Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Operating Systems Software Unix Upgrades Technology BSD

OpenBSD 5.2 Released 141

Posted by samzenpus
from the check-it-out dept.
An anonymous reader writes "OpenBSD 5.2 has been released and is available for download. One of the most significant changes in this release is the replacement of the user-level uthreads by kernel-level rthreads, allowing multithreaded programs to utilize multiple CPUs/cores."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OpenBSD 5.2 Released

Comments Filter:
  • Good News! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Noryungi (70322) on Thursday November 01, 2012 @06:58PM (#41848517) Homepage Journal

    Yeah, Netcraft confirms it is dying, yadda, yadda, yadda, etc... Linus said they were masturbating monkeys, the 1990s called, and they want their rthreads back, etc... etc...

    Seriously, folks, if you haven't tried OpenBSD before, give it a spin, you might like it. Sure, it ain't no penguin, but that nice pointy fish is stable, solid, secure and quite a nice little beast to work with. I have had nothing but good experiences with that OS.

    Just my US$ 0.02.

    • Re:Good News! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Spy Handler (822350) on Thursday November 01, 2012 @07:13PM (#41848647) Homepage Journal

      Ponderosa Puff wouldn't take no guff
      Water oughta be clean and free
      So he fought the fight and he set things right
      With his OpenBSD [openbsd.org]

    • Re:Good News! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mr_da3m0n (887821) on Thursday November 01, 2012 @09:41PM (#41849631) Homepage
      Also, the documentation is pretty amazing. They treat inaccuracies and omissions in documentation with the same urgency as a security vulnerability. Seriously, it's pretty stellar, reading the man page for any driver usually explains how to fix the issue you are currently having. All the documentation is there, everything is covered exhaustively, yet entirely tersely. It's extremely polished, beyond its crude, bare appearance in general. It has sane defaults and very clear, simple mechanics with little ambuity -- everything is manageable, everything is transparent. It's one of the rare platforms on which when something doesn't work, I am usually safe in assuming I did something wrong, or there was something I didn't quite understand or just overlooked entirely. It is in many aspects my favorite unix flavor, it feels like it is made of simple, immutable things I can trust to behave in a consistent way, it makes for a pretty relaxed experience, when so few things are opaque.
    • Well in 2006 they were in some trouble http://bsd.slashdot.org/story/06/03/21/1555243/openbsd-project-in-financial-danger [slashdot.org] If they are still in trouble they hung on a long time and are still kicking. lol I am more of a Freebsd guy but I have used this distro in the past not bad I liked it.
  • i miss openbsd (Score:5, Informative)

    by resfilter (960880) on Thursday November 01, 2012 @09:03PM (#41849419)

    i used to use it a lot

    it doesnt' have much going for it, in the scheme of modern unix-like operating systems.. it's a bit of an underdog. it doesn't have fancy high-performance schedulers, its io layer is slow.. it's missing drivers for lots of commodity hardware, some of them because of principles.. theo is an asshole sometimes, with his constant 'im always right and you're always an idiot' thing.. but..

    for one, the documentation is beautiful. whoever maintains the documentation should get a medal. there are few typos, everything has a man page, and every man page has EXAMPLES and is easy to understand. better than any other operating system out there. and that's a big plus: if you try any linux distribution and find an unfamilar file in /etc, you have a 50/50 shot of it being documented properly. with openbsd, it's garunteed

    because their entire mission is based on thorough auditing, they make sure their code is very well documented and easy to understand. that's a big bonus too. modifying and developing on openbsd, as a platform, is a very nice experience

    openssh is a very beautifully written piece of software. it's nice to use, and it's nice to read the source code. when is the last time it gave you any problems? openbsd is an entire operating system written with the same standards.

    give it a try if you haven't, it wont hurt you.. virtual machines don't cost anything..

  • by ipquickly (1562169) on Thursday November 01, 2012 @11:20PM (#41850159) Homepage

    Who the hell cares about how Theo treats other people?
    Did Steve Jobs piss people off? Did he not treat other people like shit on numerous occasions?
    Yet people still lust after Apple products.

    You buy/use the product for the sake of the product.

    I can set up my OpenBSD server and forget about it for a year, with almost a guarantee that it hasn't been hacked.

    That's why I use OpenBSD.

    And if Theo is an asshole then Steve Jobs was a much bigger one.

    • by unixisc (2429386)

      I was reading up Wiki on Theo, and it said there that Theo's opposition to the war in Iraq ultimately impacted DARPA funding all BSD projects, not just OBSD. Actually, I happen to think that DARPA yanking its funding from anything related to him was related more to his refusal to withold OBSD security software from enemy countries, which is easy to do, since Canada doesn't have the laws that the US has against dealing w/ rogue countries. So any other OS that uses his security software would be unwelcome i

      • by Desler (1608317)

        I'm just not following - how does that work? I know why people are opposed to GPL, but I'm just not getting why he is?

        The issue was that there were drivers that were dual-licensed BSD and GPL. The Linux people were taking this code, modifying it but only releasing it back as GPL (which was allowed by the copyright holder who had dual-licensed it). In a more general case, you can take BSD-licensed code and use it within a work that is ultimately GPLed and make all your additions to that code GPL, too. This means that the Linux/GPL side can freely use the work of the BSD people all they want, but the reverse is not true a

        • by tlhIngan (30335)

          The issue was that there were drivers that were dual-licensed BSD and GPL. The Linux people were taking this code, modifying it but only releasing it back as GPL (which was allowed by the copyright holder who had dual-licensed it). In a more general case, you can take BSD-licensed code and use it within a work that is ultimately GPLed and make all your additions to that code GPL, too. This means that the Linux/GPL side can freely use the work of the BSD people all they want, but the reverse is not true as y

        • by unixisc (2429386)

          The licenses have their differences - BSDL allows people to combine BSD licensed software w/ others, whereas GPL requires combinations to be treated as GPL. But the main thing about GPL is that all the source code has to be available w/ everything - something that Theo endorses, even at the level of binary blobs (granted, they mean different things in GPL and BSDL). So the GPL license automatically contaminating a software is something Theo should welcome, given that it would force the source code to be m

    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Friday November 02, 2012 @03:55AM (#41850931) Journal

      The problem is that Theo treats developers badly. We've had a few ex-OpenBSD developers join FreeBSD, and NetBSD has been more successful (their kernel is more similar, so it's probably an easier migration path) because Theo's rudeness has been the last straw for them. He's also prevented new developers, such as the author of mult (something like recursive jails) from joining the project. This doesn't affect users directly, but if the developers start going elsewhere then it means that the platform evolves more slowly and does affect users.

      Steve Jobs was undoubtedly also an asshole to his employees, but typically only those that interacted with him directly (and were therefore the fairly senior people, not the ones doing most of the implementation work) and Apple had one advantage that OpenBSD doesn't: it was paying those developers directly.

    • You buy/use the product for the sake of the product.

      "Buying" an OS is not like buying a lawn chair. No matter how secure you think your OS is. You have to update systems. OpenBSD had remote holes in the default install in 1997, 2002, and 2007. We're about due for another, huh?

      But more to the point, the mentality of the leader sets the mentality of the group and it affects membership. Operating systems don't spring up out of nothing. They're made by groups of people, and those people determine how the

  • ...if only ACPI suspend/resume worked well.

    Linux gets it right, why can't the BSDs? Actually, I haven't tried it with NetBSD, maybe I will.

  • by funkboy (71672) on Friday November 02, 2012 @05:30AM (#41851223) Homepage

    ...film at 11.

    We all know that. But do not confuse "the man" with "the OS". Theo probably maintains less control over OpenBSD than Linus does over Linux (a lot of what he does involves maintaining the project's resources and logistics so that the developers can get on with their work rather than dealing with hardware and sysadmin stuff). Yes, he's the founder & leader of the project, but OpenBSD developers are amazing and could easily continue the project without him if required (not that that's at all likely to happen any time soon). Corporations would kill to have this consistent level of developer talent.

    Which is why I've been using OpenBSD for 15 years for critical systems, and have no plans to change that.

  • They want their SMT back.

As the trials of life continue to take their toll, remember that there is always a future in Computer Maintenance. -- National Lampoon, "Deteriorata"

Working...