[HN Gopher] OpenBSD 7.3
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenBSD 7.3
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 223 points
       Date   : 2023-04-10 14:00 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.openbsd.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.openbsd.org)
        
       | ianai wrote:
       | Is there much that absolutely can't be ran on OpenBSD without
       | dropping into code? With its history of sane security it might
       | offer some useful applications now.
        
         | ksec wrote:
         | If you do a search the number one problem or concern for
         | running OpenBSD is performance. And I dont think much has
         | changed. I dont doubt there are certain domain where you would
         | value security over everything.
        
           | kjs3 wrote:
           | OpenBSD had pretty poor support for SMP for quite a while,
           | but lots of work has gone into fixing that in the last
           | decade. That plus how much smaller the OpenBSD footprint is
           | than, say, Linux, and you might find these days it performs
           | pretty well.
        
             | __turbobrew__ wrote:
             | Is packet filtering still single threaded? I remember pf
             | could only could only use a single core at a time which
             | made filtering more than 1 Gb/s problematic.
        
               | kjs3 wrote:
               | I believe it is. I will, however, admit that while I use
               | OBSD extensively for networking devices (routers, etc.),
               | I haven't had much call for multigig networking on them.
               | I will say that it will easily do 1G routing+PF+VLAN on
               | rather modest hardware (J4105, dual i211 ports).
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | It's threaded as of recently. Before that the throughput
               | obviously hinged on single-core performance. 1 Gbit/s
               | sounds like lower tier laptop spec to me. My 2015 low-
               | power Celeron test rig could do ~700 Mbit/sec through a
               | medium complexity PF ruleset on OpenBSD versions where PF
               | was still single-threaded.
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | I had issues with some Rust-backed python libraries, last time
         | I tried to use it in anger.
        
           | Foobar8568 wrote:
           | Basically anything that is not C/C++ is a pain on non linux
           | system...
        
         | perihelions wrote:
         | Most of the proprietary world, things like Mathematica and fast
         | WiFi (they only support up through 802.11n, I believe), and the
         | entirety of Steam. Things where for-profit companies make an
         | effort to support Linux, but ignore smaller OS's. So it's a
         | monastic experience compared to the modern Linux desktop.
         | 
         | (Monasteries are beautiful - still won't choose to live in
         | one!)
        
           | t-3 wrote:
           | > (they only support up through 802.11n, I believe)
           | 
           | Some newer wifi (iwx at least) work at higher speeds, but I
           | believe this is mostly due to hardware functionality being
           | moved to firmware. 802.11ac should be supported, but I
           | haven't followed closely enough to know how well and in what
           | drivers.
        
             | t-3 wrote:
             | > hardware functionality being moved to firmware
             | 
             | Sorry for my lack of proofreading, this was not written
             | correctly. Functions that were formerly handled in software
             | drivers are now being handled in firmware by many wireless
             | NICs.
        
         | 5e92cb50239222b wrote:
         | "Modern" .NET is not compatible with it (or as Microsoft would
         | say, "OpenBSD is not compatible with .NET"), and there doesn't
         | seem to be much interest in resolving that. For comparison, it
         | is available from official repositories at least on Ubuntu,
         | Fedora, RHEL, and Arch Linux, and I use it daily to build and
         | host stuff for $DAYJOB.
        
           | tester756 wrote:
           | As far as I've been there was some effort in .NET for BSD
           | 
           | https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/issues/14537 700 comments
           | 
           | https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/docs/workflow/re.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/issues/71338
           | 
           | https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/docs/workflow/bu.
           | ..
        
           | clort wrote:
           | I don't know about .NET or OpenBSD specifically but Mono
           | claims to be available on all BSD platforms ->
           | https://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/supported-
           | platf...
        
           | daneel_w wrote:
           | Is there a huge difference between that and what Mono offers?
        
             | dvzk wrote:
             | Yes, and this is tantamount to suggesting that Python
             | developers should be satisfied with Python 2.0 (arguably
             | 1.0 if you do F# development). Mono is effectively dead and
             | abandoned, and it only exists now for historical reasons.
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | _> "Yes, and this is tantamount to suggesting that Python
               | developers should be satisfied with Python 2.0 (arguably
               | 1.0 if you do F# development). Mono is effectively dead
               | and abandoned, and it only exists now for historical
               | reasons."_
               | 
               | There's no suggestion being made here, directly or
               | implied. I'm asking because I have no experience with
               | .NET and am for the most part unfamiliar with both it and
               | Mono, but my colleagues recently spent a fair bit of time
               | to "de-dotNETify" a large chunk of our platform and move
               | it towards running entirely on Mono, and I figured they
               | knew what they were doing.
        
               | 5e92cb50239222b wrote:
               | The "new .NET" (which used to be called .NET Core not
               | long ago -- the whole versioning scheme is a total fiasco
               | on their part) is relatively cross-platform, but is not
               | fully compatible with the old one (which is only
               | available on Windows and hasn't been updated for many
               | years). Your colleagues probably ported an old .NET
               | project to Mono to move it off Windows. The usual thing
               | these days is to port old projects to the "new .NET"
               | instead, but it isn't always possible (because full
               | compatibility between the two was a non-goal from the
               | start).
               | 
               | Anyways, as dvzk has mentioned, Mono is a completely
               | separate project and is not a replacement for current
               | dotnet. Last time I checked, an experimental FreeBSD port
               | was available, but MS doesn't seem to care very much
               | about any of the BSDs.
        
               | dvzk wrote:
               | Sorry! I shouldn't have assumed that it was a retort.
               | Mono's latest supported .NET framework (v4.8) is four
               | years old, or even older if you include the general
               | movement to .NET Core, and it only supports C# versions
               | <= 9.0 (via Roslyn), also 2-3 years old.
               | 
               | msbuild, the toolchain still used by Mono, has also been
               | widely replaced by dotnet (CLI).
               | 
               | It's still (decreasingly) common to use Mono for cross-
               | platform development, especially for Unity, which hasn't
               | yet transitioned to .NET >= 7.0.
        
         | enriquto wrote:
         | > Is there much that absolutely can't be ran on OpenBSD
         | 
         | Virtual machines for non-openbsd guests? That's the only thing
         | blocking me to fully move to openbsd.
        
           | zokier wrote:
           | Faq says that vmm supports Linux guests?
           | https://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq16.html
        
             | t-3 wrote:
             | Yes, Linux guests work. A bigger issue is the lack of
             | hardware acceleration or passthru support for virtual
             | machines.
        
               | mrpippy wrote:
               | Only supporting a single CPU in the guest is a
               | significant limitation too
        
         | seanw444 wrote:
         | There seems to be a fairly low memory limit on processes, so
         | when I tried to run a Minecraft server on my OpenBSD system, it
         | complained about not having enough memory to start. Turns out
         | the value seems to be hardcoded and compiled into the kernel.
         | So... I'm not really sure how to run high-memory processes at
         | this point, without self-compiling it in its entirety, which I
         | don't really feel like doing.
        
           | t-3 wrote:
           | The limits are set in login.conf, it's not hardcoded.
        
             | seanw444 wrote:
             | Tried that. There's still a limit on top of that.
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | That limit is 32 GiB. Hard to call it "fairly low". If
               | you encountered a lower limit then it's something you can
               | tune in login.conf.
        
               | smabie wrote:
               | 32gb seems pretty low? pretty routine in a lot of
               | different domains to have processes using 10s/100s of gbs
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | It's not pretty low, or objectively low, but it can be
               | considered relatively low. The average amount of RAM in
               | desktops and laptops is still <32 GiB. From this
               | perspective it's a very high limit.
        
               | __turbobrew__ wrote:
               | Many servers have over 32 GiB of RAM.
        
               | daneel_w wrote:
               | Get outta here, man. No way.
        
               | seanw444 wrote:
               | I routinely work with one with 256 GiB of RAM.
        
               | prmoustache wrote:
               | And you use that one to run minecraft servers. Riiiight.
        
               | seanw444 wrote:
               | I didn't say that?
        
               | kouteiheika wrote:
               | Depends on what you do; I routinely use double that, and
               | for me even my 64GB starts to be limiting.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | xxpor wrote:
           | It's relatively straight forward to recompile the kernel.
           | Especially compared to Linux.
           | 
           | https://man.openbsd.org/release#2._Build_and_install_a_new_k.
           | ..
        
         | LeoPanthera wrote:
         | Hardware-wise, OpenBSD (deliberately) has no support for
         | Bluetooth.
        
           | kelp wrote:
           | Because their previous Bluetooth implementation was broken in
           | various ways, and no one volunteered to fix it. So they just
           | removed it.
        
       | j_not_j wrote:
       | Every six months for the last 24 or 25 years (the web pages came
       | after the early releases so a bit of uncertainty there. Explore
       | for yourself at https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/www/)
       | 
       | And even vi gets fixes these days (Fixed handling of escaped
       | backslashes in vi(1) ex_range).
        
         | gladiatr72 wrote:
         | Nice. I ran into an nvi bug years ago... if ":set numbers" and
         | ":set noleftright" and then loaded a file of more than several
         | kilobytes it would go into a malloc loop and segfault. We
         | tracked it down and submitted a patch (this was to FreeBSD) and
         | was told patches to src/contrib were not accepted (nvi was
         | still "owned" by sleepycat). Good to know that at a certain
         | point, function can overtake form!
        
         | mattl wrote:
         | Almost 28 years.
         | 
         | 6.8 was released Oct 18, 2020. (OpenBSD's 25th anniversary)
         | 
         | https://www.openbsd.org/68.html
        
       | somat wrote:
       | Release engineering: Verb
       | 
       | see OpenBSD
        
         | unethical_ban wrote:
         | When I was in college I followed FreeBSD and Solaris for a bit
         | just to dabble outside Ubuntu and Fedora.
         | 
         | I remember looking for info on FreeBSD versions and wondering
         | what the heck RELENG was.
        
         | sillywalk wrote:
         | Theo DeRaat (OpenBSD leader) did a talk on the OpenBSD release
         | process back in 2009 [0]
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://www.openbsd.org/papers/asiabsdcon2009-release_engine...
        
       | alberth wrote:
       | I've always found building/running your app code on OpenBSD (even
       | if it's not your target OS) - makes for a better app overall
       | because of how strict OpenBSD is - it forces your app to run
       | "correctly" more than any other OS.
       | 
       | I've been able to find and fix way more app bugs, than when I ran
       | my software on other OS'es
        
         | darknavi wrote:
         | Any specific examples? I don't daily drive Linux but that
         | sounds interesting.
         | 
         | Somewhat related, for Minecraft (Bedrock, C++) we compile with
         | a ton of different tool chains and I really appreciate Clang
         | versus MSVC for how strict the compiler can be (even with
         | /-permissive).
        
       | jmclnx wrote:
       | About to upgrade my amd64 system.
       | 
       | I already upgraded my very old i386 (R51e), no issues and very
       | easy. I am getting some mystery core dumps, will look at that
       | later. I suspect the new "Permissions (RWX, MAP_STACK, etc.) on
       | address space regions". but only guessing :) On the i386 I am
       | planning on using a new "old" disk since the old disk is getting
       | tight. Then I will worry about the dumps after an install.
       | 
       |  _edit:_ Fully updated to 7.3 on amd64, no issues all working
       | perfect. Again easy no no manual configs for me.
        
       | MobiusHorizons wrote:
       | Exciting to see some initial work to support the rk3588 soc. It
       | has a lot of potential for use as a NAS or router or home server.
        
         | neodypsis wrote:
         | Could it support the PinePhone?
        
           | Panino wrote:
           | Not yet, but see this:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30019823
        
       | synack wrote:
       | I wish I could run OpenBSD on the arm64 EC2 instances. Last I
       | checked, there's no driver for Amazon's ENA network interface.
        
       | higherhalf wrote:
       | There's something mildly charming about fixes to ed(1) in
       | software released today.
       | 
       | > Fixed ed(1) to print bytes read/written and the ? prompt to
       | stdout, not stderr.
        
         | hestefisk wrote:
         | ed is still the standard editor.
        
           | cperciva wrote:
           | And there's even a book about it, in case anyone has trouble
           | figuring out how to use ed:
           | https://www.tiltedwindmillpress.com/product/ed/
        
             | codetrotter wrote:
             | Love the books by mwl. Have physical copies of several of
             | them, and the whole bunch of the ebook versions. Currently
             | reading one of the physical copies. The one about Ed I have
             | in ebook format only and didn't read it yet. Will get to
             | that one after I finish reading the physical books that I
             | have from him.
        
           | VWWHFSfQ wrote:
           | what do you mean by standard editor
        
             | mrweasel wrote:
             | The POSIX standard defines ed as one of the editors that
             | must be present for a system to be standard complaint, the
             | other being vi I believe. You can always expect ed to be
             | available to you on a Unix system.
        
               | doubled112 wrote:
               | This was initially why I learned enough of the vi
               | keybinds to get by.
               | 
               | You can expect it to be there.
        
               | znpy wrote:
               | You can expect that on a unix system that has applied,
               | paid and received the unix certification.
               | 
               | Most linux distros (and most BSDs afaik) are not unix
               | certified.
               | 
               | MacOS is, for that matter.
        
               | edgyquant wrote:
               | They still have ed though, do they not?
        
               | msla wrote:
               | Inspur K-UX is a Linux distribution that is officially a
               | Unix.
        
               | fdschonborn wrote:
               | OpenEuler, Huawei's version of RHEL, is also UNIX-
               | certified.
        
               | krylon wrote:
               | I wonder what benefit the certification has these days.
               | IIUC, it used to be a requirement for contracts from
               | large corporations and government agencies, but these
               | days the number of commercial Unix systems is fairly
               | small, and RHEL is so common in those environments, I
               | wonder if it there's still places where it's required.
        
               | zinekeller wrote:
               | POSIX != Unix (the certification)
               | 
               | It is true that all certified Unix systems follows POSIX,
               | but it doesn't mean that non-certified systems are
               | forbidden to follow POSIX. Most Linux distributions have
               | ways to turn to 98% compliant, and BSDs have always
               | strive to follow POSIX.
               | 
               | Weird fact: POSIX was actually named by RMS.
        
               | chungy wrote:
               | OpenBSD was fairly anti-POSIX in the past. I don't know
               | if that's relaxed at all, but they very much do not chase
               | after it.
        
               | krylon wrote:
               | But they do have ed, vi (plus ex), and mg (which is not
               | standard but nice to have) in their base system.
        
               | zinekeller wrote:
               | ed: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2018
               | edition...
               | 
               | vi: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2018
               | edition...
        
               | chasil wrote:
               | You can see all of the utilities this way. The ex editor
               | is also standard.
               | 
               | https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilitie
               | s/
        
               | madars wrote:
               | TIL: busybox has ed and vi but not ex.
               | https://www.busybox.net/downloads/BusyBox.html (so ex
               | might be nice to learn but it might be not available on
               | common systems like OpenWRT)
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | mstevens wrote:
             | Probably a reference to https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-
             | msg.html
        
             | adl wrote:
             | Here: https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.en.html
        
         | nixcraft wrote:
         | In the old days, Unix rescue boot floppy disk to fix
         | workstations or servers only included minimal text editors such
         | as ed (i think vi was added later). So if you were a Unix admin
         | or power user, you need to know ed to fix the dam system. The
         | 'ed' text editor was available everywhere. These days rescue
         | disks boot from USB or CD/DVD-ROM and may have a full desktops
         | or operating systems running. A little bit of history, I guess.
         | BTW, I prefer https://www.system-rescue.org/ these days to fix
         | Linux bare metals.
        
           | awesomegoat_com wrote:
           | You just reminded me a slightly related strip:
           | http://www.stripcreator.com/comics/elemental/605973
        
           | vbezhenar wrote:
           | Last time I checked, OpenBSD installer didn't have any
           | editors but ed.
        
             | cylinder714 wrote:
             | It comes with vi (nvi, maybe?) and mg, a small Emacs-like
             | editor.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | He means the ramdisk image, not the installed system,
               | which obviously has ed, vi and mg. And xedit.
        
           | kjs3 wrote:
           | Perhaps more important, as a line editor, 'ed' would often
           | work when your terminal was otherwise too borked up for vi or
           | pico to work.
        
             | anyfoo wrote:
             | Though in most cases, you can just type "reset" to reset
             | your terminal to a sane state. If the problem is not the
             | terminal's state, but how software is trying to talk to it,
             | setting TERM=vt100 (with a "reset" for good measure
             | afterwards) usually works for most if not all terminals
             | nowadays.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-04-10 23:01 UTC)