Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 3rd Nov 2005 01:52 UTC
OpenBSD "Yesterday OpenBSD, the proactively secure Unix-like operating system, released version 3.8, featuring several improvements to networking, RAID management tools, and increased security. At you can download installation files or order the official three-disc CD set, which supports 16 processor architectures out of the box. I took this new release as an opportunity to perform my first ever OpenBSD install." Read more here.
Thread beginning with comment 54933
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Inconsistent
by Soulbender on Thu 3rd Nov 2005 03:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Inconsistent"
Member since:

"But having to setup X manually, it is something that has to be done just that: manually"

You dont have to set up anything manually for X. Autodetect works like a charm in the majority of cases.
Also, if you cant figure out how you configure X OpenBSD is not the desktop OS for you.

"Server OS or not, this is 2005 and OpenBSD should go with the times."

Nonsense. Servers dont need X and if the way OpenBSD do things doesnt suit you then it's simply not for you.
Alternatively, if you really want a graphical X config (or a "better" installer or whatever) write one yourself. Noone's going to do it for you.

"BSDs, Arch/Slackware and some other old stylers should do too. It is called care for your users."

More nonsense. Obviously the users and maintainers of these systems *likes* it this way. If you want the graphical eye candy and installers there are plenty of distros for you. If you dont there are also distros for you.
It's called choice.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Inconsistent
by on Thu 3rd Nov 2005 08:01 in reply to "RE[3]: Inconsistent"
Member since:

True, a server does not _need_ X, but that's why you can deselect any X packages when installing OpenBSD. However, if you _do_ select X packages then you most likely want to use X (otherwise you're just being silly) and hence X should be automatically configured and setup. True 1337 hackers can manually edit the configs, 99% of the rest will have a much nicer user experience.

Yes, I like OpenBSD and think Theo and the gang are doing a great job. It just wouldn't hrt to make things easier. Remember that things don't have to be complicated to be powerful - such mentality is simply arrogant "1337-ness".

/Lennart Fridén

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Inconsistent
by on Thu 3rd Nov 2005 08:37 in reply to "RE[4]: Inconsistent"
Member since:

"Remember that things don't have to be complicated to be powerful - such mentality is simply arrogant "1337-ness"."

Things aren't designed to be needlessly complicated just so people can feel "1337" (as you put it) about themselves. (leetspeak is really childish by the way) I run OpenBSD on a headless, embedded computing system. The ultra light weight installation method makes OpenBSD the easiest OS I've ever installed on that device. I don't need or want a so-called "easy" installer. Not because I think I'm elite - but it's because on some systems, that type of installer IS simply the best AND easiest way to do it.

Reply Parent Score: 0