the bsd thread
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
http://devio.us/
No.
>>53551099
>totally imaginary problems
must be nice
>>53551116
>lalalalalalalala I can't hear you lalalalalala
sndio troubles, m8?
Who here OpenBSD masterrrace
>>53551099
>wahh permissive license
That's all I see
>>53552998
Thanks for ur code m8, well mention you in the credits
>>53553043
Thanks anon, that's all I ask
>>53553081
No problem, cuck
>>53553303
>le cuck maymay
Enjoy your communism
>>53553331
What communism? I work for Apple.
>>53553339
Sure bud
>>53553396
Some has to do the cucking, you know
Where does BSD shine in comparison to linux? Networking? I'd love to try it but if it's just another bash terminal I wouldn't need it.
>>53553448
Why don't you fuck off to reddit and take your shitty meme with you?
>>53553496
Fewer command line options for /bin/echo; that's about it.
>>53553516
Why are you angry? Aren't you supposed to enjoy being cucked?
>>53553531
Because your memes are shit and you're shit
>>53553574
What memes? Are you trying to deny obvious facts? No point in hiding, we all know already.
>>53553600
Using a superior license by no means means you're a cuck. The whole cuck meme is fucking stupid and it's just nonsensical here.
>>53553625
>superior
Only for cucks. No normal individual would ever consider it superior. You're proving my point now.
>fucking stupid
I don't understand why you try to distort the truth.
>>53553657
Forcing people to contribute to your project is not the way to go anon. If you stop spouting stupid memes I'd be happy to continue the argument, but you won't so I'm done.
>>53553680
>Forcing people to contribute to your project
Who said anything about forcing people to do anything? Are you suffering from yet another mental illness?
>stop spouting stupid memes
If you reject reality then maybe we don't have anything to talk about indeed.
>>53553496
Documentaition, simplicity, stability and code correctness.
The base system is developed as one chunk of code, that makes it very homogenous.
Can't say that about a Linux distro, where quality varies wildly between packages.
And well, you put BSD on your server because it is stable, easy to administrate and needs barely any love from the admin.
Or when you want stuff like a mature ZFS implementation, jails or easy to setup package filters or IPsec
>>53553968
>The base system
Worthless without ports.
>>53554027
Not as worthless as your post
>>53554059
Why are you so insecure? The years of getting cucked finally took their toll?
>>53554093
Stop shitting up the thread. We get it, you don't agree with the BSD license.
BSD users itt, do you feel about lpr/lpd?
>>53554106
We're not talking about the BSD license, we're talking about how useless is the base system.
You're a hypocrite if you criticize the "distro packages" when your system uses the same packages to get anything useful done.
>>53554151
I never said packages nor ports were useless.
>>53554151
The OpenBSD base system has nearly everything you would need unless you intend to run it as a desktop OS, in which case you're an idiot and shouldn't be complaining.
>>53554184
OpenBSD works great as a desktop OS
>>53554170
No, I said the base system is useless.
>>53553657
>No normal individual would ever consider (BSD) superior.
You wouldn't call giving 'superior' to lending for the person doing it, either.
>>53554184
>nearly
Doesn't cut it.
>unless you intend to run it as a desktop OS
No sane person intends to run it as anything else than a research toy in a VM.
>>53554214
Which was irrelevant and incorrect
>>53554194
*if you have no use for a computer
>>53554263
Sure bud
>>53554246
You're living a fantasy, but then again I wouldn't expect a cuckold to see reason.
>>53548029
Would you recommend bsd for a netbook recycled into a home server?
>>53554306
Most likely it won't have drivers.
>>53554327
I'd actually be surprised if he was lacking drivers
>>53554327
GNUIDF please go
>>53553043
What kind of a narcissistic greedy attention whore are you? You should be honored anyone found value in your shitty code.
>>53554027
>>53554151
A homogeneous base system plus ports is superior to a series of individual packages and a kernel held together with tape, especially in terms of stability.
>>53554413
lel
Linuxtards only care about performance. Why would they care if a backdoored HWRNG was used if it gives better performance than /dev/urandom?
wow /g/ is genuinely unmoderated
>>53555162
What's new?
Is there a distro that combines Linux's kernel with BSD's userland?
>>53554413
Here's a fun PoC showing how a backdoored source like rdrand can be used to break /dev/random
https://www.alchemistowl.org/pocorgtfo/pocorgtfo03.pdf (page 18)
>>53555177
nothing really, im just amazed that every time there's a BSD thread it just devolves into le epic cuck meme and that reporting everyone involved never does shit
>>53555217
>le epic cuck meme
not a meme if it's true
>>53555217
It only takes one shitposter.
>>53555281
>cuck cuck cuck
Goose
>>53552954
Prefer debian on Desktops. ports is still meh.
Gnu fags shit all over this thread.
>>53553339
>I work for Apple.
he works for Apple
>>53553496
>Networking?
Defcon, yes that Defcon, uses OpenBSD for all their networking shit on the cons live network. It's one of the worlds most hostile networks, at least for a couple days it exists.
Also, quakecon uses OpenBSD for their shit.
>>53557338
The OpenBSD ports system isn't too hot, I agree.
Their binary package management is simple and works really great, though.
>>53555183
Android
>>53557540
>Android
>BSD userland
>>53557540
>>53557685
Yeah, I think most of the time you'll have the Busybox userland, not *BSD.
Still better than the turd that is the GNU coreutils.
>>53557704
Isn't busybox nearly identical to GNU coreutils?
>>53557685
You're right Android uses parts of NetBSD, but most of it is toybox
>>53557753
Not at all.
Compare the code of busybox's and GNU's cat.c.
https://gist.github.com/pete/665971
It's also hilarious to see GNU's implementation of true.c, which is about 70 lines, when it can be implemented in 3.
>>53557753
In functionality, yes**
In implementation, not at all
>** Well, not really, but sort-of.
>>53557685
Where the fuck did you get the impression that Android was using a BSD userland? What BSD? You do know there are like 14 relevant BSDs, all with different implementations?
>>53557820
>14 relevant BSDs
Only 3 are relevant
>>53557820
>Where the fuck did you get the impression that Android was using a BSD userland?
Maybe you should look into what he's replying to
>>53557837
Based on what arbitrary distinction?
Number of users? Number of contributors? Number of ports?
Because if any of the above, you should rather be using GNU....
>>53557837
SunOS, OS X and HP-UX?
>>53557849
I replied to the wrong post.
>>53557886
>random unices
>BSD
>>53557820
>Where the fuck did you get the impression that Android was using a BSD userland?
That was me. I was wrong though it uses pieces of NetBSD's userland but apparently most of it is toybox according to wiki
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/system/core/+/master/toolbox/upstream-netbsd/
>>53557920
those either are based on BSD or use BSD features
>>53553968
>And well, you put BSD on your server because it is stable
what is debian stable
>putting UNIX on a phone
Whoever thinks this is a good idea should be shot
>>53554327
If it's old, it probably has drivers.
>>53557993
Apple's been doing it for years, it seems to be working quite nicely for them.
>>53558016
>didn't even have multitasking until version 4
>"working quite nicely"
I disagree
>>53558040
blame apple's poor programming skills
UNIX is designed for multitasking from the ground up, the inability to do that is because of iOS' bullshit.
>>53558040
>iOS 4 is old as fuck
>thinking this is an argument
>>53557977
Debian is dead, SJW and systemd took it over.
>>53558061
>using old as an argument
See below
>>53558048
UNIX was designed to run on 1970s mainframes, not to run power-efficiently on modern microprocessors
There's a reason why you need to charge your so-called smart phones every fucking day, in contrast to older cellphones that could last for days before running out of battery.
>>53558073
Systemd isn't mandatory, I've got two systems running Debian Stretch and use systemd on neither.
>>53558112
>There's a reason why you need to charge your so-called smart phones every fucking day
That reason is because the modern smartphone is a pocket computer, not just a cellphone.
>>53558112
>UNIX was designed to run on 1970s mainframes, not to run power-efficiently on modern microprocessors
while this has nothing to do with the original argument, i do agree with that
we're running UNIX on too many things
>>53558129
>>53558048
>wanting pocket-sized mainframes with multi-user support for a personal gadget for calling other people
>>53558161
>implying communication is the primary use of a smartphone
>>53558161
having multi-user on a phone isn't a bad idea
imagine if every phone booted into single-user mode
you'd have a lot of normies crying over lost data
Can't decide between open and freebsd
>>53558204
What are you going to use it for?
>>53558192
>personal device
>multi-user
Why?
>inb4 you confuse multi-user with multitasking
>>53555206
"Not to worry, though, since all cases that I’ve encountered have one thing in common. There’s always a register pointing to the buffer on the stack. So a malicious RDRAND instruction would just have to find a register pointing to somewhere on the stack, read the value it’s pointing to, and that’s what the RDRAND output will be XORed with."
That would require the Intel to specifically hardcode something which detects extract_buf() code and know which register was used (which can change depending on compilation flags).
If you're worried about such attacks, then there's nothing stopping Intel from subverting ANY code snippet regardless of instructions used - they can put in fingerprints which identifies common crypto or rng code in any kernel or program and redirect the cpu the execute something else instead.
>>53558180
Facebook, twitter, instagram, snapchat, whatsapp, whatever are all forms of communication.
>>53558254
i said exactly why in my post
also because there's less R&D required, they just grabbed the linux kernel and slapped shit on top of it
>>53558273
No shit
>>53558218
ordinary desktop pc
but im interested in security so I would like to get familiar with the security features of openbsd.
>>53558296
both are equally good for desktop usage
try both out (in a VM, but keep in mind VMs suck at BSD, it'll most likely perform like shit)
>>53558296
Go for OpenBSD
>>53558281
>i said exactly why in my post
You wrote
>you'd have a lot of normies crying over lost data
which doesn't make any sense at all.
>also because there's less R&D required, they just grabbed the linux kernel and slapped shit on top of it
Symbian existed before Android, but yeah this is a good point.
>>53558154
Stuff like QNX and Inferno are pretty nice for that kind of thing. Linux seems a bit over-the-top though.
>>53558406
UNIX-like permissions are necessary for the majority of consumers who are retarded, if every phone booted in single-user mode with root, just imagine the sheer suffering of normies.
>>53558436
>single-user = running everything with elevated privileges
You are a special kind of retard, aren't you?
>>53558456
It works as some kind of mitigation against the average person, what's wrong with that?
>>53554413
Very interesting. And this message was written back when the OpenSSL bug was out in the wild. I wonder who could be behind this?...
>>53558471
You do know that having a dedicated superuser is only one way of implementing differentiated privileges, right?
>>53558495
Yes, but it's the most common and easy to understand one.
>>53558507
That may be so, but it's anyway completely irrelevant to the point of multi-user systems.
Multi-user refers to multiple CONCURRENT users, not having two (or more) different user accounts
