Another perspective. Not to do with embedded systems, but the quality
of OpenBSD documentation.
My job is as a technical editor. I write documentation for email
encryption software based on a Debian platform (but mainly administered
in the browser, to be fair). I know exactly how documentation is viewed
(if at all) and the last thing that most users do when they need help is
to click the 'Help' button.
Most people search the internet looking for solutions to their problem.
They often find it - they wouldn't bother doing that in the first place
if that weren't true. Along the way, they'll find lots of outdated and
plain wrong stuff that just wastes time.
A few years ago, wearying of the incessant need to reinvent the wheel in
the Linux world, I tried out the BSDs and settled on OpenBSD. Its
emphasis on security and correctness appealed to me. What never occured
to me was the meaning of the documentation. It is there - complete - and
it is very good. There is no need to trawl through the internet looking
for answers, it is all there on your box.
OpenBSD does documentation properly, in my professional opinion. It's
just not what you may be used to from the Linux world. A certain change
in mentality is required when switching from Linux to OpenBSD. It takes
time to learn to type 'man' rather than going straight to the browser
when you don't know how something works. No joke.
For the most part, the user experience of OpenBSD is the same as on other
systems. The differences - to me - are similar in nature to those in the
documentation. It might not work the way you are used to, but it does
work. It just depends on if you need to or want to adapt to the

Best regards,


Gesendet: Donnerstag, 08. Februar 2018 um 22:41 Uhr
Von: "Charlie Eddy" <>
Betreff: considering a move to OpenBSD

I am considering a move to OpenBSD, since I subscribed to this mailing list
some time ago (~few months). I want to take advantage of security.

However, a programmer who I know personally and respect considers OpenBSD
to be old-school, in a negative sense. He recommends Arch Linux as
superior, because more new. Does the difference boil down to one's
definition of free software, and then compliance with that definition?

I have read up on this a lot, and this is a serious question. I have heard
that it is unimportant what *nix you're on after a few years of using one
or the other, in terms of functionality. I am interested in embedded
devices. I think that bends the needle towards Arch, but the security of
OpenBSD is also attractive. What considerations should I take into account?


Reply via email to