnome.org]||KDE [kde.org]) for administration and so on. They will not be running the latest stuff from Linuxberg [tucows.com] or a bunch of things that would be on a desktop OS. So we are going to try very hard not to introduce any instabilities. We aren't going to be compiling running games, sound drivers and the like that integrate directly into the kernel.

    The questions are:

    1. Is OpenBSD more secure in some fundamental way that a well maintained Linux distribution?
    2. Is OpenBSD more stable than a well maintained Linux distribution?
    3. Will the OpenSource software we normally need (firewall, Apache, PHP4, Perl [perl.org], Python [python.org]) and so on probably compile on OpenBSD?
    4. Does OpenBSD have something like clustering support (Beowulf [beowulf.org]) and failover?
    5. Is the performance of a well maintained OpenBSD system better than a well maintained Linux distribution?
    6. Does Linux have anything like the one time use password system?
    7. Does OpenBSD support multiple CPU's better then Linux?

    Thanks for taking the time, and hopefully we can keep the flames down to nothing and talk about technical issues this time.

  • It's impossible to say since you haven't specified which models they are. There are devices in each of the categories you metioned listed in the release notes for the i386 port, though, at http://www.openbsd.org/i386.html [openbsd.org]
  • The Ship??? Now I've seen everything at Slashdot. (I can see it out my front window. Definitely the best pub in Calgary by far.)

    Call me a newbie, but I didn't realize Calgary was such a hotbed of Open Source development. How can I not give it a try. Wish me luck :)

  • I use OpenBSD on a Sparc (SS2 :-) and Debian/Linux on an AMDx86. I like both and am becomming more and more impressed with OpenBSD. I find OpenBSD to sometimes be confusing, but I wouldn't say non-intuitve. Off the top of my head: what is tun0 and tun1 and some of the other interfaces from a `ifconfig -a` ? Also, there is lots of documentation, but sometimes I feel that I am missing something. I find that the docs are well geared towards the long time sys-admins and not first time users. I find the whole system feels that way. I will also admit that I prefer GNU style command line parameters.

    I have been waiting for the past week and a bit to install 2.6 on a new (to me) Sparc10. Knowing it would be ready for Dec 1, I schedueled my whole day as being in "meetings." :-)

  • Can someone fill in how far along *BSD's support for USB is?
    I see a lot of references to it, on Linux-USB, but everyone's rather vague about just how much of USB (which is a big wide spec) has landed in the various BSDs

    Linux, I do know, will have HID (mouses, keyboards and stuff), modems, printers, some cameras, SCSI-like things and various other stuff in 2.4.0 when it arrives. Sound would be nice too, but that looks like a really eeevil specification.

    ISTR That enough of Linux's USB support was available at 2.2.x time for USB based iMacs to be usable, but maybe my memory is blurry.
  • ISBN Number is..
    ISBN 0-9683637-4-1
    which is on the 2.6 Webpage [openbsd.org]
  • Harbinger... good sir... long time no chat... The CD's look great and so do the T-Shirts... finally a wardrobe change.... :) Cheers...

  • Re:Here's my questions (Score:3)

    by Type-R ( 8130 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @07:12PM (#1491556) Homepage

    BLEH. It's much easier to just type:

    pkg_add -v ftp://sunsite.ualberta.ca/pub/OpenBSD/packages/i38 6/navigator-4.61.tgz

    Packages are your friend (right next to the ports being your friend ;)

  • And as for the last bit about the *BSDs being "too late", the BSD kernel codebase has been around for a lot longer than the Linux kernel...

    Correct. However before the first free/open source BSD could get going it get held up by legal disputes over AT&T code in the BSD source preventing free distribution. By the time that got straightened out Linux was already out and had gained considerable support from kernel hackers. In that sense *BSD was "too late." I once found this story burried on the FreeBSD web site and I am probably missing some details.

  • Quick answers (Score:5)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @07:12PM (#1491558)
    1.Is OpenBSD more secure in some fundamental way that a well maintained Linux distribution?

    Without a doubt. Use RedHat as an example - out of the box, it is shamefully exposed.

    It is perfectly reasonable to assume that a linux distribution could be made as secure as OpenBSD, if the effort was made

    2.Is OpenBSD more stable than a well maintained Linux distribution?

    Generally speaking, both are considered stable enough to not make it a significant issue, although the increased competition in the linux distro market will force more frequent releases and less testing. Look at the flack Debian is catching for their slower release schedule.

    3.Will the OpenSource software we normally need (firewall, Apache, PHP4, Perl, Python) and so on probably compile on OpenBSD?

    Of course. There is no question that the packages you mention will work well on OpenBSD. Some of the packages you mention are developed on a BSD variant.

    4.Does OpenBSD have something like clustering support (Beowulf) and failover?

    No.

    5.Is the performance of a well maintained OpenBSD system better than a well maintained Linux distribution?

    This really depends on what you are doing. For network performance, I put my chips on BSD. For other system functionality (disk throughput, etc.), linux may be better. It really depends on the type of application.

    6.Does Linux have anything like the one time use password system?

    No.

    7.Does OpenBSD support multiple CPU's

    The BSD's are making some inroads with SMP, but linux is out ahead.

  • I should have been clearer - the "bastard" comment was not specifically referring to either Theo or Tom.

    That said, Theo has never had much patience with anyone (more politely put, he does not suffer fools gladly), and his replies on the OpenBSD mailing lists tend to be rather terse. Tom tends to be a bit "inflammatory" in his comments about the GPL, and don't try and tell me that he doesn't get emotional about that particular subject.

    As for the flamewar thing - I didn't say that the previous poster was starting one; I just didn't want to say anything that would be picked up by some frothing GPL/BSD/Artistic/etc. maniac and turned into a flamewar.

  • *Sigh*

    I know about that - see my comment about the AT&T dispute earlier in this discussion.

    However, the original poster didn't make clear in what way he thought the *BSDs to be late; too many people seem to think that Linux was the first free OS.

  • Re:OpenBSD and Linux - compare? (Score:5)

    by ninjaz ( 1202 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @07:21PM (#1491563)
    These systems will be running the server software they need, and X11 + (Gnome||KDE) for administration and so on.
    I think X/(Gnome|KDE) a bad idea on a network server regardless of the operating system. My reasons for thinking it's a bad idea are:
    • video hardware (& its drivers) tends to be one of the touchiest areas of a system, best avoided if you're not using it as a workstation,
    • You're wasting resources that could be used for serving on your X environment (especially with some of those new-fangled screensavers ;)
    • It's better to understand configuring the system the *right* way - via the command-line tools and configuration files. That way, you can keep multiple versions in case something goes wrong and you need to back out a change.
    Now, with that out of the way..
    Is OpenBSD more secure in some fundamental way that a well maintained Linux distribution?
    The audits of source code would seem to imply that. If you'd like some data on the subject, visit the vulnerabilities section of http://www.securityfocus.com/ [securityfocus.com] Have it show you the vulnerabilities of OpenBSD and of a few Linux distros so you can compare. Of course, unless you're allowing shell accounts, the external (network) security of either mostly depends on what daemons you're running and how they're configured.
    Is OpenBSD more stable than a well maintained Linux distribution?
    Both a well-maintained Linux server and a well-maintained OpenBSD server should be stable. There may be less scheduled downtime with OpenBSD if there's a kernel-related security issue in Linux, but in my experience with OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris, all of them have been stable (current standard uptimes here around 6 months).
    Will the OpenSource software we normally need (firewall, Apache, PHP4, Perl, Python) and so on probably compile on OpenBSD?
    Yes, and /usr/ports/ is there in case a change does need to be made to something for it to compile (i.e., the patches are automatically applied when you type make
    Does OpenBSD support multiple CPU's better then Linux?
    No, it doesn't support them at all. If you want multi-cpu support with a *BSD, try FreeBSD.

    One thing that BSD is currently very helpful with on the x86 architecture is large file support. The Linux limit is 2gb, so your MySQL databases are limited to that size.

  • I would love to try OpenBSD, but I can't afford the $30 they want for the CD.

    I understand they need all the money they can get, but $30 (USD!) seems excessive. Factor in shipping, and the exchange rate, it thats like $50 CAD. It would be nice if they had a lower student rate or something, so all of us starving student types could get a shiny new CD and support the cause. Ah well.

    I might buy a t-shirt though. Only $16 USD. :)
  • WTF: the artwork is the #2 issue about OpenBSD? How the fuck did this [slashdot.org] get to where it is? Come on people, this is an OPERATING SYSTEM, not an advanced form of cosmetology (sp?). Besides, I think the cat/fishbowl thing rocks regardless.

  • Re:OpenBSD and Linux - compare? (Score:3)

    by dadams ( 9665 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @07:37PM (#1491566)
    1.Is OpenBSD more secure in some fundamental way that a well maintained Linux distribution?
    One of the OpenBSD project's principals is proactive security. They go through all the code for core part of the OS, including the kernel, and look for things that might cause problems.
    2.Is OpenBSD more stable than a well maintained Linux distribution?
    Probably not. The BSD model of releases is most like Debians, where everything's frozen and all bugs are chased out and then there's a release. BSD installs (at least Net and Open) tend to be fairly minimal, but additonal software is easy to add.
    3.Will the OpenSource software we normally need (firewall, Apache, PHP4, Perl, Python) and so on probably compile on OpenBSD?
    Yes. The ports tree is a wonderful thing. Firewalls are done a little differently then under linux, but it's mostly just subtle things.
    5.Is the performance of a well maintained OpenBSD system better than a well maintained Linux distribution?
    Probably not. BSD uses a different scheduling model than Linux, so there's bound to be some difference, but it's not much.
    6.Does Linux have anything like the one time use password system?
    Yes. There's something called OPIE telnet.
    7.Does OpenBSD support multiple CPU's better then Linux?
    OpenBSD doesn't support SMP. FreeBSD does, but it's not as "secure"

  • Um... I may be wrong here, but IIRC, the USB support originally included with Linux/PPC was based on NetBSD's USB support.
  • SuSe can also do minimalist installs easily. I've done installs (including X and basic X apps) in under 90 Mb. I've also done one totally stripped SuSe install in 51 Mb. (If I didn't use it EVERY log in, or it wasn't req'd for mpg123/cdparanoia, it wasn't installed).

    RedHat is much trickier than it used to be on installs of the small variety.

    However, I beleive Debian fits the criteria best.
    Offtopic: Can you still use the old
  • Eh, the $30 seems to be more of a donation...
    Anyways, I'd rather give my cash to a nonprofit organization
    than a for-profit business any day.
    (Especially an organization with such a great product!)

    Not to mention, you can download the whole thing
    for absolutely nothing. I think it even does FTP
    installs... (At least with the sparc version, but I
    don't see any reason i386 would be different.)

    --Kevin
    (Happy OpenBSD/Slackware/IRIX/FreeBSD user...It's ALL good! :)

    =-=-=-=-=-=
    "I think the P-Funk Mothership just landed in my back yard!"
  • /. clipped the comment for some strange reason. The last line should have read:

    Can you still use the old Slackware 97 type installer? Has it even changed? I loved that thing!

  • Full OpenBSD distribution is available on FTP, if you have tools, NOTHING stops you from making your own _bootable_ OpenBSD ISO image, I have done that, it took 5 minutes to figure out how.
  • or many of the mirror locations.
  • It is FREE... So you CAN use it. [openbsd.org]It is nice if you can support the cause via monetary means; but if you can not I am sure they appreciate your code and your thanks...
  • FreeBSD's SMP support is roughly similar to Linux 2.0.x's. Not too good unless you have two compute bound tasks. Once you start hitting the kernel, the BIG_ASS_LOCK is grabbed, and everything serializes.
  • Hehehe...The cat is a 'Script Kitty'! :D
    (Really. It mentions it in the T-Shirt section...)

    --Kevin

    =-=-=-=-=-=
    "I think the P-Funk Mothership just landed in my back yard!"
  • A line by line code review is great, and I would agree that OpenBSD is the most secure OS you can get your hands on, but it cannot prevent all possible exploits [insecure.org]

    If you think you can just install OpenBSD and not have to know a thing about security, you need to get you head checked.
  • tun0 and tun1 are "tunneling" interfaces. For using VPN. Similar to ppp0 and ppp1.
  • I have only vague memories of the Slackware97 installer, but the current one is, I believe, very similar (I know for certain that it hasn't changed significantly in 3.5, 3.6, 4.0 or 7.0), and I find it very easy to use.

    It's also very flexible; I installed 3.6 and then 4.0 on a IBM PC110 (486SX, 8MB RAM, 20MB flash for /, 260MB PCMCIA type III hard disk for swap, /tmp, /var, /home and /usr) that required all sorts of acrobatics (e.g. special disk geometry and ext2fs block size on the flash, special disk geometry for the HD, swap as a file rather than a partition, main install via NFS over a PCMCIA NIC), and it went in just fine. Try doing that with RH ;)
  • Now I know what I am asking Santa for Christmas!

  • First off, I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to respond so far. Just when I was despairing of /. as a useful information medium a great set of responses comes along.

    So a lot of looking into it and I have definately decided to go with an *BSD for our servers. With the 2.6 OpenBSD release this looks like a good time to plan our move.

    Then another issue hit me in private mail from a /. reader....

    OpenBSD [openbsd.org] or FreeBSD [www.freebsdorg]?

    This is a question we have been asking ourselves as well.

    OpenBSD advantages

    • Most strenuous proactive code review
    • Integrated cryptography
    • Canadian legal advantages

    FreeBSD advantages

    • Greater ports library
    • More populare support for hardware
    • More common support options
    • The FreeBSD team watches OpenBSD carefully, so security is note ver far behind OpenBSD
    • More "linux like" installation software

    Anything missing?

  • This comment should be moderated up... This AC answers a number of good questions acurately.
  • If the older PC (like mine) has installed an Adaptec 1542 and a Soundcard (SB compat.) then the system will hang during probing as IO address 300 is default for both cards.

    It might be a good idea to start with a completely "stripped" PC - only with video card and HD controller.
  • The Daemon (he's not a devil)

    I knew that, damn, why didn't I type it!

  • followed the link to find:
    "Vulnerable Systems: OpenBSD 2.2 and earlier"
    If you are running software that old ... well, nuff said.

    I agree that you can't prevent all possible exploits. However ...
    installing the latest version of OpenBSD and applying all the posted security patches is going to make your system pretty darn secure.
    (even if you don't know much about security)

    now if you go and start changing the default install without security knowledge you are asking for trouble.
  • And as for the last bit about the *BSDs being "too late", the BSD kernel codebase has been around for a lot longer than the Linux kernel...

    He's not talking about the codebase. Because of the lawsuit early on, Linux was able to get a head start on BSD (not sure what flavor, though). Since then it has been playing catch-up. Otherwise, it would probably have been the dominate *nix OS.

  • The whole distribution is on ftp.
    If you have the bandwidth and a cd burner, nothing stops you from making your own bootable .ISO image.

  • Natedawg's OpenBSD 2.6 installation report (Score:4)

    by NatePuri ( 9870 ) on Tuesday November 30, 1999 @09:31PM (#1491594) Homepage

    Well, I just finished installing OpenBSD 2.6 Nov. 30 snapshot (which would probably be pretty damn close to the release if not identical. OBSD developers can chime in if I'm wrong.

    Here's what I have.

    1. Dell Inspiron 3000 notebook PC
    2. ~144 MEG RAM
    3. 200 Mhz Pentium (i586)
    4. Neomagic Magicgraph 128
    5. Linksys 10/100 PCMCIA NIC
    6. Megahertz cellular modem
    7. 13' 800x600 display capable of 24bpp


    With a few minor adjustments to BIOS (i.e., changing from the settings I had with Linux and FreeBSD on the same machine to switch IRQs for my serial devices, PCMCIA was supported by the default install floppy.)
    I had installed OpenBSD 2.5 and gave up on it, because I needed a working system in short order and did not have time for the learning curve, so I was used to the partioning scheme.

    Here's my secret recipe for OpenBSD's partioning scheme: Go download kern.flp and mfsroot.flp from FreeBSD's site and boot those. Pick the 'Novice' install, which will then lead you to FreeBSD's partitioning which is automatic. Then after FreeBSD is done doing the newffs on your HD, pop out the floppy, pop in the OpenBSD install floppy and reboot.

    Then when OpenBSD asks you for partioning, it's already done, and you can just change the labels and mount points with 'p' to see your partitions and 'n' to rename them.

    boom bam bing... *woop* there it is. Reboot.

    X11R6 was easily configured now that Neomagic is well supported in 3.3.5. APM is well supported in both BSDs.

    Brief performance review.

    In a nutshell, OpenBSD is slightly slower than FreeBSD on the same hardware, which was slightly slower (but not much) than Debian GNU/Linux on the same hardware. Here are the applications I run always. I'm a law student, so my main needs are text editing, archiving and searching.
    1. Bash 2.03
    2. WindowMaker 0.61.1
    3. Wterm xxxx
    4. Midnight Commander
    5. Nedit
    6. Mutt
    7. GnuPG 1.0/PGP 2.6.3
    8. OpenSSH (now running on FreeBSD and Debian)
    9. WordPerfect (w/ linux_lib) (runs flawlessly on all OS's).
    10. glimpse
    11. Navigator 4.61
    12. Lynx-SSL
    13. MagicPoint (presentations)
    14. xlockmore (stop staring over my shoulder! I know my desktop looks better than yours, go away)


    Whenever I test a system, I always use my laptop b/c it's what I like to use most, and my goals are to have X, pcmcia, and apm running flawlessly.

    In Debian, X and pcmcia worked great, but when I would suspend my box I would have problems with pcmcia modules and would have to insmod them or rmmod them and re-insmod them. This was an annoyance. I eventually got a hold of a script that allowed me to disable pcmcia before suspending. I would then have to run the script again to reinitialize pcmcia; I quickly grew tired of this.

    Enter FreeBSd 3.3. Went and bought it, and downloaded the PAO install floppies and the PAOBIN pcmcia drivers. This was very nice and great, I loved everything about FreeBSD except for one thing, the pcmcia drivers seemed to treat my pccard as a 10baseT rather than 100. That kind of sucked. I knew eventually my legal work would require an IPSec network so I moved on (I highly recommend FreeBSD). It suspended and resumed like a breeze, the clock had not lag upon resume, and the pcmcia daemon reinitialized all pccards excellently. Very Nice. And FreeBSD has the best collection of applications for GNUstep of any Unix I've seen (much better than the Linuxes I've used).

    Enter OpenBSD 2.6.

    Yesterday I downloaded and installed OpenBSD. Everything that applies to FreeBSD applies to OpenBSD except in OpenBSD my pcmcia card is supported better (I have full bandwidth on my LAN). APM, etc are excellent.

    Drawbacks. I miss my FreeBSD WMaker desktop! But I think the FreeBSD ports I want will work on OBSD so that I can have the best of both worlds.

    OBSD's ports collection is not as vast as FreeBSD's, and it's package collection is no where near that of a Debian or Red Hat. But that is for a reason. What you get is secure, and they have everything you *really* need. All the applications I mentioned above that I use on a daily basis are all in OBSD with the exception of Midnight Commander, which I will try to make use of FreeBSD's port. I will also try to make wmapm, wmnet, and wmmon from FreeBSD work in OpenBSD, then I will be quite satisfied.

    Speed. There is a noticable speed reduction with OpenBSD. It is not as optimized for my hardware as FreeBSD was. But my hardware is not all that spectacular anyway so it was never all that fast to begin with. Compile times are roughly the same. However, for some reason X has never performed better, even with FreeBSD. Opaque moves have no hint of jerkiness

    Bonus. OpenBSD recognized my sound card! This is new. If I can make that work, I'll really be an OpenBSD fanatic. Another added bonus is mount_ext2fs. This allows floppy transfers from Linux to OBSD, something that FreBSD does not have yet.

    In sum, OpenBSD is perfect for a Desktop OS if data security is really really important to you (i.e., if you carry confidential material on your laptop around with you). There's enough applications for document creation that you could need, and with linux_lib all things linux are possible. And binary compat with all other BSD's is there as well. OpenBSD is solid, super secure, and I'm breathing easier now that I know my client materials are under the blowfish ;).

    Later y'all.
  • Ok, now that there is a new release, I won't have any qualms putting open bsd on my 486 for NAT. I like the idea of an ultra secure firewall for everday browsing ;-).

  • Re:OpenBSD and Linux - compare? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Well, if OpenBSD's focus is security, FreeBSD's focus is stability. Of course all these are relative words, but FreeBSD is seen to handle high loads better than anything on the Open Source market(Walnut Creek,...).

    FreeBSD's linux emulation is also probably further along than that of OpenBSD.(even VMWare runs in FreeBSD now).

    FreeBSD has reasonably good Java support(1.1.8 JDK with 1.2 around the corner).

    Finally, the SMP and threading situation is about to take a leap forward with the release of 4.0, the creation of a kernel threading system(probably for 4.1), and reduction of the big kernel lock.

    A code auditing project has also begun for FreeBSD to make it more "secure."

    Plus, FreeBSD's mascot has stayed closer to the original BSD daemon which is cooler than an oversized spikey fish(although spikey fish are pretty neat...). :).

  • Re:I love openBSD (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    that's my biggest qualm with the bsd's. Many of the utilties have awkward parameters (if you are coming from GNU/Linux that is) and many programs are stripped compared to their GNU counterparts. I shoudl probably install gnu utils on my fbsd box heh.
  • My Toshiba notebook loses its sound interrupt after suspending, but it's not too hard to set up apmd to rmmod stuff that doesn't handle suspend well, and then modprobe for it when you come back from suspend. Give it a try - worked fine for me.



  • I ordered OpenBSD at the beginning of October (then at version 2.5) and it still hasn't arrived. When I sent an email to see what the problem was, I was sent a reply stating they were have "production problems" and that they were 2 weeks behind schedule. I sent that email at least 2 weeks ago and still no software. This is somewhat understandable, but now they have released v. 2.6. This makes me more than a little angry considering that 2.6 seems to be a considerably better product. Yeah, I know that this release would still be out even if I had my 2.5 release right now, but it just adds to the adjitation a little. Oh well.


    Anyone know where I can get an .ISO?? I tried to find one of 2.5, but it was virtually impossible. I know about helping to support the developers by purchasing. No problem with that. They have my $45 and change (I also bought one of their cool shirts) but, I still have no software. Wo is me :-(

    ----------------

    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
  • The only quirk is that Xfree86 support for USB mices has been added after the 2.6 freeze, so you'll have to CVS upgrade and recompile your xserver to use those funky M$ ballless mices...

  • Review (Score:2)

    by cmc ( 44956 )
    We don't have to waste -core's time with having them review each and every update to the kernel sources (though there are obvious cases). Basically we have to use our own judgement. If it's something simple, like ripping out unused declarations or whatever, it doesn't need -core review.

    You probably either misunderstood the way review works with FreeBSD, or who -core is.

    In any case, hopefully this clears it up.
  • You may think this is stupid, but 1) I have a high-school education and 2) I would consider the cover-art of a commercial product before buying it. Certainly it would not be a primary factor in my decision-making, but it does play a role.

    My reasoning? The quality of design in packaging conveys to me the amount of effort that was put into the whole of the product. Not just the coding, but other things like support, interface design, etc... It's possible that this might cause me to misjudge a product. Oh well, their loss. Most of the stuff I use is Open Source anyway, and in those cases there usually isn't any cover-art to speak of.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • A. Line-by-line security audit of *everything* that goes on the CD.

    Not completely true!

    Only the OpenBSD OS and a portion of the Ports & Packages that are on the CD are audited. The majority of the Ports are just that: working Ports of the respective Software. Just want to make sure that people (new to OpenBSD) installing third party software (like Ports) are not left alone with a false believe of security. :)
    However, running insecure software on a secure OS could potentionally reduce the effect, but it remains dangerous, nevertheless.

    Major Kudos to the OpenBSD team - a job very well done!

  • I have seen the same thing under RH5.2,RH6.0,RH6.1, Mdk6.0, Mdk6.1, and heard it reported under Debian, TurboLinux, and SuSE.

    Other than sound, PCMCIA networking is often reported to suffer on sleep/resume.

  • 6.Does Linux have anything like the one time use password system?

    No.

    Actually, you're wrong. Check out OPIE [nasa.gov]

  • What did I say about Open Source? Well, it's too late anyway. I've already installed OpenBSD 2.5 as a firewall/NAT in my office. It's working quite nicely too.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • I'm a law student

    You rule. I wish all lawyers were as technically adept as you. I hope you can find a way to use your skills in the defense of on-line freedoms and cryptography, and against wiretapping.

    Best of luck, and thanks for the informative report!

    PS: How does anyone find time for all that hacking during law school? ;)

    Vovida, OS VoIP
    Beer recipe: free! #Source
    Cold pints: $2 #Product

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close