I'm thinking of trying out running #OpenBSD on a server instead of #Ubuntu, because Derek Sivers recommended it for its security (particularly around the more controlled packaging).
I have basically zero experience with BSD, but a ton with #linux (redhat, ubuntu, arch, centos, amazon linux, etc.).
Any advice on making the transition? Is this a good move or unnecessary or bad?
I don't have sympathy for #OpenBSD or #LibreSSL. However, I can understand that they had good reasons to fork OpenSSL, and that switching back today would be hard. I can understand projects refusing to officially declare support and rejecting workarounds.
OTOH, pushing LibreSSL hate to the point of blocking Python implementations that don't link to OpenSSL is just horrible. Users get in the crossfire, again.
Have you ever noticed that there are certain directories everyone has? ~/Documents, ~/Downloads, ~/Desktop, and so forth? Some of them you don't need, some of them you might wish were named differently, but any time you rename or delete them, the originals reappear?
You see, these directories follow a standard so that all programs know where they are—with the right tools under your belt, you can customize them.
That's pretty wild!
Reminds me a bit of #OpenBSD's focus and elegance, but on another level ;)
Are there any tiling WMs, or is it the interface more like cwm. Is there any progress on that front, or is that just not a priority? (which is totally fine)
It's another priority thing:
Bluetooth isn't a priority for #OpenBSD
Having a cohesive OS with good docs isn't a priority for 90% of #Linux distros
Being remotely SANE isn't a priority for #Canonical
My new open source operating stack consists of #almalinux , #debian, #linuxmint, #freebsd, and #openbsd. Each of these 4 operating systems have their distinct advantages and place. I love the #foss life.
@RL_Dane@XOrgFoundation I believe #OpenBSD uses their own xenodm fork now that @mherrb maintains - but while there is no one actively maintaining X.Org’s xdm now, the community is still merging patches and making releases, so it’s not abandoned like many of the other projects.
Yes, you're right -- OpenBSD's Xorg is a fork, or at least a patched version that implements some clever privilege separation takes advantage of some of their own cool security-related syscalls.
As far I know #gnome does not run (well or at all) on #bsd OSes. Which desktop do you suggest for a "gnome addicted" dude like me (who used Gnome since release 0.x)?
I'm pretty sure @freezr will have precious suggestions 😀
@ebassi
I'm happy I was wrong. I may be recalling some past flames, something like "gnome is too strongly tied to systemd".
This is a strong incentive to try #Openbsd or #Freebsd! 😀
(My #amiga childhood would induce me to try https://www.dragonflybsd.org/ 😀) @freezr
#doas in the #FreeBSD ports tree is the portable one maintained by Jesse Smith.
Per https://github.com/slicer69/doas/issues/15 you are right, and the people who claim that it works on Linux are in fact using a non-OpenBSD fork made by Duncan Overbruck that outright deleted the OpenBSD code in 2019, isn't actually portable any more despite the README, and substitutes a timestamp file for the missing necessary #OpenBSD kernel security feature that Linux lacks.
As you can see from the README and the diff that I gave to you, xe took the portable version, stripped out all of the bits that were conditionally compiled for anything other than Linux, substituted in Linux shadow password and PAM libraries, and added in the file-based timestamp mechanism from sudo.
Worse: This is the official #ArchLinux flavour of #doas. The portable one that didn't go back to sudo under the covers is relegated to the AUR.
It's a neat little OS. Kinda halfway between #NetBSD and #OpenBSD's razor focus and minimalism, and #Linux's sprawling feature set and bloat.
It's a stupid rubric, but I always judge a system by mount |wc -l (taking into account if there are many actual volumes mounted). If there's more than 10 non-disk volumes by default, that's kind of silly.
#NetBSD: a more traditional unix, very focused goals (similar to #OpenBSD), broad architecture support #FreeBSD: more geared towards the enterprise, more feature-complete (bhyve virtualization, linux executable compatibility, ZFS), a little better hardware compatibility on the one PC (Thinkpad) I tried both of them on.
To be fair, I spent very little time on NetBSD (only because I couldn't get suspend to work).