4 ms·

My biggest turnoff with OpenBSD is the more complicated package management if you want to have new versions and security updates beyond the versions packaged wi

My biggest turnoff with OpenBSD is the more complicated package management if you want to have new versions and security updates beyond the versions packaged with the release. As far as I know you either have to stay on the bleeding edge with -current, build packages yourself, or trust a third party (M:Tier) to build for you, who last I checked were behind on firefox builds. I'd love to someday run it on my laptop though.

kbirkeland 8y ago
You can patch the system and update all binaries with two commands: doas syspatch doas pkg_add -u
- deskdrawer 8y ago
  As far as I know that will update to the latest packages built for that release, but those are not the latest versions of those packages. OpenBSD doesn't have the resources to rebuild every port as a package for -stable.
4ad 8y ago
The best part of OpenBSD (to me), as opposed to say, FreeBSD is that pkg -u only brings in security fixes, instead of unrelated crap I don't want. When I want new packages, I'll upgrade the operating system. I very much appreciate the stability of packages during a release cycle.
- deskdrawer 8y ago
  For firefox at least, I don't think security patches are backported for OpenBSD, nor are newer versions. As the browser is the main way I view remote content, not being fully patched there is important to me.
- JdeBP 8y ago
  This is very probably because you have url: "pkg+http://pkg.freebsd.org/${ABI}/latest", in your configuration file instead of (say) url: "pkg+http://pkg.freebsd.org/${ABI}/release_3",
  - 4ad 8y ago
    url: "pkg+http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/${ABI}/quarterly" This is the default configuration.
    - JdeBP 8y ago
      Not originally it wasn't. That was a change in 10.2 . * https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/a-mini-faq-on-pkg.49694/page-2#post-339590 https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/a-mini-faq-on-pkg.49694/p... * https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-announce/2014-April/000079.html https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-announce/2...
      - 4ad 8y ago
        It's the default now, and 10.2 was released over three years ago. What exactly is your point?
        JdeBP 8y ago
        That your configuring your system to be on these update cycles is very probably why your system is on these update cycles. This should have been abundantly clear.

kbirkeland 8y ago

You can patch the system and update all binaries with two commands: doas syspatch doas pkg_add -u

deskdrawer 8y ago
As far as I know that will update to the latest packages built for that release, but those are not the latest versions of those packages. OpenBSD doesn't have the resources to rebuild every port as a package for -stable.

4ad 8y ago

The best part of OpenBSD (to me), as opposed to say, FreeBSD is that pkg -u only brings in security fixes, instead of unrelated crap I don't want. When I want new packages, I'll upgrade the operating system. I very much appreciate the stability of packages during a release cycle.

deskdrawer 8y ago
For firefox at least, I don't think security patches are backported for OpenBSD, nor are newer versions. As the browser is the main way I view remote content, not being fully patched there is important to me.
JdeBP 8y ago
This is very probably because you have url: "pkg+http://pkg.freebsd.org/${ABI}/latest", in your configuration file instead of (say) url: "pkg+http://pkg.freebsd.org/${ABI}/release_3",
- 4ad 8y ago
  url: "pkg+http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/${ABI}/quarterly" This is the default configuration.
  - JdeBP 8y ago
    Not originally it wasn't. That was a change in 10.2 . * https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/a-mini-faq-on-pkg.49694/page-2#post-339590 https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/a-mini-faq-on-pkg.49694/p... * https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-announce/2014-April/000079.html https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-announce/2...
    - 4ad 8y ago
      It's the default now, and 10.2 was released over three years ago. What exactly is your point?
      - JdeBP 8y ago
        That your configuring your system to be on these update cycles is very probably why your system is on these update cycles. This should have been abundantly clear.