On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 03:31:45PM +1200, Ben Aitchison wrote:
> The default kernel image doesn't use much memory for caching your disk
> - 5% of ram.  This is easy to change, you can run:
>       config -e -o /nbsd /bsd
>       cachepct 25

>       mv /bsd /obsd; cp -f /nbsd /bsd

> And that'll give you 25% percent instead, which is a lot nicer.  I
> think I use 60% on my desktop system which has 512 MB of ram, and
> never seems to be able to actually use up all of it's free ram let
> alone swap.

This is a real shame.  OpenBSD's caching behaviour is fairly antiquated
nowadays, but this will improve once Chuck Cranor's NetBSD UVM code is
merged into the tree.

> There's some low limits on system resources by default - you can't
> suddenly run 1000 xterm processes on a default install like you can on
> Linux 2.4.

This is done for security reasons.

> root's shell defaults to /bin/csh, which is icky.  You can login as
> root and type chsh and change the line that says /bin/csh to /bin/ksh
> and then you'll have a decent shell that isn't bloated, but still has
> tab completion, support for vi key bindings, and I think emacs key
> bindings too, but I don't use them.

No need to change the root shell, use sudo(8).  Also note that csh is
still a decent shell, and has command completion and other modern
features.  And csh is not bloated, either.

$ size `which csh`
text    data    bss     dec     hex
249856  16384   25140   291380  47234
$ size `which ksh`
text    data    bss     dec     hex
299008  12288   23928   335224  51d78

(From an OpenBSD 2.9 system)

> There's no NZ mirror that's up-to-date that I know of.  I've got the
> base system i386 tarballs, and source tarballs and I can make them
> publically accessible if anybody's keen. (but you'd still have to get
> packages).  There is a mirror that's about an extra 50 msec away in
> Australia, on www.wiretapped.net/pub/OpenBSD, and there's also
> PlanetMirror (Australia again) - which seems to go fine sometimes, and
> pretty slow other times.

The i386 directory from the June 5th 2003 snapshot of OpenBSD-current is
154MB.  Not a huge download, but it is a shame there is no OpenBSD
mirror, particularly for the likes of CVS.  I'd be happy to provide the
hardware if there was somewhere to connect it to the net.

> Single floppy install.  I've done this many times, on many different
> computers, and it's easy, fast, convenient, and flexible.

The install is very quick once you're used to it.  Very little mucking
around.

> installed by default, apache just needs: httpd_flags="" instead of
> httpd_flags=NO set in rc.conf, or httpd_flags="-u" if you don't want
> to chroot. (apache defaults to chrooting, which means that if the web

A few other services are also chroot()ed by default.  The list of
set[gu]id is reviewed regularly by the developers and reduced where and
when possible.  I think the number of setuid=0 binaries is well below 10
now, but don't quote me on that.

Don't forget the other nice stuff, like systrace.

> The filesystem layout is quite different to any Linux distribution
> that I've used, but I like it.  Apache lives in /var/www, locally
> installed packages live in /usr/local, the base system lives in /usr.

In addition to this, the installer will set noexec, nosuid, and nodev on
your filesystems where it can.

> Manpages are well written, and very useful.  Everything in general is
> documented properly.  New features don't get included without
> documentation.

The documentation is excellent.  As you mentioned, the man pages are
good, and there is also the OpenBSD FAQ [1], and the PF FAQ [2].

> PF (packet filter) works really well, and is clear and concise in
> functionality compared to ipchains/iptables.  There's a simple
> /etc/pf.conf file where you make your changes.

PF with integrated ALTQ is very nice.

> top is nicer, and it loads instantly :)

OpenBSD's top is faster because it uses /dev/kmem rather than /proc like
the Linux top.  Yes, it loads faster, but reading kernel memory is a
somewhat ugly way to extract this information.  Though, having said
that, reading /proc is quite possibly even more ugly.

> You don't have to define kernel images, like you do in Lilo. (I know
> GRUB fixes this issue)

To clarify this, the OpenBSD boot loader understands FFS aka UFS, the
BSD filesystem, and therefore works more like GRUB than LILO.  The *BSDs
have had this for quite a while, and GRUB is a welcome addition to
Linux.

I use OpenBSD on a few machines, and I have all of the files required to
perform an installation on an i386 or ppc machine from floppy or
bootable CD.  I also have many versions of OpenBSD on CD, but since
these are official CDs produced by OpenBSD, I don't believe you're
entitled copy the images for other people, since the CD layout is
copyrighted.

If anybody would like a copy of OpenBSD, I can help them out.

[1] http://openbsd.org/faq/index.html
[2] http://openbsd.org/faq/pf/index.html

Cheers,
-mjg
-- 
Matthew Gregan                     |/
                                  /|                [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to