Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
But you’ve done nothing but calling me names nonstop, I owe you an apology then, and the developers and users who may have read my ramblings. then complaining when people do the same to you. You’re a hypocrite, but you clearly don’t realize that, because you keep saying that “you’re cool” and “you don’t want to go further” while doing totally the opposite. So calling names is bad and provokes the same, exactly why I was avoiding reading these parts and intentionally not responding to the insults targeted at me. Last night was too late for me, sorry. I thought I finished posting too and Marc tempted me to explain myself. There is an official FAQ especially targeted to Linux users, I am a Linux user, I found some difference between the systems which is not in the FAQ, I thought it could be useful to add a line about it. Period. If that difference is better or worse, I don’t discuss it, only you do. Most have used Linux at some point, I did too. Comparing a re-install rolling release distributions, there is a different methodology to keep up to date. I was trying to suggest the whole time that following snapshots installation and keeping packages updated is the easiest way to achieve the Linux like rolling release and it does not involve any recompilation and is fairly easy and straight forward process ideal for a newcomer or Linux user trying out OpenBSD fresh. This gives a very low overhead always current state of both base OS and additional packages. In fact you may not have to install the ports tree to stay up to date. As for following stable and current, those would inevitable require recompilation at some points, which has their own FAQ documents, so there is no need to complicate the migration FAQ except point to these FAQs. Why did you have to mention binary patches at all? It is obvious there are no such things, but does this belong in the migration FAQ? When pkg_add -u (updating packages) is exactly the equivalent of a package manager updates in Linux. I felt the con point in your publication was a bit unfair and could scare Linux people away, if they are neither advance in Linux, nor FreeBSD and obviously new to OpenBSD. In fact I consider that I got finally settled on a proper upgrade system just when I got into OpenBSD on a daily basis some many years ago. but treat me with a little respect. OK, once again, I sincerely want to apologise for the disrespect. I tend to forget not everyone has a thick skin like I've developed online.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On 2015-06-29 09.52.19 +0100, Raf Czlonka wrote: That being said, FAQ is *not* an OpenBSD for former Linux users guide, FAQ 9 is titled Migrating to OpenBSD, four of the five sections have Linux in the title, and the one section that does not mentions Linux twice in the first paragraph. Are you proposing that the whole of FAQ 9 should be scrapped? -Mike
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 02:19:36PM BST, Mike Burns wrote: On 2015-06-29 09.52.19 +0100, Raf Czlonka wrote: That being said, FAQ is *not* an OpenBSD for former Linux users guide, FAQ 9 is titled Migrating to OpenBSD, four of the five sections have Linux in the title, and the one section that does not mentions Linux twice in the first paragraph. Are you proposing that the whole of FAQ 9 should be scrapped? Mike, Fair point - I'll shut up for now post a more detailed and (hopefully) constructive critique of the patch itself later on. Ta, Raf
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Are you proposing that the whole of FAQ 9 should be scrapped? May it be proposed to you that you further advise Carlos on improving his suggested patch or scrapping this knitting already. Whose idea was to stoke the binpatch theme anyway, somebody of commercial interest? No such thing is required anyway.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Lot of angry fuss over words on a web page.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 18:58:19 -0400 Bryan Steele bry...@openbsd.org wrote: Carlos' patch may not be appropriate, but you're kind of a condecending jerk, especially for someone who's apparently never sent mail to the OpenBSD lists before. Who are you? On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 08:57:23PM +0300, li...@wrant.com wrote: That's pathetic. If you can't make a certain point without offensive insult, why not simply go full scale and add passion and anger to it? On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 14:02:18 -0400 Bryan Steele bry...@openbsd.org wrote: Welcome to my and several other OpenBSD developers shitlist. Do you not have a day job already, kiddo? Quit fooling around, go straight to the point. If you want to say something, do so. Why hold back when you have the listening ear of the person you're trying to offend?
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 09:21:14AM BST, Carlos Fenollosa wrote: Thanks Sebastien, Here’s a new rewrite with your contributions. If I may, I’d suggest to keep this list item short, as a summary, and maybe write a longer section on the FAQ expanding on it with more detail. If you feel that’s appropriate, I can volunteer to write it too. Hi Carlos, You are fresh to OpenBSD and eager to help - I get it! That being said, FAQ is *not* an OpenBSD for former Linux users guide, and even if it were, the wording leaves a lot to be desired and, IMVHO, it doesn't add any value to the FAQ. Regards, Raf P.S. Send unified diffs. Index: faq9.html === RCS file: /cvs/www/faq/faq9.html,v retrieving revision 1.113 diff -c -r1.113 faq9.html *** faq9.html 11 May 2015 11:18:30 - 1.113 --- faq9.html 29 Jun 2015 08:15:15 - *** *** 133,138 --- 133,153 will be corrected rapidly, not something that will be permitted to continue. + liBinary packages are available to install new software through + pkg_add(1), but there are no binary security updates. The team has no resources + to constantly compile binaries for all architectures, they do it only + every -release. You can build your own packages from ports(7). + Thus, unlike Linux distributions, which come with a + package manager which takes care of updates (ttyum/tt, + ttapt-get/tt, etc), there is no single command to update the system + to the latest binary status. Keeping up-to-date (including security errata) + is a bit different. You can either (1) upgrade every -release, + (2) apply patches froma href=../errataerrata/a or (3) follow + a href=../stable-stable/a. Binary updates may be obtained + from a href=https://stable.mtier.org;a third party/a for the i386 + and amd64 architectures for the base system, using the same mechanism + than for ordinary packages, and standard packages, for -stable./li + liOpenBSD has gone through heavy and continual security auditing to ensure the quality (and thus, security) of the code.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Thanks Sebastien, Here’s a new rewrite with your contributions. If I may, I’d suggest to keep this list item short, as a summary, and maybe write a longer section on the FAQ expanding on it with more detail. If you feel that’s appropriate, I can volunteer to write it too. Carlos Index: faq9.html === RCS file: /cvs/www/faq/faq9.html,v retrieving revision 1.113 diff -c -r1.113 faq9.html *** faq9.html 11 May 2015 11:18:30 - 1.113 --- faq9.html 29 Jun 2015 08:15:15 - *** *** 133,138 --- 133,153 will be corrected rapidly, not something that will be permitted to continue. + liBinary packages are available to install new software through + pkg_add(1), but there are no binary security updates. The team has no resources + to constantly compile binaries for all architectures, they do it only + every -release. You can build your own packages from ports(7). + Thus, unlike Linux distributions, which come with a + package manager which takes care of updates (ttyum/tt, + ttapt-get/tt, etc), there is no single command to update the system + to the latest binary status. Keeping up-to-date (including security errata) + is a bit different. You can either (1) upgrade every -release, + (2) apply patches froma href=../errataerrata/a or (3) follow + a href=../stable-stable/a. Binary updates may be obtained + from a href=https://stable.mtier.org;a third party/a for the i386 + and amd64 architectures for the base system, using the same mechanism + than for ordinary packages, and standard packages, for -stable./li + liOpenBSD has gone through heavy and continual security auditing to ensure the quality (and thus, security) of the code. On 29 Jun 2015, at 06:54, Sebastien Marie sema...@openbsd.org wrote: Hi, I would just do some comments inline. On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 07:20:51PM +0200, Carlos Fenollosa wrote: Hi, I’ve recently discovered OpenBSD after using Linux for more than 15 years. I wrote a blog article with my impressions and some other users suggested me to patch faq9.html to help other users migrating. This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system updated. Since English is not my first language, before merging the patch, please make sure the wording is proper. If you think the issue may be interesting to elaborate on, I could write a guide of improve on stable.html to help newcomers adapt to this method of keeping up to date. Here’s the whole article if anybody’s interested: http://cfenollosa.com/blog/openbsd-from-a-veteran-linux-user-perspective.html Thanks! Carlos PS: This is my first patch, I’m sending it inline as suggested by http://www.bsdnow.tv/tutorials/patching-obsd. Apologies if this is not the right way. it is the good way. thanks for contributing. Index: faq9.html === RCS file: /cvs/www/faq/faq9.html,v retrieving revision 1.113 diff -u -p -r1.113 faq9.html --- faq9.html 11 May 2015 11:18:30 - 1.113 +++ faq9.html 28 Jun 2015 17:19:45 - @@ -133,6 +133,18 @@ The tree is occasionally broken, but thi will be corrected rapidly, not something that will be permitted to continue. +liThere are no binary security updates. The team has no resources +to constantly compile binaries for all architectures, they do it only +every -release. Thus, unlike Linux distributions, which come with a +package manager which takes care of updates (ttyum/tt, +ttapt-get/tt, etc), there is no single command to update the system +to the latest binary status. It is a bit more complex. The package manager under OpenBSD is pkg_add(1). It is perferctly able to do binaries updates of packages (note we speak about packages, not the base system). But as you noted previously, no binary packages for security updates are provided for -stable. And if pkg_add(1) haven't a suitable source of updated packages, it couldn't do it. Now, when you build your own packages from ports(7) (after updating it), the system will build a binary package. And pkg_add(1) will update your system with this new (updated) package (make install will invoke pkg_add). Keeping up-to-date (including security errata) +is a bit different. You can either (1) upgrade every -release, +(2) apply patches froma href=../errataerrata/a or (3) follow +a href=../stable-stable/a. Binary updates may be obtained +from a href=https://stable.mtier.org;a third party/a for the i386 +and amd64 architectures./li mtier provide third party packages for the -stable version for: - base system (using the same mecanism than for ordinaries packages). As it is for -stable, it includes errata. - standard packages. As it is for -stable, it includes security updates for packages.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 02:41:16AM +0300, li...@wrant.com wrote: Lack of resources is about the only good reason there is for not providing binary updates. That's not true. Further, base + packages are updated frequently in snapshots, which is exactly a binary upgrade path for users without worry. This works exceedingly well and is well stated in the following current and stable pages. You're an idiot. Work on current is something that naturally occurs. It does not mean there are enough resources to *duplicate that work* and do the same on stable. I don't understand how you can be so stupid, especially since you admitted in a further email to using OpenBSD for years. Dude, it's well known and documented that there aren't enough people around to - figure out what needs to be committed to stable - build the resulting pieces (which *requires* an extra set of machines that run stable) - push them out. Basically, if you do that, you take away from the work being done on current. We're already stretched thin enough as-is.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Work on current is something that naturally occurs. It does not mean there are enough resources to *duplicate that work* and do the same on stable. Obvious facts make obvious points. The snapshots for current and the security errata is good enough for me. It's easy and allows me to run current, which is closest following developers. If everyone personally did so, there would be less need for back-porting, but that's not my decision. I don't care about binary patches to stable, since current is easier for me. Maybe somebody outside the project and known developers tried to make fuss out of nothing just to agitate developers and users. Maybe advising the blogger to try provide an unnecessary but annoying patch to the migration FAQ regarding binary patches that nobody actually needs that badly (and if they need there is a reputable source) was enough to annoy me. This may have been totally imaginary publicity stunt, targeted at wasting time and energy. Or occasionally pushing into the OpenBSD developers constraints that I don't like either, precisely like you. Thanks for the explanation, anyway that was obvious to me. Initially, I was annoyed that someone tried to call a con (negative feature) what is actually in my appreciation one of the best and easiest to use achievements, actually a pro feature that is snapshots and pkg_add -u. Simply because that person refused to learn this method to update exists and insisted to make it confusing for newcomers. There is no such imaginary con period. This exactly upgrade path is still lacking in major Linux distributions and also in FreeBSD until some time, still sucks there though. With OpenBSD it just works. Tremendously well for me for many years. Thanks you. That same person tried to submit to the site a totally mangled wording of nonsense to the FAQ migration section which I think is simply ridiculous even after the so called re-work which was even more so funny. Don't call names around without reading the details, please. I respect deeply the tremendous work done on the Perl ports infrastructure and think these are amazing and work great. For me it does. It can be made known to the newcomers as well. But no need to confuse them with some pidgin nonsensical twists in the overloaded migration FAQ. For me the upgrade path works, I don't compile anything meaning I use a binary upgrade path. I upgrade from snapshots and then do pkg_add -u and like it. It works fast, and is efficient. I don't understand how someone tries to stick their head in the sand and insists other newcomers do the same by confusing them in the FAQ and giving them the notion of sticking with stable just to add more pressure to back-port, yuck. I don't like somebody reducing chances of others to understand well the efficient upgrade that could be most appropriate for newcomers. And I don't like external parties agitating developers so that's why I responded initially. Enough already, I'm cool and don't intend to waste my time with the attempts those ill advisers try to inflict any further. My point was that the provided so far by OpenBSD is enough, good, sufficient and there is no need for any biased blog posts and poorly worded FAQ deterioration. Bloggers... I don't care about what some Linux user tries to publish on the OpenBSD page since it is not worth annoying anyone over it any more. Enough energy wasted on this subject already, why go further? Everything was and is good as it is. If you want to address your dissatisfaction, please move up the thread to the original post. I am sorry I wasted my time with these outrageously insane linuxisms.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Lot of angry fuss over words on a web page. Indeed. https://youtube.com/watch?v=hrCVu25wQ5s I have no wishes and the discontent with the proposed patch is gone now.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Hi, I’m sorry that it came off that way. Did you read the whole article? No that you should have, but it addresses most of the points that you mention I understand that OpenBSD owes me nothing (and vice versa) and I was just trying to help. The decision to merge that information is not mine to do, however, I honestly thought it could help people looking for a more thorough comparison between Linux and the BSDs. I’ve been using free software and contributing to it for a long time, in different projects, you can google it. I have no link to any institution or software/political group. You seem to be about certain that I have some sort of agenda, why? I’m curious. Anyway, I honestly was just trying to help. Writing the patch took me 5 minutes so just forget about it. I don’t want to create a bad mood on a place I just arrived at. Carlos On 28 Jun 2015, at 23:03, li...@wrant.com wrote: I’ve recently discovered OpenBSD after using Linux for more than 15 years. Long time, no see? And you blogged and achieved your goal of... making yourself expressed, critically on your own controlled web space. I wrote a blog article with my impressions and some other users suggested me to patch faq9.html to help other users migrating. Without reading much of the documentation to gain reasonable production usage, you're trying to mend the OpenBSD site to say it is lacking something that you thought worth having according to your current limited to Linux experience. Never occurred to you it may be intentional? This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system updated. And you consider this a service to other Linux long time users? Or a way to try push some notion of yours - criticise and try to lobby for some other entity's interests. Since English is not my first language, before merging the patch, please make sure the wording is proper. The pushing of binary patches notion is not appropriate. For a project that provides binary base OS and binary packages for ports on multiple architectures, and signed distribution of base and packages, before anyone else adopted these impressive achievements, you think in your own universe (and your advisor's) this group is resource constrained and incapable of providing binary patches to current and stable? Read the docs, don't be lazy and overly assuming. You're polluting the Internet with incorrect information which is a disservice to both newcomers from Linux and to the OpenBSD community. If you think the issue may be interesting to elaborate on, I could write a guide of improve on stable.html to help newcomers adapt to this method of keeping up to date. You're actually trying to scare people off, because you can't handle the lean and effective process of managing OpenBSD, justifying this with the unconfirmed fact you were advised by somebody. Realistically, you could have consulted off list before trying this stunt.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 07:20:51PM +0200, Carlos Fenollosa wrote: This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system updated. It may be worthwhile to mention that updates are comparatively very rare. I'd estimate that Ubuntu's stable distribution has been pushing a new kernel or two kernel a week lately along with countless other updates. A Debian/Ubuntu user reading that might imagine themselves manually patching and building constantly.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
I’ve recently discovered OpenBSD after using Linux for more than 15 years. Long time, no see? And you blogged and achieved your goal of... making yourself expressed, critically on your own controlled web space. I wrote a blog article with my impressions and some other users suggested me to patch faq9.html to help other users migrating. Without reading much of the documentation to gain reasonable production usage, you're trying to mend the OpenBSD site to say it is lacking something that you thought worth having according to your current limited to Linux experience. Never occurred to you it may be intentional? This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system updated. And you consider this a service to other Linux long time users? Or a way to try push some notion of yours - criticise and try to lobby for some other entity's interests. Since English is not my first language, before merging the patch, please make sure the wording is proper. The pushing of binary patches notion is not appropriate. For a project that provides binary base OS and binary packages for ports on multiple architectures, and signed distribution of base and packages, before anyone else adopted these impressive achievements, you think in your own universe (and your advisor's) this group is resource constrained and incapable of providing binary patches to current and stable? Read the docs, don't be lazy and overly assuming. You're polluting the Internet with incorrect information which is a disservice to both newcomers from Linux and to the OpenBSD community. If you think the issue may be interesting to elaborate on, I could write a guide of improve on stable.html to help newcomers adapt to this method of keeping up to date. You're actually trying to scare people off, because you can't handle the lean and effective process of managing OpenBSD, justifying this with the unconfirmed fact you were advised by somebody. Realistically, you could have consulted off list before trying this stunt.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On 2015-06-29 00.03.09 +0300, li...@wrant.com wrote: And you consider this a service to other Linux long time users? Or a way to try push some notion of yours - criticise and try to lobby for some other entity's interests. Do you have a patch that achieves the same goal (that is, the goal he stated, not the one you're reading into) that is up to your standards?
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
I understand that OpenBSD owes me nothing (and vice versa) and I was just trying to help. The decision to merge that information is not mine to do, however, I honestly thought it could help people looking for a more thorough comparison between Linux and the BSDs. Are you by chance being mislead to post this to tech@ instead of updating your own web site? Anyway, I honestly was just trying to help. Writing the patch took me 5 minutes so just forget about it. I don’t want to create a bad mood on a place I just arrived at. Please post to misc@ these discussions.
[Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Hi, I’ve recently discovered OpenBSD after using Linux for more than 15 years. I wrote a blog article with my impressions and some other users suggested me to patch faq9.html to help other users migrating. This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system updated. Since English is not my first language, before merging the patch, please make sure the wording is proper. If you think the issue may be interesting to elaborate on, I could write a guide of improve on stable.html to help newcomers adapt to this method of keeping up to date. Here’s the whole article if anybody’s interested: http://cfenollosa.com/blog/openbsd-from-a-veteran-linux-user-perspective.html Thanks! Carlos PS: This is my first patch, I’m sending it inline as suggested by http://www.bsdnow.tv/tutorials/patching-obsd. Apologies if this is not the right way. ? patch-faq9.diff Index: faq9.html === RCS file: /cvs/www/faq/faq9.html,v retrieving revision 1.113 diff -u -p -r1.113 faq9.html --- faq9.html 11 May 2015 11:18:30 - 1.113 +++ faq9.html 28 Jun 2015 17:19:45 - @@ -133,6 +133,18 @@ The tree is occasionally broken, but thi will be corrected rapidly, not something that will be permitted to continue. +liThere are no binary security updates. The team has no resources +to constantly compile binaries for all architectures, they do it only +every -release. Thus, unlike Linux distributions, which come with a +package manager which takes care of updates (ttyum/tt, +ttapt-get/tt, etc), there is no single command to update the system +to the latest binary status. Keeping up-to-date (including security errata) +is a bit different. You can either (1) upgrade every -release, +(2) apply patches froma href=../errataerrata/a or (3) follow +a href=../stable-stable/a. Binary updates may be obtained +from a href=https://stable.mtier.org;a third party/a for the i386 +and amd64 architectures./li + liOpenBSD has gone through heavy and continual security auditing to ensure the quality (and thus, security) of the code.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing What you missed : https://stable.mtier.org/
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 19:55:58 +0200 Denis Fondras open...@ledeuns.net wrote: This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing What you missed : https://stable.mtier.org/ What do you mean? The author mentioned mtier.org both in his original blog post and the patch sent to this mailing list. Regarding the patch itself: +a href=../stable-stable/a. Binary updates may be obtained +from a href=https://stable.mtier.org;a third party/a for the i386 +and amd64 architectures./li If it's going to be merged then it's probably worth to mention that some OpenBSD developers work for mtier directly. Each time mtier is mentioned someone is deemed to chime in with but I don't trust them even though the same people commit code to the base OS... Regards, Adam
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
What do you mean? The author mentioned mtier.org both in his original blog post and the patch sent to this mailing list. Author? Exactly whose ground are you defending here, Adam? If it's going to be merged then it's probably worth to mention that if... and you're on top of each other arguing already Just reread the text and consider if there is actually some hidden context or offensive agenda somebody is pushing around, just to make a remote point elsewhere. mentioned someone is deemed to chime in with but I don't trust them quit that garbage
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 01:02:44AM +0300, li...@wrant.com wrote: Do you have a patch that achieves the same goal (that is, the goal he stated, not the one you're reading into) that is up to your standards? One that reversed the submission of the proposed patch, correcting it and this thread to an empty string. Carlos' patch may not be appropriate, but you're kind of a condecending jerk, especially for someone who's apparently never sent mail to the OpenBSD lists before. Who are you?
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Without reading much of the documentation to gain reasonable production usage, you're trying to mend the OpenBSD site to say it is lacking something that you thought worth having according to your current limited to Linux experience. Never occurred to you it may be intentional? The pushing of binary patches notion is not appropriate. For a project that provides binary base OS and binary packages for ports on multiple architectures, and signed distribution of base and packages, before anyone else adopted these impressive achievements, you think in your own universe (and your advisor's) this group is resource constrained and incapable of providing binary patches to current and stable? Is this a joke, perhaps a terribly unclever attempt at trolling? Lack of resources is about the only good reason there is for not providing binary updates. The wonderful signed binary package infrastructure is not terribly useful if by the time it is released, you have to build ports from CVS to not have security vulnerabilities anyway! Clearly I am not the only one who thinks this is not intentional, given the existance of m:tier, which as discussed is even run by OpenBSD maintainers. Read the docs, don't be lazy and overly assuming. You're polluting the Internet with incorrect information which is a disservice to both newcomers from Linux and to the OpenBSD community. Given that the topic is about people moving from Linux to OpenBSD, and how it is normal in the Linux world to have binary updates... what here is incorrect, or a disservice? I've been using OpenBSD for most of a decade and I think this is a fine addition given the context of what someone from the Linux world expects. You're actually trying to scare people off, because you can't handle the lean and effective process of managing OpenBSD, justifying this with the unconfirmed fact you were advised by somebody. ... pgptrMillxnPy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Lack of resources is about the only good reason there is for not providing binary updates. That's not true. Further, base + packages are updated frequently in snapshots, which is exactly a binary upgrade path for users without worry. This works exceedingly well and is well stated in the following current and stable pages.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Lack of resources is about the only good reason there is for not providing binary updates. That's not true. It must feel absolutely glorious to bask in your anonymity and make such a strong claim. I personally am not going to spend a second working on binary updates until I know there are 20+ other developers also dedicated to making it happen, and once it starts happening -- keeps happening forever. That's the lack of resources I am talking about. I have no idea what you are talking about. Nor who you are. Since I don't know who you are, it is probably best to assume you are not the right person to believe regardin reasons for our lack of attention towards binary updates.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Lack of resources is about the only good reason there is for not providing binary updates. That's not true. It must feel absolutely glorious to bask in your anonymity and make such a strong claim. There are no strong claims. The other good reasons are to manage the updates manually as has been so far via instructions in the errata pages, saving some effort and empty discussions. That might also help learn in the process, beneficial to the users following stable on more than one system. I personally am not going to spend a second working on binary updates until I know there are 20+ other developers also dedicated to making it happen, and once it starts happening -- keeps happening forever. That's exactly the idea, not do it or do it right and keep doing the task. So the discussion is to probably best put these upgrade details in the upgrade guide, not in the migration guide in the meantime. Without delegating resources until deemed necessary and no need to state explicitly they have no binary upgrades on the migration guide.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Well, not near one, but I volunteer for binary errata patch on current for i386 and amd64 (the only archs I own for now). People are going to use binary patches from you? Who are you? What is your name? That's the first step to establish trust. Boy, that's a pretty clever joke!
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Well, not near one, but I volunteer for binary errata patch on current for i386 and amd64 (the only archs I own for now). People are going to use binary patches from you? I was hoping to try help with testing at least. Who are you? What is your name? That's the first step to establish trust. An OpenBSD user for a decade, this does not change the trust state. My name is Anton Lazarov from Bulgaria. If this is some hot topic that I stepped on, how do you propose one gets into good terms with these before acting on potentially controversial posts?
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
So the discussion is to probably best put these upgrade details in the upgrade guide, not in the migration guide in the meantime. Without delegating resources until deemed necessary and no need to state explicitly they have no binary upgrades on the migration guide. I think you've already said enough nasty stuff, and noone will pay attention to your wishes anymore.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
I think you've already said enough nasty stuff Right. I personally am not going to spend a second working on binary updates until I know there are 20+ other developers also dedicated to making it happen, and once it starts happening -- keeps happening forever. Well, not near one, but I volunteer for binary errata patch on current for i386 and amd64 (the only archs I own for now). May need hand holding at first, but eager to test and perfect the procedure. The forever part is a group thing, I'm in. Please kick me at the right time and I'll pick up the task.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Hi, I would just do some comments inline. On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 07:20:51PM +0200, Carlos Fenollosa wrote: Hi, I’ve recently discovered OpenBSD after using Linux for more than 15 years. I wrote a blog article with my impressions and some other users suggested me to patch faq9.html to help other users migrating. This patch is regarding the fact that there are no binary updates, which is a given thing in most Linux distributions, and some tips on how to keep the system updated. Since English is not my first language, before merging the patch, please make sure the wording is proper. If you think the issue may be interesting to elaborate on, I could write a guide of improve on stable.html to help newcomers adapt to this method of keeping up to date. Here’s the whole article if anybody’s interested: http://cfenollosa.com/blog/openbsd-from-a-veteran-linux-user-perspective.html Thanks! Carlos PS: This is my first patch, I’m sending it inline as suggested by http://www.bsdnow.tv/tutorials/patching-obsd. Apologies if this is not the right way. it is the good way. thanks for contributing. Index: faq9.html === RCS file: /cvs/www/faq/faq9.html,v retrieving revision 1.113 diff -u -p -r1.113 faq9.html --- faq9.html 11 May 2015 11:18:30 - 1.113 +++ faq9.html 28 Jun 2015 17:19:45 - @@ -133,6 +133,18 @@ The tree is occasionally broken, but thi will be corrected rapidly, not something that will be permitted to continue. +liThere are no binary security updates. The team has no resources +to constantly compile binaries for all architectures, they do it only +every -release. Thus, unlike Linux distributions, which come with a +package manager which takes care of updates (ttyum/tt, +ttapt-get/tt, etc), there is no single command to update the system +to the latest binary status. It is a bit more complex. The package manager under OpenBSD is pkg_add(1). It is perferctly able to do binaries updates of packages (note we speak about packages, not the base system). But as you noted previously, no binary packages for security updates are provided for -stable. And if pkg_add(1) haven't a suitable source of updated packages, it couldn't do it. Now, when you build your own packages from ports(7) (after updating it), the system will build a binary package. And pkg_add(1) will update your system with this new (updated) package (make install will invoke pkg_add). Keeping up-to-date (including security errata) +is a bit different. You can either (1) upgrade every -release, +(2) apply patches froma href=../errataerrata/a or (3) follow +a href=../stable-stable/a. Binary updates may be obtained +from a href=https://stable.mtier.org;a third party/a for the i386 +and amd64 architectures./li mtier provide third party packages for the -stable version for: - base system (using the same mecanism than for ordinaries packages). As it is for -stable, it includes errata. - standard packages. As it is for -stable, it includes security updates for packages. Thanks. -- Sebastien Marie
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
So, for newcomers from other systems the practical approach would be to follow snapshots to be able to upgrade all (packages on top of base). Install first (once) 1) download a snapshot set (or only bsd.rd for network install) 2) install latest snapshot base OS 3) install your packages with pkg_add (set PKG_PATH to mirror) Upgrade later (repeat) 4) download a fresher snapshot set (or only bsd.rd for network install) 5) upgrade to latest snapshot (boot recent bsd.rd from fresh snapshot) 6) run sysmerge for base and ports 7) upgrading packages with pkg_add -ui Extremely simple and efficient process, by far the best streamlined and easy maintenance compared to other operating systems (or kernels). Please test this procedure and see if this makes you happier after a while, for me it saves a lot of effort. Might be better to put the practical approach in the FAQ, rather than some convoluted explanation about third party stuff instead of a checklist.
Re: [Patch] New item to the Migrating to OpenBSD guide
Who are you? What is your name? That's the first step to establish trust. I would not think in this way Theo. If you need a name and a social status to trust someone, then you're fucked, because everyone can fake this, and a name is just a name, symbols of some language together, nothing more.
