[HN Gopher] OpenBSD/arm64 on Apple M1 systems
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenBSD/arm64 on Apple M1 systems
        
       Author : brynet
       Score  : 274 points
       Date   : 2022-03-19 15:27 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (marc.info)
 (TXT) w3m dump (marc.info)
        
       | messe wrote:
       | Damn, that's awesome. If I wasn't using my M1 air as a daily
       | driver at the moment, I'd already be attempting an install.
       | 
       | I guess I'll keep an eye out for a second hand M1 mini, or wait
       | for a refurbished mini to show up on the Apple online store (in
       | Ireland). Would love to add another RISC system to my home fleet
       | of machines running OpenBSD (and a couple of FreeBSD).
        
       | LeoPanthera wrote:
       | Whatever happened to NetBSD being the version that ran on
       | everything? I discovered the other day that it took them years to
       | even run properly on the Raspberry Pi.
       | 
       | Are they short of money or developers, or is the famed
       | portability of it just not as true as it used to be?
        
         | 1500100900 wrote:
         | The Raspberry Pis are hostile towards non-Linux systems.
        
           | freedomben wrote:
           | Yeah they're even borderline hostile to non raspbian systems.
           | When a new Pi comes out it usually only works for raspbian
           | for quite some time until others put in the work of getting
           | the right stuff together for other distros.
           | 
           | I love raspberry pi but they are definitely not as "open" and
           | drop-in compatible as most people think.
           | 
           | That seems to be a problem with most ARM devices, so may not
           | be specific or the fault of the Pi people.
        
             | hhh wrote:
             | Non-debian would be better, no? Never had an issue with
             | Ubuntu.
        
               | hda111 wrote:
               | I also never had an issue with Ubuntu on Raspberry Pi.
               | They even provide packages to update the EEPROM.
               | 
               | But it doesn't surprise me that it just works since
               | Ubuntu is a commercial distro. They even sell products
               | for the Raspberry Pi version.
        
               | freedomben wrote:
               | How soon after a new Pi model comes out do you try? If
               | you wait 6 months then yes, Ubuntu tends to work fine
               | (although you do still need a specific build. You can't
               | just download a generic one).
               | 
               | I used to use Ubuntu MATE on pi, but when the Pi4 came
               | out it took a long time before it was supported.
        
               | duskwuff wrote:
               | Ubuntu is very closely related to Debian. I'm not sure
               | I'd count it as a "different distribution" so much as "a
               | weird variant of Debian".
        
               | OJFord wrote:
               | Yes but Raspbian is also 'a weird variant of Debian' by
               | that line right? I think you're in agreement with GP; I
               | find a similar thing coming up with Arch & Manjaro (an
               | Arch derivative) - for almost any purpose when someone
               | says 'Arch' it applied to Manjaro too (just less often
               | vice versa).
               | 
               | So, yes, 'non-Debian' which (Debian) includes Raspbian,
               | not 'non-Raspbian' which (Raspbian) precludes Debian.
        
               | freedomben wrote:
               | Yeah I agree, I consider Raspbian "a weird variant of
               | Debian." They add a bunch of packages (some that override
               | upstream debian) and they have some custom software, plus
               | a lot of other customization.
               | 
               | Raspbian is probably closer to Debian than Ubuntu is, but
               | it's still quite clear that you're not on Debian.
        
               | Maursault wrote:
               | Ubuntu _is_ Debian (architecturally), plus the stuff
               | Ubuntu added, so I believe the latter is more practically
               | accurate.
        
           | heinternets wrote:
           | How so?
        
             | burnte wrote:
             | They were designed to run Linux to be cheap so other OSes
             | need drivers.
        
             | Sirened wrote:
             | A lot of the hardware on the board has vendor support in
             | Linux and only Linux. Vendors will write drivers and
             | upstream them to Linux and then just call it a day. You
             | can't get the manuals for those components except under
             | NDA, which makes open source development for non-Linux
             | operating systems a huge pain in the ass.
        
       | lowrider919 wrote:
        
       | qualudeheart wrote:
       | Is openbsd support for puri.sm laptops any good? I don't want to
       | buy a macbook.
        
       | barelyusable wrote:
       | What's the battery life like?
        
         | jasoneckert wrote:
         | Do you mean to ask what the battery management functionality is
         | like (i.e. does the battery drain noticeably faster using
         | OpenBSD)?
         | 
         | If so, I don't know what it's like on the MacBook or MacBook
         | Pro, but on my Mac Mini, I can reliably say that the battery
         | life is dismal ;-)
        
           | lolpython wrote:
           | > but on my Mac Mini, the battery life is dismal.
           | 
           | Possible typo? The Mac Mini does not have a battery.
        
             | foodstances wrote:
             | That's why the battery life is so dismal.
        
               | sroussey wrote:
               | No, no, that's why the battery life is amazing!!!
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | Not sure on OpenBSD, but Asahi said they could get 6-8 hours
         | without any real energy efficiency features enabled.
        
       | spockz wrote:
       | What are the benefits of running (open)BSD on a workstation?
       | Especially a laptop?
       | 
       | Edit: this could of course also be used for running a server on a
       | M1 mini!
        
         | makeitdouble wrote:
         | I'd see it as stability, in the "won't need upgrades" outside
         | of security ones.
         | 
         | A bunch of us have a trail of old macs that are weird to use
         | because of the whole system is stuck on the last supported OS,
         | which happens to be the most bloated for that hardware, and
         | doesn't receive updates anymore. Moving to another simpler
         | system altogether makes it a better proposition. As a matter of
         | choice, BSD is more familiar than linux in many ways.
         | 
         | M1 laptops are not in that position yet, but in 2 years I'd
         | totally imagine getting rid of macos on sub machines.
        
         | zokula wrote:
        
         | atmosx wrote:
         | Benefits? If you are not developing _for_ the platform or don't
         | have specific use cases (e.g. package creation) literally none.
         | It will be an uphill battle where you will spent man-hours
         | trying to find workarounds to things elsewhere are trivial. Or
         | have another system laying around which IMO beats the purpose.
         | 
         | If you are an OS & BSD aficionado, you like to spent time
         | working with OpenBSD because <reasons> ok, but otherwise I
         | would advise against it.
        
         | cyberpunk wrote:
         | It's great, if you don't need something like zoom, or to
         | interact with those weird 'usb button' projectors or whatever.
         | 
         | Or video accelerated YouTube.. Or Microsoft office..
         | 
         | Really, I love OpenBSD, but I only really use it for (internet)
         | networking these days, FreeBSD looks after my storage, and it's
         | all proxmox with ubuntu 20.04 vms running k8s for apps.
         | 
         | Someday I'll switch back, but working as a freelancer with a
         | lot of different customers bsds are just too painful to run
         | bare metal (def works with ssh/mosh/tmux though!)
        
           | wolverine876 wrote:
           | Most people do most things in a web browser these days. Can't
           | Microsoft Office be used as a hosted app in a browser, at
           | least the bulk of common functionality?
        
         | messe wrote:
         | Honestly, the biggest advantage OpenBSD has always had for me
         | was its internal consistency and excellent documentation. If
         | you're a heavy command line user, you can usually figure out
         | either what command you need to run or what you need to look up
         | in the man pages. It's also great for C development, as it has
         | far better docs for libc than glibc does.
         | 
         | If you have supported hardware (and that's a bit if and caveat;
         | smaller than it used to be, but still quite large), then
         | everything just works. Even little things like the built-in
         | screen brightness buttons, just work regardless of if you're in
         | x11 or a terminal (same with volume buttons), because it's
         | designed as a complete system rather than a distribution of
         | otherwise unrelated open source projects.
        
           | paulmd wrote:
           | Ya, same for FreeBSD. You can literally operate a system with
           | nothing but the handbook in most cases - the documentation is
           | much more systematic and developed than Linux. What you get
           | isn't just a "how to use a GUI" tutorial or manpages, it's a
           | comprehensive look at how you do routine sysadmin tasks. The
           | kind of thing that Linux pushes off to web tutorials or
           | stackoverflow.
           | 
           | Compare:
           | 
           | https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/ubuntu-help/index.html
           | 
           | https://docs.freebsd.org/doc/13.0-RELEASE/usr/local/share/do.
           | ..
           | 
           | It of course helps that nothing ever changes in BSD-land.
           | After 50 years of development, they are largely feature-
           | complete and are not going to be doing massive changes just
           | for the sake of massive changes. As such they get much lower
           | levels of "documentation rot", things rust a lot slower when
           | nothing ever changes and as such it's a lot easier (and more
           | productive) to build comprehensive documentation.
           | 
           | But the amount of churn in linux is insane, Ubuntu has used
           | _three completely different init systems_ in the 15 years
           | since I started using Linux seriously. For java development,
           | I routinely see and use StackOverflow answers from like 2009
           | that are completely valid still, and yet answers from that
           | era are completely useless for Linux, which has invalidated
           | that acquired-knowledge _twice_ since then. You can pretty
           | much sysadmin FreeBSD out of the handbook, and if you need to
           | search then an answer from 2009 is usually still valid.
           | 
           | It's absolutely a cathedral-vs-bazaar situation. Cathedral is
           | presented as a negative in that metaphor, but the cathedral
           | ensures enough stability that you can start Having Nice
           | Things instead of just constantly scrambling to rewrite
           | everything every time a vendor thinks they've built a better
           | mousetrap.
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | > ...it's a comprehensive look at how you do routine
             | sysadmin tasks. The kind of thing that Linux pushes off to
             | web tutorials or stackoverflow.
             | 
             | A lot of useful material with near-official status is kept
             | under the Linux Documentation Project, https://tldp.org/
             | They have a git repository at https://github.com/tLDP/LDP
             | 
             | There are some cases of real churn in Linux but they're
             | rare. The new init systems and such come with plenty of
             | useful features that simplify many administration tasks:
             | the reason for people being so unsatisfied with them is
             | that they bring lots of what's effectively cowboy-coded
             | hacks and prototype-quality code in order to enable these
             | features. But rewriting all of this stuff from the ground
             | up with a clean, Unix-like design (or rather, Plan9-,
             | Limbo- or Amoeba-like, given that Linux now supports the
             | needed foundational features for these) while preserving
             | its feature set would involve _more_ rather than _less_
             | churn.
        
               | silverlyra wrote:
               | > or rather, Plan9-, Limbo- or Amoeba-like [design],
               | given that Linux now supports the needed foundational
               | features for these
               | 
               | I'd be curious to hear more about what you're referring
               | to, if you were willing to expand. What foundational
               | features are new to Linux that would be really useful for
               | cleaner init system (etc.) designs?
        
           | brundolf wrote:
           | Sounds like it might address a lot of the misgivings I have
           | with using Linux as a workstation; maybe I'll play with it
           | some time
        
             | messe wrote:
             | It's not a perfect OS, but it's definitely pleasant to use.
             | 
             | These days I'm on macOS, mainly because of the hardware but
             | also a few pieces of software that I have hard time
             | replacing (Scrivener and Mathematica).
        
               | tksb wrote:
               | Scrivener is a gem for sure, but I'm always curious if
               | anyone actively using it has tried Highland? I guess I'm
               | biased as it feels extremely "at home" on macOS.
        
         | ori_b wrote:
         | Simple, consistent, well documented, easy to debug, and easy to
         | administer. Comfortable.
        
           | messe wrote:
           | I think "comfortable" sums it up better than anything else.
           | When I run OpenBSD, I know what's running on my system (up
           | until the firmware at least), but more importantly I
           | understand it. Even the kernel is easy to dive into.
        
       | eatonphil wrote:
       | That's really neat, so you install Asahi Linux first and then
       | after that it's easier/possible to install OpenBSD.
        
         | generalizations wrote:
         | I don't understand the details, but it looks like you use the
         | uefi-only option in the installer to install the UEFI
         | 'firmware', which then lets you boot the openbsd installer.
        
           | brynet wrote:
           | Yes, there's an "UEFI environment only" option that only
           | installs m1n1+u-boot (not Linux), OpenBSD/arm64 uses the EFI
           | implementation provided by u-boot.
           | 
           | Mark Kettenis' from the OpenBSD project is responsible for
           | upstreaming Apple M1 support for u-boot, and has been
           | collaborating with the Asahi Linux team.
        
       | Yanker wrote:
       | I was quite literally trying to install OpenBSD on my M1 air
       | yesterday. How about that?
        
       | vaxman wrote:
       | Maybe don't boot your Macs into third-party operating systems
       | (high potential for thermal damage or even misconfiguring
       | mainboard components such that it might cause data loss even when
       | rebooted back into macOS ..if the BSP devs at Apple were sloppy
       | in their initialization code or an "unknown state" is created).
       | Linux on Mac, A/UX, etc. was a Thing back in the day when clock
       | rates were lower and component densities were lower and the
       | machines came chalk full of holes to let the heat out, so running
       | the system "out of spec" had less potential for permanent damage.
       | 
       | Apple-sanctioned alternative operating systems such as VMware
       | ESXi have also caused problems in the past and should not be used
       | at all anymore because Apple does not seem to play well with
       | others on that level (by releasing uncoordinated firmware
       | updates).
        
         | Maursault wrote:
         | > running the system "out of spec" had less potential for
         | permanent damage
         | 
         | You may have a point, unless this insinuated physical damage
         | from altOS on Apple Silicon never appears.
         | 
         | > Apple-sanctioned alternative operating systems such as VMware
         | ESXi have also caused problems in the past and should not be
         | used at all anymore because Apple does not seem to play well
         | with others on that level (by releasing uncoordinated firmware
         | updates).
         | 
         | VMWare currently supports running their bare metal hypervisor
         | on (at least) Intel Mac hardware (except for Mac Pro _due to
         | COVID straining VMWare development_ , and not because ESXi
         | causes Mac Pros to detonate), but does not consider any Mac
         | with VMWare an enterprise-grade setup.
         | 
         | Please accept some humble advice: since there are three and
         | only three reasons to update anything: bugfixes, pressing
         | security issues and the last a need for new features,
         | generally, one should never update firmware, and this is
         | especially true the moment the update appears. In the first
         | case, unless the bug prevents booting, it couldn't be less
         | important, secondly, worrying about firmware security issues is
         | silly, because if you can't physically prevent access to the
         | computer, it's pwned anyway no matter how secure the firmware
         | is. And in the last case, if you have a functioning system in
         | production, then _it doesn 't need new features_, get out of
         | here with needing new features on production. The notion is
         | absurd on it's face.
        
       | wolverine876 wrote:
       | OpenBSD is known for its high quality standards, quality software
       | is resource-intensive to develop, and they are a relatively small
       | team.
       | 
       | As a practical / project management matter, how do they manage to
       | support a diversity of hardware? What proportion of their
       | resources is spent just keeping up with hardware?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-03-19 23:00 UTC)