Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

OpenBSD 4.4 Released

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the fresh-daemons dept.

Operating Systems 235

Linux blog writes "The new version of OpenBSD is available for download. There are lots of nifty new features to try out including OpenSSH 5.1 with chroot(2) support, Xenocara, Gnome 2.20.3, KDE 3.5.8, etc. Machines using the UltraSPARC IV/T1/T2 and Fujitsu SPARC64-V/VI/VII are now supported. It seems amazing to me that they keep delivering these new results on a six-month release cycle."

cancel ×

235 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Congratulations (5, Informative)

norbot (118878) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605385)

Congratulations to the OpenBSD team. BSD is far from dead!

Re:Congratulations (5, Funny)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605481)

Indeed, BSD is not dead at all. In fact I took a look at their mailing list archives last week and saw more than half a dozen very active threads. Shame they were all flame wars.

Re:Congratulations (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606007)

What's BSD?

Re:Congratulations (5, Insightful)

david.given (6740) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606245)

Yeah. I'd really like to like OpenBSD. Technically, it's superb. It's smooth, polished, well documented --- it's got a level of consistency that most Linux distros can only hope to dream of. The kernel is well designed and fast, with excellent hardware support. System setup is consistent and well-thought out. Above all, it doesn't confuse easy-to-use with easy-to-learn --- everything is as simple as possible without oversimplifying, which makes it a joy to admin.

But then, every time I try to use it, I run up against the OpenBSD developers, who are an arrogant bunch of elitist assholes. In a couple of years, on and off, I think I've seen Theo make a civil reply to someone *once*. Maybe twice. No, I'm not kidding. When you see someone ask what looks to my untutored eye a reasonable question about VMs, and the head developer replies publicly with the words 'You are full of shit' and nothing else (apart from a complete copy of the original message, no snipping), there is something very wrong. Most of the other devs are nearly as bad, and of course there are hordes of groupies who assume that if the people in charge are okay with personal abuse, then it's alright for them, too.

Despite this, the actual operating system is definitely worth checking out if you're interested in what a well-designed Unix actually looks like. Linux can learn a lot from it.

Re:Congratulations (4, Informative)

grub (11606) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606305)


I've used OpenBSD for many years (early 2.x days). Before asking questions on the list it helps to gooooogle and read until your eyes are bleeding. OpenBSD has (IMHO) the best manpages of any *nix system I've ever used. The FAQ and How-Tos on the site are excellent as well.

I've had a few replies from questions I've answered both on and off-list and the people have always been helpful. That includes the few exchanges I've had with Theo over the years.

In short: exhaust your reading and searches before asking questions on the lists. The OS is free, but developers' time is limited.

Re:Congratulations (3, Insightful)

jps25 (1286898) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606377)

In short: exhaust your reading and searches before asking questions on the lists. The OS is free, but developers' time is limited.

And that justifies arrogance and being an asshole?
We must be living in different worlds.

Re:Congratulations (3, Insightful)

menkhaura (103150) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606493)

Yeah, you and I (we) must. OpenBSD is not for the faint of heart, not for the n00bs, not quite for granny (but if she's asking questions on a OpenBSD mailing list, there's something seriously wrong with the way you set up her rig, or seriously wrong about your understanding of her computer understanding, or whatever). For user-friendly answers, the *BSD documentation is very extensive (try the FreeBSD handbook, most of which translates to OpenBSDdom or Linuxdom), and there are very, very many user-friendly Linux forums out there; the problems you'll have as a end user will be most probably with an end-user app, and kernel developers don't need to be hassled with such questions. As an analogy, I use to say that one novice user's question about the cup holder to the power users is the power user's question about the parameters to their device drivers.

Not that I'm an OpenBSD developer or any such things, but I think that people who dwelve onto the *BSD realm must be braced for such coups, and must be prepared to RTFM!

Re:Congratulations (2, Insightful)

DiegoBravo (324012) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606707)

>> For user-friendly answers, the *BSD documentation is very extensive (try the FreeBSD handbook,...

Sadly these days people do not read documentation, and just expect there is somebody out in the forums that will respond something, not necessarily correct, just in order to make the system work (and no, it doesn't matter how it actually works).

So responding to GP, I assume that openBSD is actually targeted for another world.

Re:Congratulations (2, Insightful)

menkhaura (103150) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606795)

Heh... Who said that "Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups"? OpenBSD is indeed, targeted for another world, hence the rude answers some non-googling users get on their mailing lists...

Re:Congratulations (1)

imus (1229508) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606363)

They've always been very civil to me... even Theo. Ted Unangst has chewed me out a few times over stupid stuff, but I don't take it personally. Their man pages are the best. They are online too.

Re:Congratulations (3, Insightful)

mkiwi (585287) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606985)

Generally, it seems like many developers don't like to see their work criticized. They take anything you say, no matter how benign, and take it personally. Even when porting software to another platform. I was the first to ask a certain Mac OS X project about using prebinding to increase performance and make libraries more compatible with the rest of OS X. Of course it meant that there would have to be a substantial change in the way everything was complied. I was essentially told by the main developers to fuck off after writing a very reasonable post on the issue.

A year later they implemented prebinding, which means my effort wasn't completely wasted.

Parents don't like it when you criticize their children, even if in their heart of hearts they know the criticism is true. Here, software = children; developers = parents. It's not too hard to imagine nerdy group could be like that.

Re:Congratulations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606617)

Ugh...
KDE 3.5.9? Really?
How old is that?

Dear OpenBSD - go for some new god-damn software.

Re:Congratulations (2, Informative)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606995)

KDE 3.5.9 was released February 19, 2008.

Mebbe I should try it some time (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605409)

How does BSD compare to linux? Other than the whole take what you can give nothing back vibe?

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605441)

It doesn't have that vibe at all. If anything, Linux takes way more from BSD than the other way around, due to Linux's selfish black whole of a license sucking everything in.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605759)

Linux doesn't take anything from BSD. Everything in Linux is free for BSD to use as long as the code stays free, ie under the GPL. While if apple takes code from BSD, you will never see that code again.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605911)

Everything in Linux is free for BSD to use as long as the code stays unfree, ie under the GPL."

There, fixed that for you.

GPL code is never free. GPL has never, ever, ever been about freedom of code. GPL has been about freedom of the end user. In order to maintain end-user freedom, the code is heavily restricted. Code freedom and end-user freedom are ultimately in tension, because coders and end-users are always on the opposite ends of code transactions.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#25607053)

Although GPL is not free in the BSD sense, there are people like myself who would be happy to dual license my code under both GPL and BSD.

Don't ask, don't get.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606055)

Linux doesn't take anything from BSD. Everything in Linux is free for BSD to use as long as the code stays free, ie under the GPL. While if apple takes code from BSD, you will never see that code again.

Every bit of BSD code that Apple uses is still available from them (either under the original license, or the OSI approved APSL).

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 5 years ago | (#25607057)

Where's the boot-on-all-hardware fork of MacOS then?

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606757)

Time to get off your Finnish high horse. If Apple takes code from BSD it is their choice whether or not to return the changes. I know that puts your GPL panties in a wedge but remember the BSD license lets them do that. The code is being taken because it's being offered for the taking. If BSD people didn't like that they would change the license. I do think Apple gives in return but how much I certainly don't know.

Why are you so angry about this? Apple has, all by itself, done more than all the Linux distros combined (this includes your precious Ubuntu) to keep non-Windows solutions in the public mind-share. And it's done it quite profitably. Something Mr. Shuttleworth doesn't seem to be able to do yet. Let me ask you: Why do so many Linux people seem to require conflict in their religion? Don't take the bazaar analogy too far; the world has moved on a bit from 1990.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#25607025)

woo! Only three posts into the topic and we're already into the age of freedom debate, way to go for starting the forest fire of a flamewar.

Don't worry about me though, you just keep beating that rotting dead horse corpse.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605881)

What does Linux take from BSD? All those vendor supplied drivers? The userland? The vast array of high quality filesystems?

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (5, Informative)

ArbitraryConstant (763964) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606861)

> What does Linux take from BSD? All those vendor supplied drivers? The userland? The vast array of high quality filesystems?

The overwhelmingly dominant SSH implementation?

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605453)

Something like FreeBSD is very similar to Linux although they lack a good pre-built distro like Ubuntu. Hardware support in Linux is better.

OpenBSD on the other hand performs poorly and is several years behind in certain OS features. In the case of hardware, it's many many years behind Linux (they only relatively recently even got multiple CPU support). Then there is the issue of the many arrogant asses that think they are somehow better than everyone else even though they're basically just off working in some corner in the dark working on already outdated ideas. Of course you find people like that all over but when they run the whole project it can really be a turn-off.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (2, Informative)

torstenvl (769732) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605527)

This is not flamebait. I encourage moderators to read the guidelines at http://slashdot.org/moderation.shtml [slashdot.org]

Bad Comments are flamebait. Bad comments have nothing to do with the article they are attached to. They call someone names. They ridicule someone for having a different opinion without backing it up with anything more tangible than strong words. Bad comments are repeats of something said 15 times already making it quite apparent that the writer didn't read the previous comments. They use foul language. They are hard to read or just don't make any sense. They detract from the article they are attached to.

The parent did use "a name" but it was not an insult so much as voicing the consensus judgment of the behavior of the leader of OpenBSD, Theo de Raadt. de Raadt is, in fact, an "arrogant ass[]"; if a moderator thinks this is calling names rather than an accurate description, I encourage that moderator to peruse the history of Slashdot articles about de Raadt, perhaps starting with http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/17/127206 [slashdot.org]

Thank you and let's all try to make Slashdot a better and more interesting place.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (3, Insightful)

Galactic Dominator (944134) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605793)

It was flamebait on several counts, the first being FreeBSD is not anything like Linux. Kernel, filesystem, hier, SMP, licensing, and general philosophy are greatly different.

I personally think Theo de Raadt is a great project leader, even if he leaves a bit to be desired in tactfully dealing with situations. He's a bit abrasive in way House, MD is abrasive. I think Linus Torvalds is an ass but if I were to use that a basis of running down his work, then I too would be guilty a flamebait.

The rest of the OpenBSD criticisms are simply there to troll, nothing substantive at all. SMP has been there for quite awhile.

Please let people spend their mod points how they see fit even if they don't agree with your viewpoint.

Thank you and let's all try to make Slashdot a better and more interesting place.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605943)

House, M.D. is a huge asshole. Comparing Theo De Raadt to him is no compliment.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606387)

It's Lupus, go die already, *hugs and kisses.* - Greg

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

forgoil (104808) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606609)

He's interested in humans. Disconnected, yes, but not really an asshole. He is also freakin' brilliant at what he does, so that would be a huge compliment. He's basically suppose to be Sherlock Holmes. And who wouldn't want to be the Holmes of Software? :)

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

badpazzword (991691) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606215)

Read the guidelines.

Wrong comments are not flamebait. Wrong comments should be left unmoderated.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606355)

Actually, wrong comments should be modded "overrated" you fucking dipshit. See? Now THAT was flamebait you asshole!

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606399)

I normally consider it otiose to comment on moderation, but given that most of this thread has been moderated flamebait, it seems that the guidelines can't be clear enough for somebody. Someone with an agenda is clearly modding down anyone with whom he doesn't agree.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606597)

I wish they hadn't changed metamod; the old system was better. I think there should be a mechanism for saying a moderation was in fact unfair.

The new metamod isn't very meta.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (4, Insightful)

epine (68316) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606691)

How is it that these comments are raised again and again with rarely a genuflect towards the possibility that our social norms and our technical norms exist at cross purposes?

It is often pointed out that humans are hierarchical animals. What's pointed out far less often is that we are also polarizing animals. For the most part, it's pretty darn hard to get a community of people to rest comfortably within a dual hierarchy: the polarizers will either succeed in driving the culture toward a political hierarchy, or they will succeed in driving the culture toward a technical meritocracy, politics be damned.

What evidence do we have that people can be effective and polite at the same time? NASA? I think not. When it became a political culture, shuttles exploded.

Is Linus an ass, or does he choose to occupy the niche that has proven viable? Larry Wall has taken a gentler stance toward his position as benevolent dictator for life, and he's not getting much good press lately. Nice guys finish last or at best, five years late.

Every time this subject comes up, there is a lot of chattering from the "How to win friends and influence people" crowd that despite the technical merits of X, it doesn't suit that person's social worldview, as if technical merit belongs in a marriage with popularity and approval.

As far as I can tell from my experience, the majority of PC marriages of that ilk are functionally destitute, yet the chattering never ceases that the world *ought* to operate that way. On what basis? What annoys me most is that this chattering rarely includes even the slightest nod toward justification.

This is another fact about human nature: we seem to have an inbuilt algorithm for determining that certain kinds of opinions can be safely put forward with little or no justification (e.g. "that's just how things are"), and which kinds of opinion can automatically be called to account. In my experience, the hierarchy of what must be fully justified and what needn't be has been pretty much decided on the grade 3 playground.

There seems to be a lot of people out there who are offended to the core that Theo's objectionable personality has been associated with so much durable accomplishment. In my opinion, that's just a bad case of shooting the messenger. Given broad human instincts toward hierarchy and polarization, it was as inevitable as the rise of the spam king having created a zero-cost anonymous distribution channel.

The underlying problem is that there is no reliable chalk line between civility and brown-nosing, and it's hell to police in a project that could otherwise rely on more objective measures. It's kind of like Sudoku. A complete waste of time, but I enjoy it anyway. We've made almost no progress (as a social organism) at efficiently policing the line between civility and brown-nosing, but so many among our ranks seem to prefer sliding down this slippery moss bank over the firm traction of dystopian merit.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606765)

You deserve to flamed if you were arguing that FreeBSD==Linux in an OpenBSD mailing list.
You really should grow a thicker skin. The OpenBSD developers are busy and actually take the time to answer your stupid questions. Try asking Linus something. He is too busy calling OpenBSD developers names because his kernel doesn't measure up in terms of security.
Oh, and DragonFly/FreeBSD==Linux They both steal OpenBSD code without giving proper credit.
My heart is broken because my Ethernet card isn't supported yet and I have to use the Lunix.
I NEED OPENBSD!!

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#25607111)

I have to use the Lunix.

I didn't realise people still use lunix [wikipedia.org] . Perhaps the problem is your hardware being to old instead of a driver problem?

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (5, Interesting)

QuickFox (311231) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605751)

although they lack a good pre-built distro like Ubuntu.

They do have a good pre-built distro. It's called PC-BSD [pcbsd.org] . It's very good in my experience, very nice. And it's a breeze to install, just like Ubuntu.

I like Ubuntu even better. But PC-BSD is very fine, really, it deserves recognition. It's well worth trying.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (5, Informative)

menkhaura (103150) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606559)

Let me just point out that PC-BSD's kernel is the very same FreeBSD, nothing related to OpenBSD; let me also just point out that the standard FreeBSD distribution combines the advantages of Gentoo's (customizing the building of packages to your needs or desires) and of Debian (superb dependency tracking, very fast on searches, always up-to-date (if you consider Debian Unstable)).

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (3, Interesting)

laddiebuck (868690) | more than 5 years ago | (#25607049)

As a Debian admin and user, I have to point out that Debian also makes this process trivial. Gentoo is overrated; Debian is the best OS to admin I've come across, whether Linux or BSD.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (3, Informative)

cbhacking (979169) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606621)

PC-BSD, like DesktopBSD, is FreeBSD based. Don't confuse FreeBSD and OpenBSD - they share many userspace utilities and their kernels have some common history, but they are not the same OS.

Basically, OpenBSD is the one that is rabid about security - makes great server software.
NetBSD is the ultra-portable one - good for unusual hardware.
FreeBSD has excellent support for commodity hardware. It is the one used to make the user-friendly distros.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (4, Informative)

QuoteMstr (55051) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605825)

Yes, OpenBSD's performance is behind that of Linux and FreeBSD (which are neck-and-neck.) However, performance is still quite adequate. OpenBSD has a kind of austere simplicity, however, that makes it a pleasure to administer. It certainly has a niche.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605887)

SMP support is has been here quite awhile [kerneltrap.org] .

I suppose you consider PF, OpenSSH, and all the other things cooking in -current to be far behind too?

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605899)

Whilst this is true, OpenBSD is at least pretty upfront that security is almost the only thing that matters to them. Change is always going to be slower in such a paranoid environment. If you want performance, the latest packages and recent hardware support then you probably want Linux, FreeBSD or PC-BSD.

OpenBSD belongs on servers and firewalls, where the performance cost and archaic aspects are judged to be worth it for the security / reliability gain. On a desktop it really isn't, geek points aside.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (3, Insightful)

ArbitraryConstant (763964) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606001)

They're significantly behind Linux in many areas, but don't mistake optimization for specific workloads as obsolescence. Performance sucks once you hit userspace, but most OpenBSD machines spend almost all their time in the kernel, routing and firewalling, tasks for which they are quite competitive with Linux.

Re:Mebbe I should try it some time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606235)

It's well-documented, stable, faster, and doesn't latch onto every trend like the 5 million Linux distros do (what flavor-of-the-mouth automounting daemon are we using this month?).

Just compare the source code between any BSD and the Linux kernel. Yuck. For instance, BSD's paging code is abstracted and easier to maintain, while Linux is hardware-dependent and has to be rewritten and maintained for every port to a new architecture. Linux is amateur hour.

Far from dead... (2, Funny)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605469)

Congrats to the OpenBSD team.

In related news, NetBSD 5.0 should be released soon, too.

BSD proves Netcraft wrong again.

Re:Far from dead... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605571)

Six people working on something doesn't mean it's particularly healthy either. Amiga is stronger than openBSD.

Re:Far from dead... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605785)

I'm really sick of the out-of-control mods on BSD stories. The parent is not a troll in any sense of the word.

Re:Far from dead... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605959)

It is, as is your post for that matter. Amiga is not even nearly as healthy as OpenBSD, never mind the BSDs in general. Amiga is mostly just a litigation-happy holding company with a few copyrights to an obsolete single-user, non-memory-protected OS, a few rapidly-expiring patents and worst of all the trademark to a once-much-loved computer at this stage.

The number of still-active amiga users is numbered in the low thousands (though people using closely or distantly related systems like AROS and BeOS and DragonflyBSD for that matter is somewhat larger). BSDs are used by millions, especially in the embedded market.

Re:Far from dead... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606295)

You don't know what Troll means dude. Having a different opinion is not being a Troll. Amiga is "stronger" in terms of its fanbase and reputation than OpenBSD, and saying so isn't being a Troll.

BSDs are used by millions, especially in the embedded market.

Utterly irrelevant.

Amiga? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606565)

I thought you were talking about HURD.

why bother with 6 month release cycle? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605471)

This isn't meant as a troll, but... Those SPARCs are 4 year old machines. If this is the result of a 6 month release cycle, I wonder why they bother? The new machine support isn't at all impressive. Is their unstable branch so bad that stabilizing a release every 6 months is a big deal? I'm guessing that's not the reason, in which case, why?

Re:why bother with 6 month release cycle? (2, Informative)

this great guy (922511) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605573)

Those SPARCs are 4 year old machines.

No, the UltraSPARC T2 was released in October 2007.

Re:why bother with 6 month release cycle? (3, Informative)

NormalVisual (565491) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605577)

T1s aren't quite three years old yet, and T2s have only been out for just over a year.

Rock Solid (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605601)

I have been regularly running OpenBSD for the last 8 years, and I have never been disappointed. 4.4 keeps up the string of solid releases.

I have a thinkpad that runs it as well.

Yes, I buy the CDs, and a few shirts, and donate $ when I can. Hopefully it keeps them working on the next release. I don't know what I would do without it running my DNS and other servers.

Re:Rock Solid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606739)

Can OpenBSD cleanly suspend and hibernate your Thinkpad? Does frequency scaling work? If not, we define "works" in a very different way.

*BSD is Dying (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605663)

It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

Copy-pasted from Wikipedia! (1)

Doug52392 (1094585) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606053)

Did you just copy/paste this entire post from Wikipedia's article about Slashdot??? Protip: Next time, actually type your redundant flames, rather than stealing them.

Re:Copy-pasted from Wikipedia! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606973)

Did you just bite on an ancient and extremely obvious troll??? Protip: you fail it.

KDE version (4, Insightful)

jadrian (1150317) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605729)

KDE 3.5.8? Why so old... even if KDE 3.5.10 released in late August was too late to make it, KDE 3.5.9 came out in February, that's over 8 months.

Re:KDE version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605889)

OpenBSD is not a desktop OS it just plays one on TV. OpenBSD is first and for most a server OS that is stable as can be. If you judge a server by what gui it comes packaged with then you are not meant to be a OpenBSD user.

Re:KDE version (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606443)

My BSD server doesn't run X11 because it doesn't have a screen. Its only access point is via ssh, because that's all it needs.

Re:KDE version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605997)

It's called desire, time and quality. The quality of most Linux-oriented code leads to a great deal of time spent porting it to other systems, most people who maintain ports don't desire to do it every little itteration of every little project, if the code is well maintained and it's dependencies are as well, the code typically is up to date.

Re:KDE version (2, Informative)

calidoscope (312571) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606193)

The quality of most Linux-oriented code leads to a great deal of time spent porting it to other systems

While I can understand why OSS developers would be content if they can just get their code running on Linux, they do miss out on the debugging opportunities inherent with porting to other systems.

The other aspect is that the OpenBSD team would like to make sure they are not introducing more security holes with the "latest and greatest" from the various projects. Something like KDE or Gnome could be loaded with hard to detect security holes.

Re:KDE version (3, Insightful)

twistah (194990) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606149)

My guess is they care more about mature, audited code than something that's top-of-the-line by .1 version.

Re:KDE version (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606153)

KDE 4 is in the OpenBSD-current ports tree. The KDE team doesn't make sure their stuff works on BSD as well as it does in Linux. ktorrent (the only KDE program I used in OpenBSD) has been crashing on me for a long time. There are at least two separate issues involved, but it's too intermittent to track down. I eventually just decided to download torrents onto my laptop (Gentoo) instead.

Re:KDE version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606997)

I am currently(hopefully for a short while) OpenBSD deprived because of some new hardware that doesn't want to function, but I have used it as a Desktop for long enough to know that transmission-daemon from packages is the best choice. You don't need any bloated DE to run that.

Re:KDE version (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606297)

3.5.9 is included in 4.4!

Re:KDE version (1)

jadrian (1150317) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606809)

Yes you're right. KDE 3.5.8 did sound fishy and I should have known better than simply trust the summary :)
Hopefully someone will mod you up.

Re:KDE version (1, Troll)

SocietyoftheFist (316444) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606311)

They audit every line of code they ship, including the external stuff they don't write. It is one of the most secure operating system distributions because of this policy.

Re:KDE version (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606525)

No, they don't, they audit base, not ports.

Re:KDE version (5, Informative)

OmegaBlac (752432) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606983)

They audit every line of code they ship, including the external stuff they don't write.

I keep seeing this, but it is not entirely correct. According to their own FAQ they do not audit ports or packages to the same degree as the base system. One must assume that the "external stuff" has not been through an audit at all when installing a port/package.
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html#Intro [openbsd.org]

Re:KDE version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606879)

Some highlights:

        * Gnome 2.20.3.
        * GNUstep 1.14.2.
        * KDE 3.5.9.
        * Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.16 and 3.0.1.
        * Mozilla Thunderbird 2.0.0.16.
        * MySQL 5.0.51a
        * OpenMotif 2.3.0.
        * OpenOffice.org 2.4.1.
        * PostgreSQL 8.3.3.
        * Xfce 4.4.2.

No idea where you got KDE 3.5.8 from, they list 3.5.9 as the port.

A site geared towards Linux user, to learn OpenBSD (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605783)

This site is geared towards Linux users that want to learn OpenBSD: http://www.openbsd101.com/ [openbsd101.com]

Re:A site geared towards Linux user, to learn Open (0, Troll)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606661)

As long as bash is not default shell, less is not default pager and VIM is not default text editor - I'm NOT interested.

I'm working 99% of time in command line and *BSD archaic tools are not really helping to make the switch from Linux.

And find doesn't search by default in current directory. And grep isn't recursive.

And, for **** sake, where is POSIX conformance statement??? Even Linux man pages (more or less all of them) have by now info how does/doesn't particular tool/call conform to POSIX.

As much as I wanted to try BSDs, unfortunately, most of them (OpenBSD included) remain kind of toy for basement kids who do not know anything better.

Mod me down folks, but here is my advice: if you are serious into *nix - as user or developer - pick Linux.

*BSD might be true Unix, but this is not something to be particularly proud of, as Unix has history of being worst platform for both users and developers.

Re:A site geared towards Linux user, to learn Open (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 5 years ago | (#25607119)

Unlike Linux, the BSDs don't come preinstalled with tons of third-party software you didn't ask for, because there's a clear separation between the base UNIX operating system and the ports/pkgsrc collection. If you're too damn dumb to go into /usr/pkgsrc and take the 2 minutes to install Bash, I think BSD is probably above you. Stick with Ubuntu.

OpenBSD for Linux users (-1, Redundant)

tecopa03 (1086983) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605829)

Here is a good site for Linux users interested in OpenBSD: http://www.openbsd101.com/ [openbsd101.com]

Re:OpenBSD for Linux users (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25605915)

Once [slashdot.org] was enough, you sockpuppeting shill.

EOL cycle (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605835)

the problem i have with openbsd is it's 12 month EOL cycle. in a production environment upgrading the entire OS ever 12 months so you can continue to get security patches just doesn't cut it. perhaps the openbsd team could put up a paid for extended patch team or something to help fund their efforts? that would certainly be attractive to companies using it for firewalls and as security devices.

Re:EOL cycle (1)

MaoTse (624765) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605977)

Your point is moot.

OpenBSD is the simplest "distribution"
to update.

Cheers

Re:EOL cycle (2, Interesting)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606083)

updating requires about 30 minutes of down time, I have a production system that costs the company $10,000 a minute when it's not running (and i'm sure that's cheap by some peoples standards). explain why i would choose an OS that costs the company $300,000 a year in avoidable down time. with other OS's i can continue to get security patches and i can apply them with the minimum amount of down time possible.

and yes we have backup systems, but if you've ever worked in a real industrial environment it's not as simple as flicking a switch when it comes to changing control systems, and it's certainly something you want to avoid.

Re:EOL cycle (2, Informative)

imus (1229508) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606281)

CARP. Google upgrades backend stuff all the time, but you never know it. OpenBSD does CARP better than anyone. Try it. I can re-install in less than 10 minutes. Sparc64 or Intel machines. No one is aware as services are still available.

Re:EOL cycle (1)

ArbitraryConstant (763964) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606957)

I think having to do it with that frequency is a legit complaint. Say there's CARP and everything works fine -- I'm still spending time on upgrades more often than I'd like.

Feature-neutral security updates for more than a year would be welcome.

Re:EOL cycle (1)

baldusi (139651) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606501)

If you have that kind of downtime cost you're using redundant systems. You just go doing it one system at a time. CARP is your friend.

Re:EOL cycle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606783)

timmy, if you have a production system worth that much, and you don't have redundancy, then you're not doing your job.

Re:EOL cycle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606221)

I don't care how "simple" it is: I don't want to go dicking about with a working server just because Theo thinks I should. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Re:EOL cycle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606073)

It's really simple, update your systems every six months, the instructiosn are very simple and the upgrades typically take thirty minutes, start to finish including every port being replaced and all the configuration files being remerged.

The way it works does, "cut it," if you're not retarded.

Re:EOL cycle (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606107)

"the instructiosn are very simple" - i wouldn't be so quick to call anyone retarded.

Re:EOL cycle (2, Informative)

Blackknight (25168) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606101)

Normally you don't NEED to upgrade it. Set up the device and forget about it, unless there's some type of remote exploit you'll be fine.

Re:EOL cycle (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606133)

the 6 month release cycle only compounds the issue though, you end up so far behind that when you do need to update it means a complete reinstall to avoid dependency hell.

One Day.. (3, Funny)

EEPROMS (889169) | more than 5 years ago | (#25605851)

[Death walking away muttering]
Death "SO DISAPPOINTING"

4.4 (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606087)

Congrats to open/safe bsd guys. Just a bit momentarily confused because of version number 4.4 - as if we were back in the '90s.

Re:4.4 (3, Funny)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606185)

Linux is only at 2.6.27.4, as if we're back in the 1980s. Though unix-like systems in general are relics from the 1970s.

Re: relics from the 1970s (1)

Bozdune (68800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606699)

I suspect you'd agree that there's nothing wrong with using a stable OS. There's everything wrong with trying to "re-invent the OS" every few years using some wet-behind-the-ears college grads, and still -- after 25 years -- not being able to ship a dispatcher that can handle a spinning process without roaching the whole box. Yes, I'm looking at you, Windows. OS/MFT could handle a spinning process. Even CTSS could handle a spinning process, and that was written in 1960.

As far as the old saw that Unix/Linux/BSD/whatever "can't support a real graphical shell," have a peek at OS X. The academics who pronounced that a microkernel was the way to go (where are you now, QNX? Hurd? CMU?) found out that idea wasn't all-she-wrote either. OK, I enjoyed watching the file system crash on QNX without crashing the kernel, but there isn't much you can do without a file system (unless you're running a nuculer power plant, which was QNX's favorite example), so who cares?

Age is good. Stability is good. These are good things.

Re:4.4 (1)

geetzu (1367597) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606205)

Read the story and listen to the song coming with OpenBSD-4.4. Y'll see that your confusion can be clarified. It gives a nice UNIX history lesson aswell. //GvD

Silent Money Maker (5, Interesting)

imus (1229508) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606213)

OpenBSD puts a lot of money in consultant's pockets. It's hands down the most secure OS on the market. Got a client that needs a secure redundant firewall but can't afford big, over-priced Cisco gear? OpenBSD to the resuce. OpenBGP, CARP, etc. You can do things with OpenBSD and 15K worth of hardware that would cost six or seven times as much money with dedicated networking hardware. And, you can do it better. So, if you need some easy extra cash get into OpenBSD and start making a killing in the firewall business in your hometown. When you get a reputation for solid, secure systems (they'll wonder how you do it :)) donate some cash to the OpenBSD Foundation and buy some CDs.

Re:Silent Money Maker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25606797)

Replace "OpenBSD" with "Linux" and your comment is still valid. As a bonus you don't have to deal with Theo & Co.

Re:Silent Money Maker (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 5 years ago | (#25606947)

Theo is considerably nicer to deal with than the majority of GNUlots. Personally, I like the guy. Like Linus, he takes no shit and dishes it when he feels it's warranted. I've had more issues with Ted Unangst than Theo...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?