OpenBSD from a veteran Linux user perspective

[Mike-Sanders]

'This article discusses some of the main differences between OpenBSD and Linux, from a Linux admin perspective...'

[LeFrettchen]

I might be not really objective, but nice article

[ocicat]

Originally Posted by Mike-Sanders

'This article discusses some of the main differences between OpenBSD and Linux, from a Linux admin perspective...'

The big question in these comparative opinion pieces is how well do authors understand the two sides being compared.

In particular, this author appears to focus on building everything from scratch. While this is indeed possible in the OpenBSD world, the project expends significant effort in providing an infrastructure to avoid such a time-consuming task. The author posted today to misc@ asking if the default partition sizes need to be changed to take into account building requirements:

http://marc.info/?t=143552994300001&r=1&w=2

A number of respondents, some who are members here, pointed out flaws in the author's knowledge -- namely, that the installer has enough flexibility to not dictate partition sizes, & that packages are preferred to compiling all parts of the system locally. The underlying assumption of a "bug" being present was not a bug at all.

I do not condemn the author for his article on what appears to be single issue, but this nit does reveal a lacking familiarity with the OpenBSD project's documentation, tools & goals. I know it takes time to absorb the intent of the project. I have been doing so for years, & I know I still have distance to travel.

Writing comparative pieces requires deep enough knowledge & experience to be able to step away from the group-think, & not compare the "new" project from the mindset of the "old". When this is the strategy, one side always loses because "They don't do it the way we are all familiar with..." The comparison fails, & drawing out what truly shines in both camps becomes a lost opportunity.

Yes, that is the article I hope gets written some day. I would really like to read it.

[Mike-Sanders]

Originally Posted by LeFrettchen

I might be not really objective, but nice article

Hello LeFrettchen, nice to meet you. I applaud his efforts. To learn 'out loud' (American euphemism meaning to learn publicly) requires courage. I do hope there is some encouragement from the community. Isn't bsd/nux/nix great? So many options. So many opinions... this is a healthy, vital process =)

[Mike-Sanders]

ocicat writes in part:

> I know it takes time to absorb the intent of the project. I have been doing so for years, & I know I still have distance to travel...

Aye, as we all should humbly acknowledge. You know, Einstein is attributed as saying: 'The only source of knowledge is experience'. This is true here as well. To begin, simply start...

> drawing out what truly shines...

I've always had the greatest measure of success by remaining 'OS agnostic'. That is to say, when in Rome do as the Romans do. If one can adopt an idiomatic posture within a given domain rather than (as you've noted) 'They don't do it the way we are all familiar with...', time spent is much more enjoyable. The systemd vs. init debate springs to mind... the world is a big enough place for competing ideas to live & even thrive side-by-side.

[blackhole]

Originally Posted by Mike-Sanders

The systemd vs. init debate springs to mind... the world is a big enough place for competing ideas to live & even thrive side-by-side.

The problem with many Linux users and Linux user support/community forums in particular, is that ideological posting can easily come to the fore and sway users opinions. That is to say that users tend to go with the flow or take someone who is using a lot of impressive sounding, but mainly rhetorical, wording at face value if it's affirming their existing beliefs or playing on their fears/doubts.

Someone can easily take a myth - or just outright misinformation from some crank with an agenda - and turn it into a reality for some because "politics" has been given far too much "air time".

[Mike-Sanders]

I use both. systemd & init (sperate OSs of course) & have no problems with either. Linux is not Unix. The acronym GNU alludes that userspace isn't Unix. Likewise BSD is not Linux, its not Windows & so on... They're differing creatures, some folks lose site of that I'm guessing. Those spooked by the 'idea-problems' are given no quarter here.

[blackhole]

Originally Posted by Mike-Sanders

I use both. systemd & init (sperate OSs of course) & have no problems with either.

I don't think "having problems" ever came into the systemd debate. It seems to be an anti-Red Hat/unification ideological crusade of sorts. I have not seen many arguments to the effect that systemd is crashing or breaking people's systems, only that it's design philosophy doesn't fit, it's immature, it's Red Hat sponsored, it's developers are arseholes, etc, etc, etc...

Personally - it's not for me, but then Linux isn't really for me either, nor gnome, nor KDE for that matter, nor any of the fancy freedesktop.org bells and whistles. I'm OK if others like it and want to use it however.

Originally Posted by Mike-Sanders

Linux is not Unix. The acronym GNU alludes that userspace isn't Unix.

Richard Stallman publicly stated:

I never used Unix (not even for a minute) until after I decided to develop a free replacement for it (the GNU system). I chose that design to follow because it was portable and seemed fairly clean. I was never a fan of Unix; I had some criticisms of it too. But it was ok overall as a model.

https://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

[Mike-Sanders]

Like you, I'd have to go with classic init push comes to shove, at least I can wrap my mind around init more throughly. Agree as well on desktops, still doing great here with the 'window manager' paradigm. twm/evilwm are two I tend to use allot, not allot to fuss with, a decidedly good thing for me.

Had no idea Stallman claims he 'never' used Unix at all. That's really something...

[hitest]

Originally Posted by cynwulf

I have not seen many arguments to the effect that systemd is crashing or breaking people's systems, only that it's design philosophy doesn't fit, it's immature, it's Red Hat sponsored, it's developers are arseholes, etc, etc, etc...

I always like to try a system and see for myself. I gave Debian 8.0 a spin and found that my box would hang intermittently on shutdown. I don't know if systemd was the shutdown culprit. I gave up on systemd and I am back with OpenBSD.

OpenBSD obsd.home.local 5.7 GENERIC.MP#0 amd64

[blackhole]

Well you could have tested in a VM?

Debian switched to systemd for the latest release and it's been somewhat controversial there. The 'problem' with Debian is that it's a huge project with thousands of contributors and a complex political structure in terms of how decisions are made. It's often the case that such an OS will be the "jack of all trades and master of none" and that can often equate to going for the lowest common denominator. In other words Debian is likely to "go with the flow" and adopt "sensible defaults" by it's very nature ("too many cooks...").

Compared to say 15 years ago, there is a gaping chasm between typical Debian end users and the developers/maintainers. Most of the noise about systemd is coming from the former. They often act like consumers and that's why they get treated as such. The Linux distro is an end product to such people and they focus unduly on aspects such as hardware support, popularity, 'market share' and on how distro X measures up against distro Y [with respect to their wants/needs only], etc - which is why they feel entitled to complain often quite vocally.

Even a few years ago there was little tolerance of new Debian users who didn't want to actually learn to use the system - now spoon feeding people with answers on web forums is openly tolerated and the accepted norm. It's now also accepted to be some kind of forum superstar guru, while knowing very little. Copying and pasting from elsewhere and telling people to use the search, usually with much condescension, is often what passes for knowledge nowadays.

This is why the biggest hurdle for someone coming from any Linux system is going to be the realisation that "I'm going to have to figure this out for myself". People used to a support forum structure where other "gurus" actually compete to answer questions and gain reputation stars will struggle with this idea from the off.

[Mike-Sanders]

Begs the question: How is this problem (creating a more cerebral newbie) solved? My take: Develop an online *entry level* course for new uers. One thats officially sanctioned & accredited. Make it a badge of honor that shifts praise to the newbie from the forum rockstars. Would it work in the final analysis? Honestly dunno... OS's are like cars, everyone wants to drive, yet few are willing to get under the hood.

[hitest]

Originally Posted by cynwulf

Well you could have tested in a VM?

Sure, but, a bare metal install will on occasion behave differently than a virtual install. I've been a fan of Debian since version 4.0. and I wanted to see what systemd was like.
No harm done with giving Debian 8.0 a test run. I'm happy running Slackware and OpenBSD.