OpenBSD 3.7 Released 325
pgilman writes "It's official: OpenBSD
3.7 has been released.
There are oodles of new features, including tons of new and improved wireless
drivers (covered
here
previously),
new ports for the Sharp
Zaurus and SGI,
improvements to
OpenSSH,
OpenBGPD,
OpenNTPD, CARP, PF, a new OSPF daemon, new functionality for the already-excellent ports & packages system, and lots more. As always, please support the
project if you can by buying CDs and
t-shirts, or grab the goodness from your local mirror."
How's the install? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How's the install? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How's the install? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, people who say OpenBSD is hard because of the non-GUI installer just end up making themselves look lame. OpenBSD really is not that hard to install, and I actually prefer it to Red Hat's do-as-we-want-you-to-do installer.
making themselves look lame (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How's the install? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How's the install? (Score:3)
Re:How's the install? (Score:3)
Re:How's the install? (Score:4, Informative)
The installer might not have shiny graphics, but its actually extremely simple. It fits on a single floppy and can be used remotely. Same goes for upgrading.
Re:How's the install? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:How's the install? (Score:3, Funny)
How do they expect us to use this super advanced UNIX if we can't figure out how to install it?!
It's not like we're computer geeks or anything!1!!1
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Thats cool if you don't like reading documenation. Stick with MacOSX/Windows/Linux/Whatever.
Nobody says OpenBSD is for everybody.
Re:How's the install? (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, OpenBSD is not for people who don't understand what they are doing.
Read the docs so you understand properly, and it is no longer hard
Re:How's the install? (Score:5, Informative)
It is confusing when you come from i386 and have used Linux. It was, at least for me, quite confusing the usage of the word "partition".
To simplify, on Linux on i386 for each file system there will be a partition (DOS type). On BSD you commonly create a primary DOS parition using fdisk, and then use disklabel to create different filesystems on that particular DOS partition. "Primary" beacuse BSD may only boot from a primary DOS partition (at most four of those).
Now, when you enter fdisk you are asked to "parition" your harddisk(s). Then you enter disklabel and are asked to create new partitions. WTF? I just did that! Enter the term "slice" that is not quite the same across the BSD. Erh, you won't see the word "slice" in the man pages, though.
Not sure if OpenBSD 3.7 still have this usage of partition, though.
In any case, I'm a happy user of OpenBSD since 3.2/3.3.
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Are you sure about that?
I mean that BSD will only boot from a Primary partition.
As I understand it, That is an i386 problem, not limited to BSD.
If I am wrong please feel free to enlighten (but not ignite) me.
Re:How's the install? (Score:4, Informative)
Now, booting an OS that resides on a non-primary partition requires what is called a two-stage boot loader, and it does exactally what you think it would. Both NTLDR and lilo (among most others) work this way. The boot sector contains JUST ENOUGH code to find the second stage boot loader (reading a file, looking on the root of all partition, whatever), load it, and set the execution point.
Hope this helps
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Re:How's the install? (Score:4, Informative)
I think the way you said that is misleading, because it sounds like you're saying "OpenBSD must be installed in a primary DOS partition to be bootable"
That is definitely not true. OpenBSD does not necessarily have to touch a primary partition to be bootable.
The limitation is really "SOMETHING has to pick what boots" usually (but not always) the i386 BIOS is pretty dumb about this, so something somewhere has to be on a primary partition.
One of the primary partitions on the first drive must be marked active, and that partition must contain a bootable OS OR boot loader that can find your OS - but that's trivial these days. - THE BOOT LOADER DOESN'T HAVE TO MATCH YOUR OS -
So you could have OpenBSD in a logical partition and have a linux boot loader in a primary partition that lets you select on boot which partition - primary or logical, on any drive - gets booted. You could also have this selection be automatic. You could have it boot OpenBSD if it's Thursday, if you wanted. Except for that last part, this is all very, very common freeware.
http://pclt.cis.yale.edu/pclt/BOOT/PARTITIO.HTM [yale.edu]
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Exactly the point of my first post ;-)
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
I was more trying to get the point across that it isn't only OpenBSD that is limited to this.
Another poster described the boot process very accurately (and as I understand it).
So no OpenBSD CAN boot from any partition. But its BOOTLOADER must reside in a primary partition (dos or otherwise) Same as linux winnt etc.
P.S. I have used OpenBSD in production (firewalls mostly) for years now.
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Here's the process we use for pxeboot/custom cd installs:
echo "Wiping drive.."
echo y | fdisk -i wd0 >
echo "Running disklabel.."
disklabel -E wd0
d
*
a
a
400M
a
b
400M
swap
a
d
2G
a
e
w
q
EOF
echo -n "Creating filesystems.. a "
newfs wd0a >/dev/null
echo -n "d "
newfs wd0d >/dev/null
echo -n "e "
newfs wd0e >/dev/null
echo "done."
This creates 3 partitions and a swap partition, then puts the fs on them. You can mount them whereever you like.
Re:How's the install? (Score:2, Informative)
partitioning HD's is Computer Building 101
spend an evening to understand it and it will put in good stead for the rest of your life
Re:How's the install? (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps you should widen your experience beyond i386 and Linux. It's confusing because the same word partition (on i386) is used to refer to both DOS partion (fidsk) and filesystem (disklabel).
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
no, wait a minute, I run BSD on Sparc & plan9 on x86
I only run Linux by force !
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
plan9 is easy to install, it even boots from the CD into graphical desktop mode
I had it up and running the first day I tried it, when Ver 3 was announced here on
I have the auth server running on a stock VIA EPIA 5000 fanless board, my fileserver is a stock IBM Netfinity 5000 and my terminal is an Athlon with an nvidia gforce
I have put in quite a bit of effort in the meantime though, it is a bit to learn but being consistent, everything is a file, makes learning
Re:How's the install? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Actually, the (almost) main reason why I use OpenBSD is because it's easy to install, configure and maintain in a secure way. Yeah, I know, I'm lazy ;-)
Seriously, its amazing (Score:4, Insightful)
However, after 3 attempts when we got the hang of it, I looked at my partner (it was our first webserver for our little company) and we were like COOL. Once you get the handle of the installer and ports, its a DREAM, much EASIER than the Redhat what do I want and where is it problem.
That said, RHEL 4 is pretty slick, but nowhere near as impressively simple as OpenBSD + Ports. The installed OpenBSD system is SO FUCKING clean its not funny, and then you add the few ports, nice and customized, that you want.
One day I build 4 OpenBSD machines. Build the (customized) packages on one and distributed, and it was REALLY, REALLY, REALLY nice).
It's a great system, but you gotta really be a Unix-lover. If you want the click-click install, the Linux distros are great, but with OpenBSD I understand what is going on with my system.
That said, you can just TRY to get my OS X Powerbook away from me...
Alex
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
In the fdisk program, if you press a key to reset the partition table, it resets it AND writes it. Most other partition changes require 'W' to write before exiting, so you can back off your errors... but the reset partition table resets and writes permanently... at least on amd64.
I tried it to check if it was completely zeroing out the table, or fixing the MBR, like fdisk
Re:How's the install? (Score:2)
Re:How's the install? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Crazy (Score:3, Informative)
But you don't speak for everybody. I've found no problem with getting help for OpenBSD (I recommend www.bsdforums.org). I think you just need to make some effort to solve the problem yourself first. I can quite understand why people get annoyed with newbs who ask facile questions because they can't be bothered to try the most basic steps themselves. That's hardly unique to OpenBSD users though.
Yay! (Score:2, Funny)
Growl (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Growl (Score:4, Funny)
Open-bee-ess-dee
Open-ess-ess-ait
Open-bee-jee-pee-dee
Open-enn-tee-pee-dee
Ca
pee-eff
oh-ess-pee-eff
No problem.
Re:Growl (Score:2)
"Openbuzzd"
"Openshhhhh!"
"Pfff"
Those three are easy :)
Re:Growl (Score:2)
Let me read that back for you: oh-pee-ess-off
Re:Growl (Score:2, Insightful)
I want to MURDER people who say "Sequel" instead of S-Q-L, "Say-Taa" instead of S-A-T-A, and especially "ERRRRRK" instead of I-R-C.
If the acronym was intended to be pronounced, the author would have done something like the SAMBA project, where SMB was the acronym, but they filled in the blanks to actually MAKE it a word.
Re:Growl (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Growl (Score:2, Funny)
Actually, acronyms [wikipedia.org] are supposed to be pronounceable:
Re:Growl (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Growl (Score:2)
Re:Growl (Score:2)
I call it Sahtah (ah as in the a sound in 'cat'). And Squil instead of Sequel.
SAMBA couldn't use the name SMB (Score:3, Informative)
It was certainly not the result of an attempt to come up with some cute name for the software.
Re:Growl (Score:5, Informative)
I can't hear you very well through that hat (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know if you are really aware of it, but note that the link you gave mentions the story behind the acronym SQL, which certainly used to be SEQUEL before and had to be changed for legal reasons, but doesn't mention the pronunciation of SQL at all. Actually it _is_ "Es Queue El": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL [wikipedia.org].
If you read the documentation of popular relational databases, it's quite possible that you find a paragraph regarding the pronunciation, and in that case you'll find they follow the ANSI convention. [1 [mysql.com]] [2 [wikipedia.org]]
I know when I started using RDBMs years ago I read about it, and ever since whenever I see someone pronouncing SQL as "sequel" the first thing that comes to my mind is "newbie". I suspect from now on one more thing will come to mind: a prick who wants to sound clever when he's actually an ignorant.
Re:Growl (Score:2)
Try the Torrent! (Score:5, Informative)
Better yet, don't! (Re:Try the Torrent! (Score:3, Informative)
Selling CDs is one of the ways that the OpenBSD project is able to make money, and as far as I know, they don't provide checksums for the general public to verify the integrity of downloaded .iso's.
So by all means feel free to download some J. Random bitTorrent ISO of OpenBSD, but keep in mind that you have no way of knowing if it's been trojaned, root-kitted, or otherwise compromised If you really need a free install, just use the freakin network floppy. It's super easy, and you download directly from
Re:Try the Torrent! (Score:2)
It's true, of course, lot's of ISO images are flung far and wide using bittorrent(BT). ISO has two primary features, they're bootable, and they're structured.
BT can't solve the bootable problem, but BT can manage the structure problem. As near as I can tell, these torrents are structured.
I hope (Score:4, Interesting)
"Systemagic" and "E-railed" are still my favorite ones. They went sillier after that. "The Ballad of Puffy Hood" is okay-ish, anyway.
"Systemagic" is really a nice song to chant, drunk, with nerd friends."Cracking the bedroom, HEY, cracking the vault, cracking the bedroom HEY SECURE BY DEFAULT. CAAAAAAAAAAAAAN'T FIIIIIIIGHT THE SYSTEMAGIC. ÜBER TRAGIC. CAAAAN'T FIGHT THE SYSTEMAGIC! SYSTEMAGIC!.
Re:I hope (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I hope (Score:2)
If you like Pink Floyd you'll like this one!
Decent firefox port ? (Score:3, Interesting)
does my head in
I know a page where one can get a patchset against 1.01 and compile but I like my systems and vanilla as possible, ports & packages only, then I can reliably install a new box via script
Re:Decent firefox port ? (Score:2)
3.7 comes with 1.0.2 if I'm not mistaken.
Re:Decent firefox port ? (Score:2)
I use Debian-testing as a desktop and I avoid apt for the small number of things that I want to be 100% up to date with, including Firefox.
Re:Decent firefox port ? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Leading technology for tomorrows computing (Score:2)
* No colored directories.
* Update the system by recompilation (yay!)
these are bad things ?
Getting closer (Score:3, Funny)
Intel Wireless (Score:2, Interesting)
I must say that OpenBSD is a joy to work with. It is much cleaner and more consistently designed than everything else out there, including Linux. I have an old OBSD box that acts as a router and wireless access point, hasn't been updated in years, and I know I'll be giving it 3.7 to keep it up to date.
Now that it has Intel Wireless support, I might just switch to OBSD from Debian on my laptop.
Re:Intel Wireless (Score:2)
Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
ftp://mirror.sg.depaul.edu/pub/OpenBSD/3.7/i386/ [depaul.edu]
SMP (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:SMP (Score:3, Funny)
SMP in OpenBSD is slightly different to normal implementations for security reasons. Generally when one processor is in use, the other suspends itself to avoid race conditions. That way you get the full advantages of SMP, not wearing out a single CPU for instance, without the possibility of race conditions causing some kind of security hole.
Re:SMP (Score:3, Informative)
OpenBSD clusters make my heartbeat faster... (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Set up High Availability router with pfsync. (using computers rescued from the trash)
2. Set up a HA Network RAID system using DRBD [drbd.org] or something similar. (using more computers rescued from the trash)
3. Build a Kerrighed [kerrighed.org] or OpenSSI [openssi.org] Single System Image cluster. (using the latest and greatest computers one can rescue from the trash)
4. ???
5. Profit! (and thus, have enough money to actually buy equipment)
I've already set aside Tuesday evening to upgrade my bandwidth throttling [benzedrine.cx] OpenBSD router. I set it up the day before 3.6 came out, so I didn't feel like upgrading until now. I'm tired of the typical hardware failures you tend to get out of computers people throw out (maybe that's why they threw them out in the first place) but mostly I'm looking forward to getting a learning experience hundreds of times more valuable (personally) than getting my MCSE 2003.
\/\/\/
Re:OpenBSD clusters make my heartbeat faster... (Score:2)
I'm also learning how to build a clustered server one step at a time.
You might want to look at my post [slashdot.org] about Erlang. It's a functional programming language with all the advantages that come with it. In your case you might be interested in the features:
- It has an automatically clustered database and webserver.
- No buffer overflows
- It can automatically use symmetrical multiprocessing.
Questions for you:
- With the clustering sofware links you posted, do you still need ECC
How long is each release officially supported? (Score:2)
We are a small shop and in no position to do our own security updates for something like OpenBSD once it ceases to be supported. We are also fairly unfamiliar with the code. Nonetheless, I would like to try the OpenBSD waters, but before I do so, I would like to have some reliable info on how long security updates for each release are offered.
BTW: I know that OpenBSD has a very decent se
Re:How long is each release officially supported? (Score:2)
That's a year's span, as each release is a half a year apart.
Re:How long is each release officially supported? (Score:2)
I see three options:
1) forget about it and keep paying Microsoft for the promise of support.
2) find a 3rd party to do your patches and upgrades for you.
3) invenst some time in learning how to keep up with latest stable versions.
Nothing is free as in beer. BSD is older than windows, and the patches/new versions will keep coming for a long time to come. If you want a feel-good promise, you'll have to pay someone for a support co
Re:How long is each release officially supported? (Score:2)
All of this is under consideration currently. I am honestly surprised that it is only a year, but hey, the OpenBSD developers certainly don't own me anything.
Re:How long is each release officially supported? (Score:4, Informative)
Then why didn't you go to the website and read the FAQ's? http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq5.html#Flavors [openbsd.org]
The two newest releases are supported and a new "stable" version of the OpenBSD is released every 6 months. So, each release of OpenBSD is supported for one year.
Re:How long is each release officially supported? (Score:3, Informative)
You should note however that the OpenBSD systems are very easily upgraded from the install media. Simply choose the upgrade option and then follow the simple instructions [openbsd.org] to make other changes.
Remember though that only sequential updates are supported. Example 3.6 -> 3.7, if you're upgrading from 3.5 you'd need to: 3.5 -> 3.6 -> 3.7
Hope that helps you,
Tim
T-Shirts? No thanks! (Score:4, Funny)
I would love to, except Puffy the logo fish is horribly disfigured [openbsd.org].
Linux shirts are out, too: Tux is overweight. No, I can't buy a FreeBSD T-shirt either: I live in Texas [rmitz.org].
I've got it (Score:2)
Re:I've got it (Score:2)
Great for your firewall, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
But OBSD is more problematic on my web/mail server. The ports collection is nowhere near as comprehensive as FreeBSD's (or Debian & Gentoo for that matter) and so you'll likely scrounge for upstream versions of more obscure packages.
Worse, OBSD's Apache is stuck at version 1 (Theo has issues with the Apache 2 license) and more and more software wants Apache 2. I guess you can fix that, but it's back upstream you go me bucko. Oh, and OBSD's default Apache installation is chrooted, which you'll probably defeat after your first CGI integration experience.
I like OBSD a lot, and I don't mean to suggest that it's only good for embedding in a router. But if your application requirements are remotely bleeding edge (and you want to save yourself some work at the risk of some unquantifiable security exposure) then you might want to look elsewhere.
Re:Great for your firewall, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
All the "widely" used mailingprograms are available for OpenBSD, what's your problem with them?
Sure there is some stuff missing in ports/packages but they're getting fewer by the day. If you miss something go a head an make a port of it.
Re:Great for your firewall, but... (Score:3, Informative)
Ports are often behind the most recent releases of things, which is kinda bothersome, but if you want to fix that then get involved and start talking on the ports mailing list. Take over the unmanaged ones and add your own.
That's the best part about a system like this, if you want to, you can change things.
At least the fish is open about it now (Score:3, Funny)
Now take a look at the OpenBSD web page [openbsd.org]. Just try and tell me the fish didn't finally come out of the closet with this release. The raised eyebrow, the pouty lips, the rainbow background. I told you.
Sigh, I hate people.
Re:iso image Torrent (Score:3, Informative)
That's irony, right? (Score:3, Funny)
Fanboy.
Re:Neither irony nor sarcasm (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm primarily a Linux user who does some OpenBSD on the side. I don't use GUIs that much, I configure everything by hand, and I do a lot of coding. I've written kernel stuff.
I can tell you that it is clear that OpenBSD is simpler, more consistent, and just plain makes more sense than Linux. Coming from Linux, OpenBSD is more than a joy to work with.
Linux is very ad-hoc. It just sort of "grew." It was developed in many places by many people, few of them working together with the big context of "the Linux system" in mind. The pace of development is very rush-rush-rush, and for example many times, the approach of the kernel developers is "let's shove this out to userland and let distributors worry about writing a script to make sense of it."
OpenBSD is the opposite. People working on OpenBSD core packages have a specific kernel, userland, config script, etc., etc. in mind. There is a concept of "the OpenBSD system" and it is fairly consistent. People are working together to acheive that goal. The pace of development is more relaxed, and the people working on the userland are some of the same folks writing the kernel. So you don't get the sort of ad-hoc interfaces that make no sense to anything but a shell script (i.e. iptables), you get something which at every level, the user can get an idea how it works (i.e. pf).
Or take wireless. Until recently I had a Linux box set up as a wireless access point. To do that I had to play around with different kernel modules, some of them shipping with the kernel, some of them not, ad nauseum until something worked. This was very annoying.
Awhile ago I put the very same wireless card in an OpenBSD box whose software had not been updated in a few years. The card just worked! Without rebuilding or changing any config files, the card was detected.
Then, I put a 2-line file in
The fact is, OpenBSD just does things the Right Way. People say OpenBSD's big strength is security, but that's slightly missing the point. OpenBSD's strength is correctness. From correctness yields stability, security, and all around ease of use.
You can call me a fanboy, but I say OpenBSD wins hands down against any Linux distribution, with the only exception being that Linux generally supports more hardware, quicker.
Re:Neither irony nor sarcasm (Score:4, Insightful)
Since you insist. (Score:2, Funny)
You can call me a fanboy, but I say
OK, you're a fanboy.
Re:Yes, you are a fanboy (Score:4, Informative)
Even the packages that ARE from external sources are better integrated.
(By the way: for every Linux distro I've used, the default kernel always lacks something or doesn't work in some way, and I always end up building a custom one. With OpenBSD, the default kernel is much better than any default Linux kernel I've seen.)
If you disagree with my accessments on integration, I encourage you to look at a base OpenBSD system, and a Debian base system, compare the two, and I think it will be very clear which is better integrated. Look, particularly, at the headers, and the interfaces between kernel and userland, some of the manpages for kernel features, and this is easily apparent.
And remember, I'm writing this all as a Debian user. I use Debian much more often than I use OpenBSD.
As for your last argument, about how many people use Linux: This proves nothing. I can just as easily say, "Look how many people use Microsoft Windows! Obviously, it must be better!"
Re:Disco Stu doesn't advertise (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good! (Score:5, Funny)
William the Conqueror was a bastard too, and you'll notice that you don't have anyone on the English throne named Ethelbert or or Athelstan.
Re:Good! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:But, but... (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe. What color is your mouse?
Probably not. (Score:2)
The biggest difference is really in philosophy, because most really important things that any free OS has get shared.
Traditionally:
OpenBSD is ridiculously secure, sometimes at the cost of speed or similarity of structure. It is ideal for important routers and servers
Re:But, but... (Score:2)
I like OpenBSD better in general, but Debian is a lot less work as a desktop OS and I'm lazy. OpenBSD runs my firewall/server and Debian-testing my desktop.
The documentation is MUCH better than any Linux I've used, which may be a
Re:Where did the devil put the .iso images... (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.wbglinks.net/pages/openbsd/installatio
Re:Where did the devil put the .iso images... (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq3.html#ISO
You can't get them (officially). If it's that much trouble to do that once for an OS that is truly a joy to work with then you're priorities are screwed up.
Buy the official CDs and support the project, roll up your sleeves and make your own or use another OS. It's a free world.
Re:Where did the devil put the .iso images... (Score:2, Informative)
It's easier to just do an FTP install.
Well, once the mirrors calm down in a few days anyway.
Re:Where did the devil put the .iso images... (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.webengr.com/development/tools/openbsd/
Re:Where did the devil put the .iso images... (Score:2)
Did I leave the smiley emoticon out again? I guess I was dumb enough to do that.
Actually, the last half-dozen new OS releases I been downloading the
Re:Where did the devil put the .iso images... (Score:4, Informative)
Method 1:
Download the boot ISO (there is a boot ISO available for download), burn to CD, boot, set up your hard disk, then tell it to do an FTP install.
Method 2:
Download the boot ISO, and also download all the basic packages (the ones in the form of base37.tgz etc.) Burn the boot ISO to one CD, then create a normal CD containing all the packages.
Boot the bootable CD, swap the CDs over, then tell it to install from CD.
Using the two CD method, I can go from a blank computer to a working OpenBSD system in less than 15 minutes.
Re:DHCP? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:OpenBSD for a linux user (Score:3, Informative)
The documentation is second to none. That includes all the Linuxes I've tried as well as the BSDs. The fact that it's actually worth reading the docs means you do it early and often, which is nice.
Installing things out of ports is about as easy as any of the other good package managers I've used on Linux. The o