openbsd vs archlinux

Mr G

unread,

Oct 10, 2011, 4:36:02 AM10/10/11

to

I think for repalcing cisco routers and being al around os openbsd perhaps wins.

Archlinux does have remarkable rolling release adn up to date packages all in bianry form so that oen command updates even kernel. No version. Kernel is liek firefox, just new version and nothin breaks.

Openbsd I heave heard is unbeatable with firewaling ease of use and avante garde for openbgp and ospf.

I wonder about the tradeoffs.

opinions?

Carson Chittom

unread,

Oct 10, 2011, 9:40:36 AM10/10/11

to

Mr G <gavc...@gmail.com> writes:

> Archlinux does have remarkable rolling release adn up to date packages
> all in bianry form so that oen command updates even kernel. No
> version. Kernel is liek firefox, just new version and nothin breaks.

> [ ...]

> I wonder about the tradeoffs.
>
> opinions?

Here's my two cents: "having up-to-date packages" is not a worthwhile
goal to have. It *may* be a means to the end of having a secure, useable
system, but it should never be an end in itself. I mean, seriously, do
you care whether your installation of Arch Linux has kernel version
3.0.3 instead of 3.0.4?[1] Except in limited circumstances---e.g., that
support for a piece of your hardware is added in the newer version (but
then, that goes back to the goal being a "useable system")---it very
likely makes absolutely no difference.

And, from experience, you're simply wrong about "nothin [sic] breaks."
Things *often* break on upgrades (not talking about Arch in particular
here, just upgrades in general, and definitely on Linux distributions).
Frankly, I have better things to do with my time than upgrade my
computer every other day---or once a week, or even once a month---and
then deal with the fallout. I'll put up with every six months,
grumblingly (I *would* go to once a year, but as it's happened, the last few
releases of OpenBSD have added features I needed, as will 5.0 when it's
released).

Of course, at the same time you don't want to have a system that's so
out of date it becomes insecure.

[1] I don't actually know what's in Arch at the moment, and I can't be
bothered to check.
--
http://www.wistly.net

Mr G

unread,

Oct 10, 2011, 4:21:00 PM10/10/11

to

No you are wrong nothing breaks.

Remember lastest stable code is most bug free fixed refined code.

Joachim Schipper

unread,

Oct 11, 2011, 2:35:00 AM10/11/11

to

Mr G <gavc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No you are wrong nothing breaks.
>
> Remember lastest stable code is most bug free fixed refined code.

If you feel like that, just run OpenBSD -current: you get the latest
code, and if it's good enough for the developers it's good enough for
production, right? (Often, it is. Don't even try to update during
hackathons, though.)

Joachim

Carson Chittom

unread,

Oct 11, 2011, 6:43:04 AM10/11/11

to

Mr G <gavc...@gmail.com> writes:

> No you are wrong nothing breaks.

I have used Arch Linux. Things broke on upgrade. Though to be fair by
"broke" I really mean "required manual intervention"; and it was no
different on Debian unstable.

> Remember lastest stable code is most bug free fixed refined code.

Sure, the latest code fixes bugs. It also introduces new bugs. I'm of
the "better the devil you know" philosophy.

--
http://www.wistly.net

Mr G

unread,

Oct 12, 2011, 7:12:25 AM10/12/11

to

I don't understand. Let me again repeat: archlinux with updates is all stable latest code. Most de-bugged code. Ready for production. Al parts fit, nothing breaks. All packages are installable.

Mr G

unread,

Oct 12, 2011, 7:12:52 AM10/12/11

to

archlnux obsoleted debian and redhat in 2006.

Mr G

unread,

Oct 12, 2011, 7:14:38 AM10/12/11

to

I am not sure running openbsd current is meant for production. The pacakges certainly don't work all the time as i upgraded to current 5.0 and pacakges went away week later.

In archlinux each pacakge is on its own. Only latest stable binary is available unless you use AUR. The kernel is like another package.

Peter N. M. Hansteen

unread,

Oct 12, 2011, 1:39:50 PM10/12/11

to

Mr G <gavc...@gmail.com> writes:

> I am not sure running openbsd current is meant for production. The
> pacakges certainly don't work all the time as i upgraded to current
> 5.0 and pacakges went away week later.

5.0 hasn't been released yet. -current is past 5.0 by significant
amounts, and it's important to note that the base system (install sets)
and the packages are separate, although the packages will be in sync
with either a specific release or -current (most likely the closest
approximation in the form of the most recent snapshot available when the
packages were built).

- P
--
Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team
http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/
"Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic"
delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.

Mr G

unread,

Oct 13, 2011, 7:05:51 AM10/13/11

to

Cool. I find the potential of openbsd replacing cisco routers more easily than arch to be intriguing.... The only fear sofar i have is the process limits on active busy apps.. Is there a clear writeup of howto massage them say in the case of a very busy web server?

Joachim Schipper

unread,

Oct 13, 2011, 7:48:37 AM10/13/11

to

Not really, I think. Note that Apache has a setting (MaxProcesses
or something) that would need to be configured alongside the process
limit.

You'll probably find messages like 'myhttpd[12345]: cannot spawn
process: resource temporarily unavailable' in syslog when you hit the
limit.

Joachim

Mr G

unread,

Oct 13, 2011, 11:03:01 PM10/13/11

to

So on a busy server I just set the process limits for the user the server runs as to be high and I am ok? I wish there was a howto for this. I myself would use hiawatha aolserver or cherokee not apache. I think cherokee uses kqueue so it might be a limited number of file descriptors. Does kqueue on openbsd work nicely like the freebsd one? It is the same library right?

Joachim Schipper

unread,

Oct 14, 2011, 12:56:47 AM10/14/11

to

kqueue works well on OpenBSD.

Just try the defaults and test with some tool (I have the impression
that people like httperf, but I have no opinion myself. It, and many
similar tools, is available from ports.) You'll find out soon enough.

Joachim

Mr G

unread,

Oct 29, 2011, 7:48:39 PM10/29/11

to

Ok having used archlinux netbsd freebsd gobolinux I am back using openbsd on my desktop.
with icewm of course
why?
I am trying to think it through.
1 simple install and xorg setup, 0 bs
2 package system seems good enuf
3 like the documentation

The others are awesome too but I like the simplicity and solidness, I guess is how to express it.

OS I would never use anymore: centos/redhat debian/ur-bung2 solaris
OS without hardware support I need: minix3
OS interface I cant grok: plan9 colorforth
OS needing gui forthOS