Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Kenneth Gober]

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Mihai Popescu  wrote:
> Folks, since we are at it, does anyone knows why 'OpenBSD' is spelled
> like that and not 'openbsd' . I was ponder that for a time, because I
> know you all hate camelCase notation.

In this context, "OpenBSD" is a proper noun, and therefore follows rules
appropriate for such names.  See also "OpenSSH", etc.

camel case (and other such conventions) is used for variable names,
function names, and sometimes program names.  "identifier names"
is the technical term for the kinds of names such rules generally apply to.

Do not blindly try to apply rules in situations where they do not make
sense.  Part of knowing a rule is knowing what situations the rule applies
to.  You would not name your children using camel case, for example.

-ken

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Christian Weisgerber]

On 2016-10-29, Mihai Popescu  wrote:

> Folks, since we are at it, does anyone knows why 'OpenBSD' is spelled
> like that and not 'openbsd' . I was ponder that for a time, because I
> know you all hate camelCase notation.
> Is it ok open_bsd?

For better security:

set -A c l u; for i in o p e n b s d; do typeset -${c[RANDOM&1]} i; print -n 
$i; done; print

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber  na...@mips.inka.de

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Mihai Popescu]

Folks, since we are at it, does anyone knows why 'OpenBSD' is spelled
like that and not 'openbsd' . I was ponder that for a time, because I
know you all hate camelCase notation.
Is it ok open_bsd?

Many thanks :-)

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[lists]

> there is no philosophy.
> 
> there was no belief.
> 
> maybe there was a touch of idealism, but nothing as refined as you
> suggest.
> 
> it was simply a decision made for a handful of things which got reused
> for the rest of them.
> 
> back decades ago.

Hi Dan,

Sounds good reasonable decision to me: not too much theology (in)hier(7)

hier - layout of filesystems
[http://man.openbsd.org/hier]

Theory of everything
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything]

Kind regards,
Anton

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[kuniyoshi]

> Stuart Henderson already answered that:
> It's easier for the system administrator to have all
> configuration files in one place and on one file system:
> less places to remember for backup and when migrating
> configuration to a new machine.

Thanks.

> Nothing particular, except that simplicity in general also
> helps security.

Thanks. 

Regards,
kuniyoshi

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[dan mclaughlin]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 01:21:13 -0600 "Theo de Raadt"  wrote:
> > > > Different design, different philosophy, and different goals [1] but the
> > > > same BSD heritage.
> > > 
> > > There is no philosophy involved.
> > > 
> > > England and the US and Canada are not differences in philosophy.
> > > 
> > > They are just different.  philosophy has little to do with it.
> > > 
> > > Stop using that word incorrectly, please.
> > > 
> > > Try:
> > > 
> > > Different texture, different pantone.
> > > 
> > > See, it fails to reuse words which are out of scope, and is just as
> > > accurate.
> > 
> > actually, philosophy was used accurately here.
> > 
> > the relevant definition from wordnet:
> >   any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation
> > and the equivalent from merriam-webster.com:
> >   a set of ideas about how to do something or how to live
> > 
> > it's only because you have a different philosophy that you use only /etc
> > instead of /usr/local/etc. that's how you deal with the situation of where 
> > to
> > put configuration files.
> > 
> > people/groups have different ideas of "how to deal with a situation" or "how
> > to do something", which means they have different philosophies.
> 
> there is no philosophy.
> 
> there was no belief.
> 
> maybe there was a touch of idealism, but nothing as refined as you
> suggest.

i made no such suggestion. a 'philosophy' doesn't have to be a doctrine.

> 
> it was simply a decision made for a handful of things which got reused
> for the rest of them.
> 
> back decades ago.
> 
> your philosphy is that you can copy things from a dictionary and
> that we should live according to that as a rule?

i never said you "should live according to that as a rule". and where the FUCK
did you get that, eh?  all i did was to point out that you were wrong about the
use of the word philosophy. i have heard it used innumerable times in my life
in exactly the manner it was originally used in this thread.

and yes, when dealing with definitions of words, my philosophy is to go to
the dictionary.

> you weren't there.  were you even born?  perhaps your philosophy is
> that you can speak authoritatively upon things you didn't experience
> directly?
> 
> oh wait, that's religion

and what the FUCK does this have to do with anything? this is completely
irrelevant anyway. you said the word philosophy was used wrong, and i *cited*
authoritative sources. i could have said that i have always heard philosophy
used in that manner all of my life, as i have, but instead i *cited* recognized
authorities on the meanings of words.

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Ingo Schwarze]

Hi,

kuniyo...@free.fr wrote on Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:44:12AM +0200:

> I wonder if there was a technical reason

Stuart Henderson already answered that:
It's easier for the system administrator to have all
configuration files in one place and on one file system:
less places to remember for backup and when migrating
configuration to a new machine.

> in particular related to security.

Nothing particular, except that simplicity in general also
helps security.

Yours,
  Ingo

Re : Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[kuniyoshi]

Hello.

Thank you for your answers (man hier(7)). Just a clarification. I was
imprecise. Sorry. My question was rather technical: I wonder if there was a
technical reason in particular related to security.

I know: FreeBSD is not OpenBSD. I use these two operating systems. And indeed,
they are different. I use them. They both work. I like these two systems. And
as they are different, I try to understand the technical reasons of their
differences ... if such reasons exist.

Regards,
kuniyoshi

NB : Sorry, my english is poor ! 

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Theo de Raadt]

> > > Different design, different philosophy, and different goals [1] but the
> > > same BSD heritage.
> > 
> > There is no philosophy involved.
> > 
> > England and the US and Canada are not differences in philosophy.
> > 
> > They are just different.  philosophy has little to do with it.
> > 
> > Stop using that word incorrectly, please.
> > 
> > Try:
> > 
> > Different texture, different pantone.
> > 
> > See, it fails to reuse words which are out of scope, and is just as
> > accurate.
> 
> actually, philosophy was used accurately here.
> 
> the relevant definition from wordnet:
>   any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation
> and the equivalent from merriam-webster.com:
>   a set of ideas about how to do something or how to live
> 
> it's only because you have a different philosophy that you use only /etc
> instead of /usr/local/etc. that's how you deal with the situation of where to
> put configuration files.
> 
> people/groups have different ideas of "how to deal with a situation" or "how
> to do something", which means they have different philosophies.

there is no philosophy.

there was no belief.

maybe there was a touch of idealism, but nothing as refined as you
suggest.

it was simply a decision made for a handful of things which got reused
for the rest of them.

back decades ago.

your philosphy is that you can copy things from a dictionary and
that we should live according to that as a rule?

you weren't there.  were you even born?  perhaps your philosophy is
that you can speak authoritatively upon things you didn't experience
directly?

oh wait, that's religion

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[dan mclaughlin]

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 23:16:50 -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Different design, different philosophy, and different goals [1] but the
> > same BSD heritage.
> 
> There is no philosophy involved.
> 
> England and the US and Canada are not differences in philosophy.
> 
> They are just different.  philosophy has little to do with it.
> 
> Stop using that word incorrectly, please.
> 
> Try:
> 
> Different texture, different pantone.
> 
> See, it fails to reuse words which are out of scope, and is just as
> accurate.

actually, philosophy was used accurately here.

the relevant definition from wordnet:
  any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation
and the equivalent from merriam-webster.com:
  a set of ideas about how to do something or how to live

it's only because you have a different philosophy that you use only /etc
instead of /usr/local/etc. that's how you deal with the situation of where to
put configuration files.

people/groups have different ideas of "how to deal with a situation" or "how
to do something", which means they have different philosophies.

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Theo de Raadt]

> Different design, different philosophy, and different goals [1] but the 
> same BSD heritage.

There is no philosophy involved.

England and the US and Canada are not differences in philosophy.

They are just different.  philosophy has little to do with it. 

Stop using that word incorrectly, please.

Try:

Different texture, different pantone.

See, it fails to reuse words which are out of scope, and is just as
accurate.

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Theo de Raadt]

> > I am a (happy) operating system user OpenBSD -current (architecture amd64) 
> > on my laptop Lenovo ThinkPad X200s. :)
> >
> > I would like to learn more about this system. I'm curious. I recently 
> > realized that the third-party software configuration files were in "/etc" 
> > instead of "/usr/local/etc" that does not exist (like FreeBSD).
> 
> See hier(7).
> 
> > Why?
> 
> OpenBSD isn't FreeBSD.

It's too bad war isn't peace.

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Fred]

On 10/27/16 21:17, kuniyo...@free.fr wrote:

Hello.

I am a (happy) operating system user OpenBSD -current (architecture amd64) on 
my laptop Lenovo ThinkPad X200s. :)

I would like to learn more about this system. I'm curious. I recently realized that the third-party 
software configuration files were in "/etc" instead of "/usr/local/etc" that 
does not exist (like FreeBSD).

Why?

Regards,
kuniyoshi



Different design, different philosophy, and different goals [1] but the 
same BSD heritage.


The following are a good starting place

http://man.openbsd.org/man.1
http://man.openbsd.org/hier.7
http://man.openbsd.org/packages.7

and they can all be found on your system if you installed the manXX.tgz sets

hth

Fred

[1] http://www.openbsd.org/goals.html

Re: strict separation base system and third party software

[Stuart Henderson]

On 2016-10-27, kuniyo...@free.fr  wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I am a (happy) operating system user OpenBSD -current (architecture amd64) on 
> my laptop Lenovo ThinkPad X200s. :)
>
> I would like to learn more about this system. I'm curious. I recently 
> realized that the third-party software configuration files were in "/etc" 
> instead of "/usr/local/etc" that does not exist (like FreeBSD).

See hier(7).

> Why?

OpenBSD isn't FreeBSD. Here, /usr/local is something that is usually
just written to by pkg_add, not somehing that gets changed in normal
sysadmin operation.

strict separation base system and third party software

[kuniyoshi]

Hello.

I am a (happy) operating system user OpenBSD -current (architecture amd64) on 
my laptop Lenovo ThinkPad X200s. :)

I would like to learn more about this system. I'm curious. I recently realized 
that the third-party software configuration files were in "/etc" instead of 
"/usr/local/etc" that does not exist (like FreeBSD).

Why?

Regards,
kuniyoshi