3 ms·

The downside to OpenBSD to understand what you are using and monitor how to keep it going from release to release.

SoftTalker 3y ago
I guess you're being ironic but I didn't mean to say it was a "downside" just that it is different from what one may be used to with Linux distros. I actually think it's good that you're sort of forced to keep up, but it's something you need to be aware of in case that isn't practical for your planned use. For example if you get too far behind you'll find that sysupgrade doesn't work anymore, because it will only upgrade from one release to the next, and if you're more than two releases behind the "next" release might not be on the mirrors anymore. In that case you'll have to go hunting for it or just do a new install of the current release and then copy/update all your local config. That can happen with Linux too, but typically not as quickly. With OpenBSD, if you're much more than a year behind, upgrading will become increasingly problematic.
- detourdog 3y ago
  I think I actually left words out and so my point was lost. The difference I see is that OpenBSD is so well documented that one can judge wether or not any of the updates is needed. One can consider each release as a standalone environment. The change notes going forward can be monitored. Upgrades are only required for feature changes. There is no requirement to upgrade.
- anthk 3y ago
  No. You can always find mirrors. A friend upgraded from 7.0 to 7.3 with no issues.
  - accrual 3y ago
    sysupgrade was released with OpenBSD 6.6. I think my wildest upgrade was going from 6.8 to current (7.3), so 5 releases without a hitch. Granted the box was mostly just base anyways. Always remember to "pkg_add -u" after every release.
    - detourdog 3y ago
      The biggest change for me was when they added security to GPIO. I forget the details, but fabBSD(openBSD variant for CAMs) was a casualty last I checked. It's a documented system what more could one ask for.

I guess you're being ironic but I didn't mean to say it was a "downside" just that it is different from what one may be used to with Linux distros. I actually think it's good that you're sort of forced to keep up, but it's something you need to be aware of in case that isn't practical for your planned use. For example if you get too far behind you'll find that sysupgrade doesn't work anymore, because it will only upgrade from one release to the next, and if you're more than two releases behind the "next" release might not be on the mirrors anymore. In that case you'll have to go hunting for it or just do a new install of the current release and then copy/update all your local config. That can happen with Linux too, but typically not as quickly. With OpenBSD, if you're much more than a year behind, upgrading will become increasingly problematic.

detourdog 3y ago
I think I actually left words out and so my point was lost. The difference I see is that OpenBSD is so well documented that one can judge wether or not any of the updates is needed. One can consider each release as a standalone environment. The change notes going forward can be monitored. Upgrades are only required for feature changes. There is no requirement to upgrade.
anthk 3y ago
No. You can always find mirrors. A friend upgraded from 7.0 to 7.3 with no issues.
- accrual 3y ago
  sysupgrade was released with OpenBSD 6.6. I think my wildest upgrade was going from 6.8 to current (7.3), so 5 releases without a hitch. Granted the box was mostly just base anyways. Always remember to "pkg_add -u" after every release.
  - detourdog 3y ago
    The biggest change for me was when they added security to GPIO. I forget the details, but fabBSD(openBSD variant for CAMs) was a casualty last I checked. It's a documented system what more could one ask for.