I'll give you a pitybump and also because I was curious to know if anyone has tried a *BSD with Vagrant i.e. actually creating a box of a *BSD VM and how it went?

I'm looking to build a little server VM that I'll use for projects but I was using Debian then I remembered how nice FreeBSD was to configure and install, so I might try it again.

Why is this thread so unpopular?

>>53755404
Because /g/ is made of a bunch of 'tards obsessed with ricing up linux installations to watch animu, view photos, and run colored terminal windows.

Meanwhile, I'm concerned about launching my next jails-style web server. So I'm here. Sorta.

>>53755480
All that can be done on a *BSD

>>53755524
Plus they still get to brag about being hardcore and hipster and make fun of n00buntu babies, much like arch and gentoo users

>>53755480
I would use openBSD if it had better support for my hardware. Linux just works on my hardware.

>>53755524
Oh I know. I've done it before (in that bizarre phase of my life).
>>53755622
I bet FreeBSD supports your hardware. Less likely if it's a laptop.

>>53755480
> I'm concerned about launching my next jails-style web server.
There's OpenVZ, LXC, Docker. What's the point of jails?

>>53755735
chroot separation. plus the code is more mature than all the above mentioned.

>>53755735
>>53755772
not to mention that combining the (native) ZFS + jails means that I can snapshot everything so easily.

>>53755772
> chroot separation
Well, yeah, Linux containers are basically advanced chroot with separated memory, HDD /CPU quotas and such.
> ZFS
btrfs can into snapshots. But, it looks like you're just used to it, so I'm not going to bash you in any way. Thanks.

The fuck, 5.9 is out already?

God damn, and I just upgraded to -current two days ago.

>>53755404
/g/ is made up of 50% consumerist retards, 40% ricers and 10% people who have actually something interesting to contribute. Of course BSD threads aren't going to be popular.

Also, what do you think of PC-BSD, especially for beginners? It basically a pre-configured FreeBSD with the enhancements like using LibreSSL instead of OpenSSL or a one-click Tor switch for the whole system. I think it's a really underrated and people (especially Linux newcomers) should give it a try.

https://www.pcbsd.org/

>>53755480
>>53755704
>used to rice my openbsd machine
>realized i could get by just fine with just cwm, xterm, xclock, no bullshit shell and barely any customization beyond setting a solid color as a background using xsetroot
I've never been healthier.

>>53756174
Meh, I just use windows and ssh into my BSD servers. Easy peasy.

>>53753531
>https://openbsd.org
>Unable to connect
it's the YOOL 2016 and openbsd.org still doesn't have ssl/tls
security focused my ass

>>53756278
I'm sorry, but what part of the OpenBSD website requires authentication?

>>53756293
all of it

>>53756293
Or perhaps the server is swamped. You know, because it's release day.

>>53756363
And at what point is very sensitive information transmitted, to the point of requiring ssl/tls?

>>53756385
When you download a signify key. There's no excuse for this. freebsd.org runs https. Even debian.org runs https. This is why freebsd has more market share and company backing. No one is going to take you seriously when you don't even have tls on your damn website. No wonder they had to beg for donations a few years ago.

>>53755404
it's not the reason the other two faggots gave
someone wrote something a long time ago about why UNIX and not Plan 9 had just become accepted, and it's the same reason why BSD isn't ever going to be as popular unless a major event takes place that completely destroys everyone's confidence in Linux (which probably won't happen)

linux is just good enough. probably not even technically, but it's still just good enough.

>>53756490
The signify key.

What use would that even have to someone eavesdropping on the connection? All it does is allow you to verify packages.

>>53756537
And verify the release. Drop the sealioning bullshit. You're only embarassing yourself and the openbsd team by bringing up signed packages since that's another failing on their part. OpenBSD is meme security at its finest.

>>53756632
Yeah, I'm sure the OpenBSD servers get hacked literally every day and the signify keys get swapped.

>>53756672
You can always look on twitter for the real key in case that happens. Yes, fucking twitter.

http://www.openbsd.org/papers/bsdcan-signify.html

>There are no key servers for signify. No web of trust. Just keys. The good news is the keys are pretty small. As demonstrated. We can stick them just about everywhere, and we do. They're on the web site, they're on twitter

OpenBSD security.

>>53756752
I don't think you get public keys.

File: spice_not_even_once.png (1 MB, 1600x1200) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1600x1200

>>53756752
>>There are no key servers for signify. No web of trust. Just keys. The good news is the keys are pretty small. As demonstrated. We can stick them just about everywhere, and we do. They're on the web site, they're on twitter
AYYLMAO

OpenBSD is still hosted on Solaris.

They're OS developers not web designers. They're the exact opposite of Apple in this sense. If you actually buy a CD set you will most likely arrive in the mail weeks before it's even released. Their is no PR bullshit, it's just not a priority within their limited resources.

>>53753531
>https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/01
I am an OpenBSD user and I think this is bullshit, you're doing the BSD community a disfavor by promoting this.

>>53756174
I do this on linux. Falling in love with cwm has made me want to look into openBSD. It's my favorite software that I use.

>>53761170
It's a shame that the portable version of cwm is WAY behind now.

I think the latest portable one forces you to have a [term] menu item.

Is NAS4Free worth it on a Pentium 4?