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!

SMP On OpenBSD, Coming Soon

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the faster-if-you-pay dept.

Security 321

Lord of the OpenBSD writes "At long last, SMP development on OpenBSD looks to be gearing up. One person is now doing full-time funded development on SMP. Project leader Theo de Raadt is now asking for funding for a second developer. Theo has announced that SMP support for i386 is planned for the OpenBSD 3.6 or 3.7 release, the first of which is due in 8 months."

cancel ×

321 comments

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

BSD: it's (a)live! (5, Funny)

users.pl (689022) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593362)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: *BSD: it's (a)live!

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD is dying community when Slashdot confirmed that *BSD death trolls have dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all troll posts. Coming on the heels of a recent troll survey which plainly states that trolls are running out of *BSD ammo, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Slashdot trolls are trolling with new and better methods [slashdot.org] because trolling about BSD's falsely prophetic death is as obsolete and useless as GNU HURD [gnu.org] .

You don't need to be Jesus [stallman.org] to predict the Slashdot troll phenomena's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD trolls face a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD trolls because *BSD trolls are dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD trolls. As many of us are already aware, *BSD has recently acquired several [freesbie.org] Live CDs [livebsd.com] . Red devil Live CDs multiply like fucking rabbits.

The reasons for the death of the *BSD troll are obvious. The creators of the *BSD troll post have lost 93% of their core developers due to casulties from the sudden and unpleasant battles [slashdot.org] between Trollcore [slashdot.org] and GNAA [slashdot.org] . There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD trolls are dying.

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

GNAA leader Anonymous Coward states that there are 700 active trolls on Slashdot. How many BSD death trolls are there? Let's see. The number of troll posts vs BSD death troll posts on Slashdot is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 700/5 = 140 BSD death trolls. But half of those are just cheezy karma-whore spinoffs of the original troll. Therefore there are about 70 users of the real BSD death troll. These statistics, of course, reflect Slashdot before the war between Trollcore and GNAA. So we must assume that there are less than 70 people who actually believe that *BSD is still dying!

All major surveys show that *BSD trolls have steadily declined in humor level. *BSD trolls are very sick and their long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD trolls are to survive at all, they will be nothing but workers toiling in Slashdot trolling phenomena obscurity. *BSD death trolls continue to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save them at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD death trolls are dead.

Fact: *BSD: it's (a)live! [freesbie.org]

ATTENTION: THEO DE RAADT IS A TWAT! OPENBSD IS GAY (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593641)

Vile American HARLOTS! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593364)

You Americans should be ashamed of yourselves!

Detainees at Guantanamo Bay are shackled for up to 15 hours at a time in hand and leg cuffs with metal links which cut into the skin. Their "cells" are wire cages with concrete floors and open to the elements - giving no privacy or protection from the rats, snakes and scorpions loose around the base. By contrast the camp guard dogs have wooden houses with air conditioning and green grass to exercise on. A diet of foul water and food up to 10 years out-of-date has left inmates malnourished.

But worst of all is the use of vice girls to torment the most religiously devout detainees. Prisoners who have never seen an "unveiled" woman before are forced to watch as the hookers touch their own naked bodies. One said an American girl had smeared menstrual blood across his face in an act of humiliation!

You make me sick! How dare you call yourselves the land of the free and the defenders of civilization. You make me sick! You are a bunch of depraved lunatics who deserve to drown in pig shit!

Re:Vile American HARLOTS! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593516)

rats, snakes and scorpions loose around the base.


And, that's just the visiting Republicans!

Re:Vile American HARLOTS! (-1, Offtopic)

BobandMax (95054) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593542)

Is pig shit sufficiently liquid to inhale easily?

First Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593365)

GNAA Reprazent!

INFORMER! You no say daddy me Snow me am to blame (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593369)

A licky boom boom down!

Yet another modern feature added to *BSD (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593375)

Yet another modern OS feature is being added to *BSD, which have many features not even found in the best of commercial operating systems. *BSD isn't dying, it's setting the standard for other operating systems to follow.

Re:Yet another modern feature added to *BSD (1)

endx7 (706884) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593916)

Yet another modern OS feature is being added to *BSD, which have many features not even found in the best of commercial operating systems. *BSD isn't dying, it's setting the standard for other operating systems to follow.

Odd it's been taking them this long. Both FreeBSD and NetBSD have had SMP for a while.

Re:Yet another modern feature added to *BSD (3, Informative)

Santana (103744) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594066)

As you may know, OpenBSD focuses on security. SMP support brings new concerns on this field.

Theo's Words for the next year of devleopment... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593378)

"It was just a crash..."

Risky to add SMP to free *nix (5, Funny)

sydb (176695) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593380)

Let's hope IBM doesn't offer their developer time... ;0)

Re:Risky to add SMP to free *nix (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593741)

muxa stuk sell!

Re:Risky to add SMP to free *nix (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594055)

Hi!

Perhaps not risky; certainly pointless.

Why? What other reason than pure EGO can there be for people to be bothering with BSD? Why not concentrate on one OS, the one that is obviously years ahead - you know I'm talking about Linux.

And this isn't a troll - and you'll notice I'm not prepared to have misguided mods hack my karma to pieces in case they think it is - but I honestly can't see why they're still fiddling about with something that is so far behind. OK, Theo couldn't be the boss if he switched to Linux, but what OTHER reasons are there?

Cheers,
GNU/Wolfgang

Netcraft confirms... (0, Funny)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593381)

A dead operating system grows a second head and becomes a two-headed ghost.

The trolls are gonna love this one.

Re:Netcraft confirms... (4, Funny)

fm6 (162816) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593403)

No, even the trolls are tired of "BSD is dying...".

Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (-1, Troll)

h2odragon (6908) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593383)

n/t

MOD PARENT -1 TROLLBAIT (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593462)

h20 dragon is a known kuro5hin troll also he trolls the irc channel #kuro5hin and bans people he disagrees with

mod this piece of crap down

Re:MOD PARENT -1 TROLLBAIT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593524)

lmao! He bans people he disagrees eh? And you propose to mod him down...because you disagree with him. SHUT THE FUCK UP FOOL!

Re:Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (-1, Flamebait)

Captain Tenille (250795) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593483)

At this rate, OpenBSD should have DECNet support sometime around version 4.0. Journaling filesystems, ELF, and
ls
with colors should be showing up in 4.5, or around 2009.

Re:Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593490)

ELF has been in since months, flamebait. colored ls is for whimps.

Re:Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593631)

There are alot of whimps out there...

Re:Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (5, Insightful)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593585)

Of course you guys realize the mission of OBSD is not tossing in every feature you can think of trying to keep up with the Gates', its something else altogether, thankfully.

Re:Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593856)

I sure do. So let's say they invest 50% of their ressources on security, and 50% on new features.

Now what if they just dropped it and spend 100% of their time on the security of FreeBSD. That we we could have a secure OS (imagine, 100% of their time to making the whole thing secure) and a lot of features (Imagine again, the core of the FreeBSD can now focus on new features).

Let's just not fake it. They are two different OS because their respective maintainers cannot stand working together. This is really a personnality problem, not a technical one.

Of course, when they started OpenBSD they chose the "Security" niche, because there already was so many mainstream OSes around.

Re:Yesterday's Technology, Tomorrow! (1)

ryanr (30917) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594119)

Or... maybe they could take NetBSD and spend 100% of their time making that secure!

Great News! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593389)

Welcome to the twenty first century. Progress from version 3.11 has been terrific, eh?

smp? (1, Insightful)

narkotix (576944) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593392)

can someone enlighten me as to why its taken so long to get support?

Re:smp? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593412)

can someone enlighten me as to why its taken so long to get support?

because you've been to lazy to do it?

Re:smp? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593416)

SMP is one of those technologies encumbered by various patents. As it is now, SCO claim to own most of the support for it, and it's one of the features embroiled in the SCO vs IBM case.

How they'll get around this, I don't know. It's good to see the coding and experience getting out there and used all the more however.

Re:smp? (1, Redundant)

Herbster (641217) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593431)

Re:smp? (5, Insightful)

Herbster (641217) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593469)

oops. Because OpenBSD is focused on security. [openbsd.org] This means they don't compromise by spreading development effort that could be best spent on making the OS more secure.

Re:smp? (1)

narkotix (576944) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593504)

thanks for that insight. I dont really use bsd at all (only thing we get to use unixy is sco for a large library system) - mainly windowscentric where i am based (huge microsoft contracts) so we rarely get to play around with other os's :-/

Re:smp? (2, Insightful)

Brandybuck (704397) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593587)

so we rarely get to play around with other os's

Does your boss make you live at work? Go home and play around with other systems there!

Re:smp? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593570)

That's a nice way of saying that OBSD's dev resources are very limited, mainly due to personality issues.

Re:smp? (1)

Herbster (641217) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593844)

Or, another way, Theo doesn't let retards mess with his source tree ;)

Re:smp? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593454)

theo is an incompetent idiot.

Re:smp? (5, Informative)

TheHonestTruth (759975) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593486)

Because it wasn't important to Theo. Seriously. He had no need for it, plus it introduces security issues (I guess, I can't speak from experience) with what code is getting executed in what processor, so it wasn't developed for a long time (security being OpenBSD's focus). It just started getting some work in the past year or so.

-Truth

Re:smp? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593523)

because deraadt is an insufferable prima dona who won't ever _ever_ admit there just possibly might be something he doesn't know how to do better than anybody else on earth? and none of his fanboys can code SMP, or won't admit they can lest he turn on them and roast them alive, and they would rather kiss his ass than show him up?

openbsd is a fucking cult of personality.

Re:smp? (5, Informative)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593923)

OpenBSD's top priority is security. For SMP that means two things:

1. All potential security-relevant race conditions must be handled. A single processor system can never do two things at exactly the same time. A dual processor one can. OpenBSD wouldn't be OpenBSD if that would be allowed to affect the system's integrity.

2. Given the choice of an small project, that increases security, and a big one that probably will lower it, Theo will choose the one that increases security. Dual-processors are not a major concern to OpenBSD's core users, so support can wait until other things get done.

Interesting... (4, Interesting)

TheHonestTruth (759975) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593414)

Given Theo's past attitude of "it's not important to me so it's not important to OpenBSD." Though his goal always seemed self-serving e.g. "I write it for myself and if others use it, fine," it's good to see that he is opening his mind to the one area OpenBSD is severly lacking. It could use some desktop polish (though I only use it for firewalls and servers since I only use it at home), SMP is the gaping hole in OpenBSD's offering. Knowing Theo's penchant for not playing nice with anyone beneath him, I'm guessing the SMP developer is pretty top-notch if he has Theo's support. Cool.

-Truth

Re:Interesting... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593480)

Meh, but OpenBSD is slow anyway... SMP ain't gonna help.

It's like adding SMP support to a C64 or something... pointless

Theo is a jackass, he's lucky anyone cares at all.

Re:Interesting... (1)

TheHonestTruth (759975) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593515)

I wish I could refute this, but IIRC, a series of I/O benchmarks were run on the major OS players a while ago and OBSD did pretty terribly. Well, it suits my needs and I got tired of OS advocacy a long time ago so I'm just sticking with what I know. To each their own.

-Truth

Re:Interesting... (4, Insightful)

Ryvar (122400) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593588)

Personally, I feel safer knowing that the time that could have gone into optimization has gone into checking for bugs and other security enhancements (privsep, WorX, etc.) - OpenBSD isn't meant to be your main enterprise-level server. That's FreeBSD's job. OpenBSD is supposed to sit there at the gates and safely divide packets into sheep or goats all day long.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593651)

How does "privsep, WorX, etc." make OpenBSD a better firewall OS? ... And why is OpenBSD better at FreeBSD at firewalling?

Re:Interesting... (2, Informative)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594034)

Let's see...

Privsep: Makes sure that only the code that needs to be root is run as root.

WorX: Makes sure that data cannot be executed as code. (Memory pages are either executable or writable, not both)

There are other features like them, that add to the security of the system. OpenBSD is better at firewalling than FreeBSD because of them; it is harder to break any port or access that is allowed/found into a security lapse. And any security lapse will be as limited as possible.

FreeBSD is descent at this. The standard level of security is available. OpenBSD is positively paranoid. That's a good thing when anyone can throw anything at it...

Felix von Leitner's "Benchmarking BSD and Linux" (1, Informative)

mosel-saar-ruwer (732341) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594049)


I wish I could refute this, but IIRC, a series of I/O benchmarks were run on the major OS players a while ago and OBSD did pretty terribly.

The money quote from the Conclusion of Felix von Leitner's Benchmarking BSD and Linux:

OpenBSD 3.4 was a real stinker in these tests. The installation routine sucks, the disk performance sucks, the kernel was unstable, and in the network scalability department it was even outperformed by it's father, NetBSD. OpenBSD also gets points deducted for the sabotage they did to their IPv6 stack. If you are using OpenBSD, you should move away now.

http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/ [bulk.fefe.de]

http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/03/10/19 /0130256.shtml [slashdot.org]

Re:Interesting... (4, Informative)

Ryvar (122400) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593555)

While I'm a big fan of OpenBSD and Theo both - I have to admit that Theo doesn't play nice even with those NOT beneath him - the loss of Niels Provos is still a bitter, bitter blow for the project.

Re:Interesting... (1)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593748)

Any links on the fallout? I did a google on Provos, found a lot of stuff (he would be a loss to any project) but nothing about the split.

can somebody please provide the background on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593796)

i would be interested in reading about the loss of provos

Re:Interesting... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594102)

have to admit that Theo doesn't play nice even with those NOT beneath him


Ever play with a cat? You swat at its head a bit, it tries to bite back or swat back, roll it around, it scratches your hand, etc, etc, the same way one cat plays with another - the nibbles and scratches don't really hurt a fellow cat. Theo plays rough with people, has thick skin, and expects others to play as rough as he does (yes rough often == flame wars, etc). He plays rough with everyone, irregardless of how much work you do, though he does really respect those who do good work (he'll talk *very* highly of them).


I don't much care for that attitude, but i also recognize that i am the same way with some people (at work, among co-workers, we hurl insults back and forth and call eachother on our fuck ups, but also respect eachother's work abilities and will say so when asked). Theo is just that much more consistent than i am.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593560)

True, the thought of having SMP with OBSD is tantalizing, but I don't think your comments are warrented towards the desktop polish. Personally, I have used many different operating systems in the past, and still do, but if a more polished desktop is what I'm after, then I'll use FreeBSD. Just look at how their port system is set up. It's much more geared to be the type of os where you can plunk someone down in front of Gnome or KDE, and away they go. The very fact that OBSD touts security should make it the ideal candidate for exactly what you use it for. The developers don't need to waste time on making eye candy.

-hn

Re:Interesting... (3, Interesting)

beerwolff (537254) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593578)

Well I think Theo's attitude has reflected this because everyone wanting certain features weren't going to code any of it themselves.

So yes, his attitude was "I'm not going to code that feature for you because it doens't interest me.". But I'm pretty sure if anyone coded something good enough it would be accepted -- why wouldn't it be?

Play by the OpenBSD rules (no dumb licenses, etc), and write good code, and you can get your code into the official tree. If you write crappy code, or put a dumb license on it, then of course it's not going to be included.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593594)

not everyone is a coder. but they may still have suggestions and want to see certain things.

Re:Interesting... (2, Insightful)

hdw (564237) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593990)

Yes they may.
But why should anyone listen?

If you want a certain feature then you either code it, or pay someone to code it. Wishing doesn't produce better software.

Sure, you can contact the developer(s) and say "wouldn't it be nice if ..." but don't whine if she/he says "sure, when/if I get the time and/or resources".
If you don't like that answer then either provide the resources or pay for commercial software.

Re:Interesting... (5, Interesting)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594026)

Unfortunately, not all ideas are created equal, or should be treated equally. Some are better than others. Some bad ideas repeat over and over and over again, over a course of years and it's not unknown for a project head to get testy about them after awhile.

Especially since it's actually pretty rare for someone outside to come up with an idea that the people who work with the code all the time haven't actually already thought of.

Some ideas aren't bad, they just have to wait their turn in line and their priority may be low within the parameters of the project.

For instance, in Racer, a project overtly aimed at providing the best physics engine for driving sims, there is fairly constant call from the modelers, who don't contribute any code, to impliment opening doors and working horns.

While the core physics is yet incomplete.

Opening doors and working horns will come in time, and has been stipulated, when they make it to the top of the priority list. Right now nailing the tire and drive train model is far more important.

As a project head it's all too easy to become a code monkey for everyone with an idea. That isn't the role of a project head. His role is to decide what does and does not belong in the code base, and when it's important for what does belong in the code base to get implimented.

I'd don't know OBSD or Theo, but I do know some of the problems encountered in open collaborative works, or works that are essentially the project of a few, but that take place in fairly public view so the public tends to the think of them as open collaborative works when they are not.

This isn't just a problem in software projects. As a physicist I have spent many, many hours trying to explain to people why their idea for a magnetic perpetual motion machine just won't work. I have to spend these hours because these people haven't taken the trouble to gain a simple high school understanding of physics.

Now, as it happens I make part of my living tutoring basic scientific philosophy and physics. If these people wish to enroll and learn, fine, that's my "job."

But if all they want to do is argue with you, ad infinitum, in swarms, sooner or later you start to reach for the fly swatter and just bat them all away.

Not because you have anything against them, per se. Because life is short.

KFG

Re:Interesting... (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593783)

no dumb licenses...

I sure hope that alone keeps BSD alive. Dumb licenses might kill Linux before Microsoft does. Then how will SCO stay in business if they have nobody to sue? Like a train wreck, these license battles are fun to watch.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593665)

I really don't give a shit. I don't use software based on what the developers political beliefs, temperament or some other trivial personality trait. I use the software because it runs fine on my hardware.

Re:Interesting... (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593772)

I really don't give a shit. I don't use software based on what the developers political beliefs, temperament or some other trivial personality trait

that's very fine until those political beliefs or personality become overwhelming, and just generally too much to ignore. I guarantee you, if Linus became a neo-nazi tomorrow, I'd switch to *BSD in a jiffy, and so would many other devout Linux users.

And I know more than a few people who flatly refuse to try dotGNU because you-know-who, and his special personality, and his political motivations for doing it, is behind the project.

Re:Interesting... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593962)

And I know more than a few people who flatly refuse to try dotGNU because you-know-who, and his special personality, and his political motivations for doing it, is behind the project.

And I can assure you that you know a few people who are idiots. While one can disagree with RMS' politics, putting him in the category of neo-nazis and other radicals shows a complete disregard for common sense.

switch (-1)

Cyber Dugie (724373) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593415)

aren't evrybody already switch to i586 and 64 arch?

Watch out for the SCO police (2, Funny)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593423)

What next, SCO sues OpenBSD for having a feature that Linux has?

Re:Watch out for the SCO police (2, Funny)

sydb (176695) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593475)

That wasn't very funny. Please see my post [slashdot.org] for an example of a successful way to refer to SCO, and simultaneously entertain your audience, in this story.

Re:Watch out for the SCO police (1)

SilveRo_kun (741555) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593534)

Well, here: http://www.linux.org.uk/SMP/title.html [linux.org.uk] it says: "the initial port was made possible thanks to Caldera".... Maybe that's why SCO said it will soon sue the BSDs... =)

Great News! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593443)

Let me be the first to say, welcome to the 20th century!

Please, post some details so we can discuss this new 1960's technology you are implementing.

DON'T FORGET ABOUT DARWIN (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593465)

It's BSD-compatible, AND ALREADY HAS SMP! By the power of Jordan Hubbard, I COMPEL YOU!!

Re:DON'T FORGET ABOUT DARWIN (4, Insightful)

spoonboy42 (146048) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594074)

Yes, Darwin has SMP support that it inherited from the codebase of FreeBSD and Mach. And, to tell the truth, if you want a complete, modern *BSD system you might be better off with FreeBSD anyway (it has probably the most extensive ports collection, best SMP support, fastest scheduler, best desktop support, etc.). The reason for the "other" BSDs (OpenBSD and NetBSD) existing is to focus on goals that don't fit in with FreeBSD's general-purpose design or Apple's exclusive focus on the PowerPC desktop (i386 versions of Darwin notwithstanding). Specifically, OpenBSD is designed to be ultra-secure, while NetBSD's goal is to be portable across as many different architectures as possible. If OpenBSD gets a useful feature like SMP without sacrificing security, though, it's a *good thing* for people who deploy OpenBSD, as it gives them more hardware options in the future.

Who cares? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593488)

Seriously, not to totaly troll, but we need ALOT of linux support, and much less other *nix and W#nd0ws support.
example: A Nero like interface for linux
Places like Kazaa realease native clients for linux
and quality dvdXcopy for linux, all native no wine.

Re:Who cares? (1)

jdunn14 (455930) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593777)

Interesting selection of things that need to be implemented. Most people point to UI consistency, GUI improvement, etc. Let's see Nero, Kazaa, and dvd copying.... what would you be doing =)?

Re:Who cares? (1)

chizu (669687) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593811)

Well some people do. I don't use bsd (tried to get freebsd installed, the init system segfaulted on my box) so you or I might not, but a lot of people do. And support for bsd usually means support for linux as well. Any decent application code will run on both, so why not make stuff for bsd and compile on linux or vise-versa. It doesn't make a lot of sense to just write a good operating system off, just due to lack of users. Remember Linux once had less people using it than any bsd and did for a long time. Don't ignore things because the crowd isn't using them (yet...)

Linux (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593508)

NGSCB + SCO = Linux is dying.

Why buy hamburger when the steak is free? (3, Insightful)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593513)

I can use NetBSD, FreeBSD or Linux -- all of which have SMP capabilities to varying degrees ... so, why do I want to give Theo $ for something he could probably port --instead of hiring a programmer to putz around with reinventing the wheel?

Re:Why buy hamburger when the steak is free? (4, Interesting)

EisBar (324026) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593547)

who said they are going to reinvent the wheel?, porting kernel space stuff is not simple, and the common base between the *BSD is not that common anymore.

it's not "porting" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593626)

This is not just "porting" like a device driver.

SMP touches every aspect of the kernel (scheduling, VM, VFS, etc.). Each OS is different internally and so you can't just rip code out of one and put it into another. It's not simply copying over a sub-directory and changing a couple of kernel system calls.

You have to pour over a lot of the files and make all the data structures are written to and read from correctly.

There's also more than one way to do SMP so how do you know whether he's "reinventing the wheel", or coming up with a novel approach?

SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593532)

I played around with obsd a few years ago, and I liked how small and tight the system is. At one point I even setup an obsd web server, but the thing kept crashing. Never did find out if it was softare or hardware related (it was located offshore and nobody in the vincinity could troubleshoot it effectively). Other than that, I really liked the OS. The man pages are absolutely top-notch, unlike some of the Linux man pages (in Debian, lots of man pages say stuff like: "this page is a placeholder; there is no documentation" or refer you to the GNU info docs). I also like the firewall more than iptables, which was really confusing at first.
Anyway, the main thing that bugs me about obsd is that it uses the ports system. It does the job and all, but when it comes time to upgrade your OS, it's a real PITA. I remember having to manually edit files in /etc, and having to figure out which files were added or deleted since the last version. Lots of room for error, there. Compared to Debian, which can be upgraded by only typing two commands, it's just no fun. Especially if you're trying to upgrade a server that's thousands of miles away, and can't afford to fuck up.

Re:SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593696)

OBSD has both ports and packages (precompiled binaries) and the software to manage them, pkg_*. When it comes time to upgrade your OS, all your customizations can be put in a site.tgz file. Takes one command to install it.

There's a reason OpenBSD has nice man pages and FAQ - they're for learning how the OS works.

Re:SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (1)

UseTheSource (66510) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594014)

Good point, but this really doesn't address management of all the little bits of software you may or may not want to have on different machines. What would be nice, ideally, is something like RPM. I'd like to have an inventory of everything associated with a particular software package, as well as an easy way to upgrade it, remove it, verify that it hasn't been modified, etc. For one system, ports are fine. For a few, identically configured servers, site.tgz might work. But if you've got lots of boxes doing different things, there should be a better way of keeping track of things.

That said, *BSD is otherwise well put together, for the most part. Bugs are well documented and addressed quickly. My first foray into kernel hacking was on FreeBSD, and the source code was very approachable, for someone just starting out with such things. I guess this could be attributed to the straightforward, succinct way in which most of the code is written.

Re:SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594024)

In my experience, there are very few upgrades to the ports packages once an OpenBSD version is released. Good thing, too, because upgrading is something that pkg_* sucks at. So, it's quite possible that he has to use the ports/CVS system.

Re:SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593836)

Upgrading can be a very complex process especially if you've tweaked or even rewritten daemons' config files. The question is, do you trust a tool to do it more than you would trust yourself? Many moons ago one of my debian boxes removed its libc during an automatic upgrade. Now I upgrade my remote OpenBSD boxes by hand very very carefully. I'm sure Debian has gotten far better. Once bitten, twice shy.

Re:SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594089)

If the server is thousands of miles away and you can't afford to fuck up and so you load an OS that you feel you can't fuck up as easily... well you shouldn't be running that machine in the first place. It shouldn't matter what OS the machine is running, you should be competent enough to NOT fuck it up.

Re:SMP is good, but what about pkg management? (3, Interesting)

Santana (103744) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594145)

Good grief! Editing /etc/* by hand is a feature! I don't want any automatic tool touch my config files

I LIKE MY JAPANESE PUSSY SERVED ICE COLD (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593556)



A little sake can set the mood, if required.

Wow, they must be good.... (2, Insightful)

evenprime (324363) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593562)

Whoever is coding this must be *REALLY* good. I remember Theo saying that SMP had too many opportunities for race conditions....

In other news.. (-1, Flamebait)

Adnans (2862) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593577)

Linus is looking for funding to make Linux more secure, cuz he and Alan already tackled SMP!

(that makes much more sense no?!)

Re:In other news.. (2, Insightful)

BdosError (261714) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593636)

I'd say no. It's generally considered harder to secure an existing system than it is to keep a system secure and add features to it. I saw a quote from Bruce Schneier recently to that effect, I think from his "Secrets and Lies" book.

Essentially, good security relies on good architecture. Once you have an architecture from existing features, it may not be reasonable to make it secure because it may be architected for different goals.

Whats the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593586)

when FreeBSD already add PF to thier base system and has jails + SMB already? "20040308: The packet filter (pf) is now installed with the base system. Make sure to run mergemaster -p before installworld to create required user accounts. If you do not want to build pf with your system you can use the NO_PF knob in make.conf. Also note that pf requires "options PFIL_HOOKS" in the kernel. The pf system consists of the following three devices: device pf # required device pflog # optional device pfsync # optional http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/s rc/UPDATING?rev=1.298&content-type=text/plain

Why doesn't Theo... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593598)

just rip the code from a better BSD like the fucking plaguristic parasite he is.

irrelevent (0, Informative)

quelrods (521005) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593613)

I fail to see how this is relevent. This whole article is just going to be eaten up by the /. trolls. SMP support has been coming along in openbsd for the last year+, mostly "borrowing" code from netbsd. Yes SMP is coming and it will bring them up to date with the rest of the world. There really isn't anything to see here...move along.

Re:irrelevent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594139)

Why do you put "borrowing" in quotes like that? Where in the hell do you people get this idea that just because the code came from another BSD-licensed source its a BAD thing? I would LIKE that all the BSD's shared the same SMP code, that way resources are not spent DUPLICATING work, and in the end, the code can be worked on by all the developers together, resulting in fewer bugs and a better implementation. You imply that somehow TAKING _BSD_ licensed code is a _BAD_ thing... yet thats one of the PRIMARY REASONS FOR THE LICENSE. Provided the SMP code from netbsd is well written, I would INSIST that they do "borrow" the bloody code. Better than someone trying to reinvent the code and reinvent all the mistakes previous developers made in the process.

Re:irrelevent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594155)

Yeah... 'cause the Linux people have just been sitting around doing nothing in that last "year+".

Ass.

That reminds me... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593616)

We haven't seen a SCO story of slashdot for a while.

Re:That reminds me... (-1, Offtopic)

MyFourthAccount (719363) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593786)

We haven't seen a SCO story of slashdot for a while.

Tssss.... (Score:-1, Offtopic)

Silly mods probably didn't understand the humor... If anything that should have been Redundant [slashdot.org] , not Offtopic. (although redundancy doesn't normally seem to bother the mods very often)

Maybe there should be a 'Score:-1, Old Joke' moderation.

Maybe it's time for another type of troll.... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593633)

"*BSD is trying"

Fantastic (4, Insightful)

ChiralSoftware (743411) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593664)

My dream system for security work would be a thin SMP OpenBSD environment with a Java runtime on it. That way there would be a solid, very security OS, with a sandboxed VM environment to run the server code, resulting in strong security at every level. I am looking forward to this. Now, if it can run KDE 3.2 and OOo 1.1 and Evolution, that is all I need in a desktop and development system. I've been using OpenBSD for years but I switched to Linux when it pulled ahead on desktop functionality, but maybe it's time to take another look at OpenBSD.

--------
Create a WAP server [chiralsoftware.net]

muxa stuk sell! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593682)

muxa stuk sell

I Will Be Amazed If This Works (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593823)

OpenBSD does not have a good track record of major architecture improvements. For example, in the wake of the PR FreeBSD got for John Dyson's VM work, OpenBSD adopted Chuck Cranor's UVM system, integrating it into the last of the 2.x releases. Cranor is a very smart guy, but OpenBSD's stewardship of Cranor's code has been pretty awful --- lockups, panics, and various other problems remain in evidence, each answered with de Raadt's "UVM was just a research project from Cranor, it's not our fault" excuse.

FreeBSD has years worth of head-start on OpenBSD in SMP right now, and a much larger (and more experienced) core team. In addition, FreeBSD has corporate sponsorship (from Juniper and Apple, to name two). Despite these major advantages, FreeBSD SMP remains a work in progress.

de Raadt has had a religious perspective on SMP ("most modern applications aren't compute-bound! SMP is not the way to scale large applications, lots of individual machines are!") for almost a decade. What evidence do we have that he has seriously changed his mind? This seems like more of a desperation move, trying to ensure that OpenBSD doesn't fall behind NetBSD to become the least-used open source operating system available.

I predict years of instability and excuses.

'asking for funding' (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593879)

Too bad de Raadt looked a gift horse in the mouth and blew it with that NSA grant.

Dying OS Gets SMP Support as Final (Death-)Wish (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593895)

Why are they bothering? See OpenBSD-specific information in the article below.

Yet another sickening blow has struck what's left of the *BSD community, as a soon-to-be-released report by the independent Commision for Technology Management (CTM) after a year-long study has concluded: *BSD is already dead. Here are some of the commission's findings:

Fact: servers running OpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."

Fact: the *BSDs have balkanized yet again. There are now no less than twelve separate, competing *BSD projects, each of which has introduced fundamental incompatibilities with the other *BSDs, and frequently with Unix standards. Average number of developers in each project: fewer than five. Average number of users per project: there are no definitive numbers, but reports show that all projects are on the decline.

Fact: DragonflyBSD, yet another offshoot of the beleaguered FreeBSD "project", is already collapsing under the weight of internal power struggles and in-fighting. "They haven't done a single decent release," notes Mark Baron, an industry watcher and columnist. "Their mailing lists read like an online version of a Jerry Springer episode, complete with food fights, swearing, name-calling, and chair-throwing." Netcraft reports that DragonflyBSD is run on exactly 0% of internet servers.

Fact: There are almost no FreeBSD developers left, and its use, according to Netcraft, is down to a sadly crippled .005% of internet servers. A recent attempt at a face-to-face summit in Boulder, Colorado culminated in an out-and-out fistfight between core developers. Hotel security guards broke up the melee and banned the participants from the hotel. Two of the developers were hospitalized.

Fact: NetBSD, which claims to focus on portability (whatever that is supposed to mean), is slow, and cannot take advantage of multiple CPUs. "That about drove the last nail in the coffin for BSD use here," said Michael Curry, CTO of Amazon.com. "We took our NetBSD boxes out to the backyard and shot them in the head. We're much happier running Linux."

Fact: *BSD has no support from the media. Number of Linux magazines available at bookstores: 5 (Linux Journal, Linux World, Linux Developer, Linux Format, Linux User). Number of available *BSD magazines: 0. Current count of Linux-oriented technical books: 1071. Current count of *BSD books: 6.

Fact: XFree86 is dropping support for *BSD. The remaining core group believes that the *BSDs have strayed too far from Unix standards and have become too difficult to support along with Linux and Solaris x86. "It's too much trouble," said one anonymous developer. "If they want to make their own standards, let them doing the porting for us."

Fact: Many user-level applications will no longer work under *BSD, and no one is working to change this. The GIMP, a Photoshop-like application, has not worked at all under *BSD since version 1.1 (sorry, too much trouble for such a small base, developers have said). OpenOffice, a Microsoft Office clone, has never worked under *BSD and never will. ("Why would we bother?" said developer Steven Andrews, an OpenOffice team lead.)

With these incontroverible facts staring (what's left of) the *BSD community in the face, they can only draw one conclusion: *BSD is already dead.

Is this necessary? (4, Insightful)

agent dero (680753) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593973)

No this isn't a troll, I used Free and OpenBSD's; but why do we need this.

I still haven't found a necessity for SMP OpenBSD yet, if I need a box to run X or anything else that would work the CPUs, i'd choose FreeBSD, just for the package system.

What's really lagging in OpenBSD is an easy to use port/package system; SMP is long down the line.

Anybody that uses OpenBSD like I do, please tell me why we need OpenBSD, I use it for security, not for dual/quad/etc processor servers.

BSD to release SMP for the i386..... (5, Funny)

MrIrwin (761231) | more than 10 years ago | (#8594099)

But I think I will wait for the i486 release before upgrading.

BTW, is an 'SX' OK?

Netcraft confirms: *BSD is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8594120)

It is official; Netcraft confirms: *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 a Kreskin [amdest.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 dbblers. *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
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?