<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
On 09/29/2016 11:52 PM, Peter King via talk wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:45:09AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen via talk wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So for me, bsd is only a necessary evil to be used if linux won't run
on the hardware, and the last time I had to resort to netbsd to get a
machine running and doing useful stuff was about 18 years ago.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
This is the GTALinuxUserGroup...<br>
<br>
In general I am not a fan of BSD and my experiences go back as far
as the 80's<br>
Once I found linux and started downloading the floppy sets I never
looked back.<br>
<br>
I have run into the argument of people claiming that some BSD
variant is better than linux in some way or other and often when
pressed the comparison is years old and based on a 0.99 version of
the Linux kernel.<br>
<br>
Because of its dominant position Linux tends to vacuum up good ideas
from all other operating systems.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
The *BSD software ecosystem lags behind Linux in hardware support; as far
as I'm concerned, the ports/packages system is years behind Gentoo, Debian,
Arch, and others; the communities are smaller and much less open.</pre>
</blockquote>
In general linux packaging systems under linux have moved forward
greatly over the years and for the most part it seems that the
packaging system is what tends to be the first discriminator between
distributions.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
For all that...
OpenBSD is where we get things like openssh from. Their packet-filtering
system, PF, is a joy and a delight. The continuous code-auditing means
that kernelspace *and* userspace programs that make up the system are often
rewritten to get rid of cruft, and run cleanly and efficiently. They are a</pre>
</blockquote>
SSH and PF were developed in the days when linux was not a real
option for people working in research and since then both features
have been included in linux along with a lot of linux only
development.<br>
<br>
I cannot comment much on the code auditing but that will be a small
subset of the software that people commonly think of as the
"system".<br>
For example I am sure the code auditing does not include things like
X and the associated window managers which most people would think
of as part of the "system".<br>
<br>
When someone installs Ubuntu they get a whole environment installed
by default not just a kernel, package manager and some utilities(ala
slackware et al on floppies).<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
remarkable implementation of UNIX, without the ``better ideas'' such as
systemd, and they are all phenomenally stable -- even more so than Linux.</pre>
</blockquote>
Not sure why people have a hate on for systemd.<br>
It is a pain to learn a new way to manage your systems but it solves
a number of problems and gets systems into a usable state faster in
the face of startup problems.<br>
I curse systemd on a daily basis because my fingers know init but
quite frankly having to wait 30 minutes for a system to boot up with
init because some network connections need to time out is a major
pain when its a critical system and the phones are all lit up.<br>
systemd removes the single threaded-ness of init and also provides a
much better mechanism for dependency resolution.<br>
<br>
Linux is also amazingly stable if you are willing to stay away from
the bleeding edge.<br>
I am sure you will spend lots of time rebooting if you like to run
the BSD nightly releases.<br>
I have a lot of Linux systems that I need to support that are well
over 10 years old.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Granted, some of that comes from not having drivers for the latest hardware
and innovations. But if clean and debugged code matter to you, if you want
better deep ideas like privilege separation and default security, then I'd</pre>
</blockquote>
A number of that security ideas go back to the 80s.<br>
Sun was selling Compartment Mode workstations in the 90's<br>
Some very inserting work was done on secure operating systems at the
UofT using the Turing programming language and a complete
redevelopment and redesign of a unix compatible OS.<br>
<br>
Linux now has selinux after a lot of work from the NSA and it
incorporates ideas back to the 80s' and before.<br>
<br>
Linux has cgroups that are the basis of the container boom but it
has a number of interesting abilities when used for complex network
configurations.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
say there is a reason to have a look at OpenBSD. If you run a server, then
you should definitely look at it. There's a reason why the internet ran on
*BSD for so long, and why much of it still does.</pre>
</blockquote>
I would kind of dispute that much of the internet runs on BSD.<br>
The guys at Cisco would be way more aggressive about refuting that.<br>
I still have the SUN information highway T-shirt but at the time I
was working there I was running my ISP on linux.<br>
If you look at just about every home router appliance out there you
will find it has a whole lot of GPL code built in with the kernel
included.<br>
So by sheer numbers of computers BSD is going to be way down there.<br>
Then you have all the android devices.....<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20160930035259.GC7290@amber" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
FreeBSD is the most common platform but has fewer distinctive features.
NetBSD runs on almost anything, including toothbrushes, but is otherwise
pretty plain vanilla.
</pre>
<br>
</blockquote>
LUGians unite we can defeat the evil hoards of OS disbelievers ;)<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Alvin Starr || voice: (905)513-7688
Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:alvin@netvel.net">alvin@netvel.net</a> ||
</pre>
</body>
</html>