4 ms·

So simplified I couldn't figure out how to even login, let alone install it. I think if they're aiming for simplicity, start with the installer. And no, "read

by mig39 2y ago

So simplified I couldn't figure out how to even login, let alone install it. I think if they're aiming for simplicity, start with the installer. And no, "read the instructions" isn't making it simpler.

akdor1154 2y ago
Simplicity in implementation is not necessarily the same as simplicity in usability. Both are desirable, but if there's a trade-off between the two, then I reckon it's quite justifiable to prioritise the former.
- rollcat 2y ago
  Try installing OpenBSD then. Even though the installer runs in text mode, it holds your hand thru a standard setup, all the way to a graphical login. The basic X11 desktop is a part of the base system (as opposed to packages/ports). The installer also supports a bunch of advanced features, like scripting an automated install. OpenBSD is also some of the cleanest and simplest code I've ever read.
  - eth0up 2y ago
    Maybe it seems a stupid question, but it's an honest one: why openbsd rather than freebsd? I tried freebsd when Debian integrated systemd. Being neither savvy or intelligent, I had trouble with the ports system and installations were taking hours for small applications. I gave up. I've always had a nagging desire to try again, but poor health has discouraged me from those kinds of learning curves. I recently left Debian again and use Void, with Opensuse on a separate drive for purposes of maintaining some competency and familiarity with systemd (just in case...). Anyway, I'd appreciate your input on the various BSDs. As I understand, recent funding suggests it may be growing and will remain viable for a long time, which was, however relevant or not, a concern for me. Edit: I might also mention that I gave serious consideration to Chimera before settling on Void, for similar reasons of learning curves. Of all distros, I had determined it would either be Void or Chimera and nothing else - or BSD.
    - rollcat 2y ago
      > I recently left Debian again and use Void, with Opensuse on a separate drive [...], I gave serious consideration to Chimera before settling on Void [...] Have you tried to write down your goals/expectations? It seems like you're throwing distros at the wall to just see what sticks. I don't care for apt vs xbps or systemd vs openrc. My own goals are simple: - I want a "UNIX workstation", overall decent for software development, need to run complex proprietary software (Logic, Compressor, Photoshop...), interface with niche hardware, develop for iOS, and occasionally play games: macOS - I want to play a couple of games that won't run on Mac/Linux/BSD: Windows - I want a simple system that I can understand and actually enjoy using: OpenBSD, Alpine > purposes of maintaining some competency and familiarity with systemd You can also just use a VM or a homelab box. No need to care for your personal device, as long as it fulfils your stated goals. > why openbsd rather than freebsd? I think OpenBSD is to FreeBSD what FreeBSD is to Linux, and then some more. I'd say these are its most distinguishing features (compared to almost every other OS): - User-friendly - assuming you have some experience with the command line, can follow prompts, read documentation, etc. - Excellent documentation, check out the FAQ: <https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ https://www.openbsd.org/faq/>; manpages: <https://man.openbsd.org https://man.openbsd.org>; etc. Even compared even to the FreeBSD handbook, which (while a step up from most Linux distros) isn't quite on the same level. - Secure by default: it is the upstream project for OpenSSH, LibreSSL, PF (notably forked into macOS and FreeBSD), and some others; also: privilege separation, W^X memory, (K)ASLR, doas, signify, pledge, unveil, kernel/libc random relinking, syscall origin verification, etc. Best part, you get all of that for free and you don't even notice. There's no "hardening guide". - Truly self-hosting - the base system has everything you'd require to comfortably develop the base system, including X11, clang, mg (an Emacs clone - if you're not a vi fan), tmux, etc. You will probably install packages anyway, to get your preferred tools, but the base system will still be there. - Innovative, not just technologically but culturally: cvsweb was the first of its kind - the source code, including all commits, could be anonymously browsed via the web, in (IIRC) 1996; most contemporary projects would just occasionally throw tarballs over the fence. - Simplicity. It is not just the manpages or the source code; OpenBSD meticulously rips out or refuses to accept complex systems (sudo, gpg, seccomp) and instead introduces simpler interfaces (doas, signify, pledge) I wish I could live in a world where this is all I need, but unfortunately, OpenBSD brands itself as a "research OS", and doesn't provide any accommodations such as binary compatibility between releases, Linux syscall emulation (which FreeBSD does), and so on. Even vmd(8) is a recent addition.

by mig39 2y ago

akdor1154 2y ago

Simplicity in implementation is not necessarily the same as simplicity in usability. Both are desirable, but if there's a trade-off between the two, then I reckon it's quite justifiable to prioritise the former.

rollcat 2y ago
Try installing OpenBSD then. Even though the installer runs in text mode, it holds your hand thru a standard setup, all the way to a graphical login. The basic X11 desktop is a part of the base system (as opposed to packages/ports). The installer also supports a bunch of advanced features, like scripting an automated install. OpenBSD is also some of the cleanest and simplest code I've ever read.
- eth0up 2y ago
  Maybe it seems a stupid question, but it's an honest one: why openbsd rather than freebsd? I tried freebsd when Debian integrated systemd. Being neither savvy or intelligent, I had trouble with the ports system and installations were taking hours for small applications. I gave up. I've always had a nagging desire to try again, but poor health has discouraged me from those kinds of learning curves. I recently left Debian again and use Void, with Opensuse on a separate drive for purposes of maintaining some competency and familiarity with systemd (just in case...). Anyway, I'd appreciate your input on the various BSDs. As I understand, recent funding suggests it may be growing and will remain viable for a long time, which was, however relevant or not, a concern for me. Edit: I might also mention that I gave serious consideration to Chimera before settling on Void, for similar reasons of learning curves. Of all distros, I had determined it would either be Void or Chimera and nothing else - or BSD.
  - rollcat 2y ago
    > I recently left Debian again and use Void, with Opensuse on a separate drive [...], I gave serious consideration to Chimera before settling on Void [...] Have you tried to write down your goals/expectations? It seems like you're throwing distros at the wall to just see what sticks. I don't care for apt vs xbps or systemd vs openrc. My own goals are simple: - I want a "UNIX workstation", overall decent for software development, need to run complex proprietary software (Logic, Compressor, Photoshop...), interface with niche hardware, develop for iOS, and occasionally play games: macOS - I want to play a couple of games that won't run on Mac/Linux/BSD: Windows - I want a simple system that I can understand and actually enjoy using: OpenBSD, Alpine > purposes of maintaining some competency and familiarity with systemd You can also just use a VM or a homelab box. No need to care for your personal device, as long as it fulfils your stated goals. > why openbsd rather than freebsd? I think OpenBSD is to FreeBSD what FreeBSD is to Linux, and then some more. I'd say these are its most distinguishing features (compared to almost every other OS): - User-friendly - assuming you have some experience with the command line, can follow prompts, read documentation, etc. - Excellent documentation, check out the FAQ: <https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ https://www.openbsd.org/faq/>; manpages: <https://man.openbsd.org https://man.openbsd.org>; etc. Even compared even to the FreeBSD handbook, which (while a step up from most Linux distros) isn't quite on the same level. - Secure by default: it is the upstream project for OpenSSH, LibreSSL, PF (notably forked into macOS and FreeBSD), and some others; also: privilege separation, W^X memory, (K)ASLR, doas, signify, pledge, unveil, kernel/libc random relinking, syscall origin verification, etc. Best part, you get all of that for free and you don't even notice. There's no "hardening guide". - Truly self-hosting - the base system has everything you'd require to comfortably develop the base system, including X11, clang, mg (an Emacs clone - if you're not a vi fan), tmux, etc. You will probably install packages anyway, to get your preferred tools, but the base system will still be there. - Innovative, not just technologically but culturally: cvsweb was the first of its kind - the source code, including all commits, could be anonymously browsed via the web, in (IIRC) 1996; most contemporary projects would just occasionally throw tarballs over the fence. - Simplicity. It is not just the manpages or the source code; OpenBSD meticulously rips out or refuses to accept complex systems (sudo, gpg, seccomp) and instead introduces simpler interfaces (doas, signify, pledge) I wish I could live in a world where this is all I need, but unfortunately, OpenBSD brands itself as a "research OS", and doesn't provide any accommodations such as binary compatibility between releases, Linux syscall emulation (which FreeBSD does), and so on. Even vmd(8) is a recent addition.