# My OpenBSD experience:



## regexorcist (Mar 25, 2010)

About a week ago I was messing with a different Linux distro
on a spare computer and decided to try BSD. After a little bit
of research, it was obvious that *openBSD* fit nicely with
my idea of what an OS should be, so I installed it, downloaded 
a few apps and that's all it took. 

Everything worked "as advertised" and I like that the default
install is already secure. After playing for a few days, I installed
it on my primary machine replacing Arch Linux. I like Arch Linux
better than other "Linux" distros, but I think I like openBSD
even more. 

Anyway, I'll be documenting my *openBSD* experience 
on this thread from time to time.


----------



## regexorcist (Mar 25, 2010)

Well I've tried a few different Window Managers
like fvwm/fvwm2, Afterstep, Fluxbox, iceWM,
Openbox (my current selection) and have
run into an old problem I've had many times before...

The menu fonts were almost too small to read
which stems from improper detection of my
32" LCD monitor.  On #!Crunchbang Linux and
a few other distros I've had to add this line...
*xft.dpi: 96* 
to my ~/.Xdefaults file 
but on openBSD, I had to add *-dpi 96* to
my /etc/X11/xdm/Xservers file which looks
something like this...
*:0 local /usr/X11R6/bin/X -dpi 96 :0 vt05*

problem solved


----------



## regexorcist (Mar 27, 2010)

I've been using *openbox* as my window manager 
with *aumix* (to adjust volume) and *feh* to 
render a background which also allows transparency
to work in *Eterm*. A custom .conkyrc provides
me with all the system info I need via *conky* and
*swfdec* allows me to view flash video.

I set up a *samba* file server which has been
solid as a rock so far with 3 other machines accessing it.

It's only been a short time, but I still prefer openBSD
over all the linux distros and Windows versions I've used.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Mar 28, 2010)

the last time i ran openbsd was back in 1999 and i really enjoyed it. however, i stuck with freebsd as the community was larger and i believe still is today.

i would never run a window manager on a BSD system because it always ends up crashing on me due to crap drivers, a problem with x windows or a monitor resolution/refresh rate conflict. too much editing in xorg and tweaking the window manager to work smoothly.


----------



## beowuff (Mar 29, 2010)

I also use OpenBox on OpenBSD. I love that it totally gets out of my way and allows me to do my work simply. I use chbg for my wallpaper because it allows me to rotate pictures automatically.

I use to use FreeBSD a long time ago, but I would sometimes run into issues with programs not working correctly. I've never had a problem with anything not working as expected in OpenBSD. I've been using OBSD for several years now.


----------



## regexorcist (Mar 29, 2010)

Easy Rhino said:


> the last time i ran openbsd was back in 1999 and i really enjoyed it.


It's good to hear of positive openBSD experiences. 



Easy Rhino said:


> i would never run a window manager on a BSD system because it always ends up crashing on me due to crap drivers, a problem with x windows or a monitor resolution/refresh rate conflict. too much editing in xorg and tweaking the window manager to work smoothly.


My X server and Window Manager experience has been nothing but positive as I'm currently running without an xorg.conf
and the only issue so far was "small text" which was easily resolved by defining DPI when calling X.



beowuff said:


> I also use OpenBox on OpenBSD. I love that it totally gets out of my way and allows me to do my work simply.


Yes I agree 100%, OpenBox does stay out of your way. 



beowuff said:


> I've been using OBSD for several years now.


It's good to hear from an experienced openBSD user!! 


I appreciate posts form other users as I am an openBSD newbie


----------



## Zedicus (Mar 30, 2010)

pc-bsd is as close to bsd as i have gotten.  while i dont dislike bsd or have anythign against it i just do what i need to do in linux and have never felt the need to change platforms again. Debian can be shaped into anything, and openwrt is quite similar to debian. so my house all works similar.

that said, im not into normal desktops, i dont use gnome and my wife uses KDE, i run blackbox or fluxbox. and i build my system install of debian by hand,  so while i use linux, i do so in a fairly BSDish way.

i did like pc-bsd as a beginer friendly distro though, comparable to Mepis.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Mar 30, 2010)

yea, the thing i love about the BSD varients is how you can build the OS from the ground up. i always start with only a basic install of base and kernels. after that i login as root and build a brand new ports tree from the internet and then i begin compiling from source all the necessary programs. it is amazing.


----------



## regexorcist (Mar 30, 2010)

Yes, openBSD does not include any applications
which is good for those (like myself) who want 
control over what servers and applications are installed.

I've used packages as my primary source for applications
but if a package isn't available, a port usually is.
So far, I've installed Cherokee, Opera and xfce4-screenshooter
via my ports tree.

Both Packages and Ports have been reliable and easy to use.

@ Easy Rhino -> Yes installing from ports is amazing 
(very similar to portage on Gentoo which I had at one time)

@ Zedicus -> I have no experience with PC-BSD, but from what 
I've read, it sounds like they created a "Distro" with a BSD core 
and various included applications. 
As for BSD, Debian or even Windows, it's just a matter personal choice.


----------



## beowuff (Mar 30, 2010)

Easy Rhino said:


> ...and build a brand new ports tree from the internet and then i begin compiling from source all the necessary programs.


I did the same thing when I used FreeBSD. That's partly why I moved to OpenBSD. I actually don't like to compile everything. Just personal preference. 




regexorcist said:


> Yes, openBSD does not include any applications...


That's not actually true. The base install of OpenBSD includes a custom version of several apps including Apache 1, Sendmail, Bind, NTP, FVWM, etc. You can turn some of these on using rc.conf and rc.conf.local. FVWM is the default window manager if you run X.



regexorcist said:


> I've used packages as my primary source for applications
> but if a package isn't available, a port usually is.


This is how the packaging/ports system was designed to be used. If a package exists and you build the port with default options, you will get the exact same thing as the package. The package just saves time. 

In fact, I've noticed that when I build ports (specifically vim, as I needed ruby support), the system actually creates a custom package (complete with .tgz) and installs it AS a package. It will even show up in the list when using pkg_add -u to update packages, although it's at the end of the list with an error about not being able to find update candidates.



regexorcist said:


> I have no experience with PC-BSD, but from what
> I've read, it sounds like they created a "Distro" with a BSD core
> and various included applications.


PC-BSD is a fork of FreeBSD that closely follows changes made in FreeBSD. It has it's own style of packages using the .pbi extension, although it's my understanding that you can still use FreeBSD's ports. The idea was to make a form of BSD more accessible to "average" users.

DesktopBSD is more like a "Distro" of FreeBSD. In fact, there's a port in FreeBSD that installs DesktopBSD onto your install of FreeBSD.


----------



## regexorcist (Mar 31, 2010)

beowuff said:


> regexorcist said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, openBSD does not include any applications...
> ...


You are correct, I wasn't counting the X server, FVWM w/ xterm, etc... as applications.

In fact, after the initial reboot I entered FVWM opened xterm and went looking for
my /etc/rc.d/rc.0 - rc.6  
it was then I realized, *I'm not in Kansas anymore*


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 3, 2010)

Set up a few cron jobs today (*crontab -e*)
and as expected... flawless operation 

I also spent some time on IRC visiting a few channels 
in the Freenode network w/ my *XChat* client. 
(and yes, before anyone asks... I also have BitchX)


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 3, 2010)

regexorcist said:


> Set up a few cron jobs today (*crontab -e*)
> and as expected... flawless operation
> 
> I also spent some time on IRC visiting a few channels
> ...



haha bitchX FTW! what system setup are you using? intel/amd ? quad/dual? and what mobo chipset? any graphics acceleration?


----------



## Phxprovost (Apr 3, 2010)

not really trying to thread hijack but anyone have any info for beginners to get something like this started up?


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 3, 2010)

Easy Rhino said:


> haha bitchX FTW! what system setup are you using? intel/amd ? quad/dual? and what mobo chipset? any graphics acceleration?


I don't go on IRC that much so I prefer XChat over BitchX.
With BitchX I have look up the options -beo etc...to start my Identd server and if 
I do manage to connect to a server and join a channel I feel like a floundering 
victim trying to remember the slash "/" commands 
XChat or the Seamonkey Suite - IRC client are better for me as I'm just a occasional IRC user.

My system is a Dell Dimension 8400 Pent. 4 - 3.2 gig, an ATI R300 series and 
an LCD 32" TV for a monitor. 
(I always buy older used hardware from Craigslist)





Phxprovost said:


> not really trying to thread hijack but anyone have any info for beginners to get something like this started up?


Do you mean a BSD system?
I initially installed openBSD on a spare computer after doing some research on 
freeBSD, netBSD, openBSD, etc... and liked it so much I installed it on my primary
system replacing Arch Linux.
(NOTE: there are other BSDs such as Dragonfly BSD, PC-BSD & Desktop BSD).

It's just a matter of downloading, burning a DVD and installing.
I had previously run Gentoo and was familiar w/ portage so I felt
I could get openBSD running w/ the necessary applications from ports
but as it turned out, the (text based) install and package manager made
the chore much much easier than I was expecting. 

IMHO, I feel any Linux user and even many Windows users can
successfully install and run an openBSD system.


----------



## Kreij (Apr 3, 2010)

Hey Phxpro !!
Starting your own thread on what you all looking to do will get you a lot more information quicker.


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 4, 2010)

Kreij said:


> Hey Phxpro !!
> Starting your own thread on what you all looking to do will get you a lot more information quicker.


Agreed!!


----------



## beowuff (Apr 4, 2010)

For IRC, I use irssi with a custom script for layout. I like having multiple "windows" for each chat room on the command line. This also works well for me because I have a semi permanent tmux session running at home. I then connect through ssh to tmux and leave irssi running on there all the time.

tmux is like screen, if you've ever used that. I also use it at work all the time because there are certain servers I have to log into all the time. I just have tmux running at work with ssh sessions permanently logged in to the servers. It saves a lot of time each day.



Phxprovost said:


> not really trying to thread hijack but anyone have any info for beginners to get something like this started up?


A good book might be Absolute OpenBSD, though it's a couple of years and versions old. It still has good info.

Really, check out the FAQ at OpenBSD.org. Also, OpenBSD has some of the best and most accurate man pages of any *nix I've used.

http://openbsd.org/faq/index.html


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 5, 2010)

beowuff said:


> For IRC, I use irssi with a custom script for layout. I like having multiple "windows" for each chat room on the command line. This also works well for me because I have a semi permanent tmux session running at home. I then connect through ssh to tmux and leave irssi running on there all the time.
> 
> tmux is like screen, if you've ever used that. I also use it at work all the time because there are certain servers I have to log into all the time. I just have tmux running at work with ssh sessions permanently logged in to the servers. It saves a lot of time each day.



I've never used irssi (the IRC client of the future) or tmux (terminal multiplexer), 
so I had to look them up...  very cool.  
(I'll assume your using openSSH on openBSD, that goes without saying )

Like I said, I haven't used tmux (BSD) or screen (GNU) for that matter, 
but I might be giving tmux a try in the near future.

*Thanks for the info beowuff*


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 5, 2010)

screen is very easy to use and saves a lot of time when you want to keep a session open but need to close out your terminal emulator like putty. i have never tried tmux. how is it similiar/better to/than screen?


----------



## beowuff (Apr 5, 2010)

Easy Rhino said:


> screen is very easy to use and saves a lot of time when you want to keep a session open but need to close out your terminal emulator like putty. i have never tried tmux. how is it similiar/better to/than screen?


tmux is basically a BSD licensed version of screen, which is GPL. However, tmux is also part of the base install of OpenBSD, so it has rigorous security audits and testing that all parts of the base of OpenBSD go through. I don't know much about screen. I didn't use it for very long before switching to tmux.

Here's a link to the an announcement for tmux being put in the base. It comments on a few differences from screen. 

And here is a tmux FAQ with more info on the differences. It includes a list of what each does that the other doesn't. It's a very small list.

It appears the main advantage of tmux over screen, and why it was put in base, is because the code is very clean. From what I've read, the code for screen is very hard to read and is a mess. That makes it hard to audit and review for security issues.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 5, 2010)

well than that pretty much has me sold  however, most of my installs are linux based so im not sure if there will be any real security benefit there.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 6, 2010)

you dont happen to run any VM software on openbsd do you?


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 7, 2010)

I don't run any VM software, but how about Bochs or QEMU?

Maybe beowuff has some experience with this.


----------



## beowuff (Apr 7, 2010)

I've never run any virtual machines on OBSD, though I have run OBSD on Virtual Box and VMWare.

Doesn't seem to be a high priority for any of the OBSD devs and I've never needed to run any kind of virtual machine on it... OBSD does all I need.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 7, 2010)

beowuff said:


> I've never run any virtual machines on OBSD, though I have run OBSD on Virtual Box and VMWare.
> 
> Doesn't seem to be a high priority for any of the OBSD devs and I've never needed to run any kind of virtual machine on it... OBSD does all I need.



yea i was just curious. i run a few freebsd virtual machines on vmware server 2.0 and it really works well. i would like to have it host virtual machines to do some specific things like hosting low security programs like team speak.


----------



## beowuff (Apr 7, 2010)

So, basically, the OpenBSD argument against virtualization is two fold.
1) Your placing a fully functioning OS on top of another one. Now you have the security issues and vulnerabilities of both OSs.
2) You also have the security issues with the virtualization software. Not only with the software itself, but also possible issues between the two OSs.

Like I said, I've used VMs before, but always on workstations to play around with things. I'm not sure I'd use them in a production environment. Jails and chroots, however, are different animals that I'm just starting to really play with.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 7, 2010)

beowuff said:


> So, basically, the OpenBSD argument against virtualization is two fold.
> 1) Your placing a fully functioning OS on top of another one. Now you have the security issues and vulnerabilities of both OSs.
> 2) You also have the security issues with the virtualization software. Not only with the software itself, but also possible issues between the two OSs.
> 
> Like I said, I've used VMs before, but always on workstations to play around with things. I'm not sure I'd use them in a production environment. Jails and chroots, however, are different animals that I'm just starting to really play with.



VMs work differently however. i can install a security problem piece of software like teamspeak on a linux virtual machine and i do not have to worry about somebody hacking it because they wont get anything of value. all of the important root and OS stuff is running on the host and it is impossible to get from the VM to the host. that is really a great reason to run virtual machines.


----------



## beowuff (Apr 8, 2010)

Easy Rhino said:


> i can install a security problem piece of software like teamspeak on a linux virtual machine and i do not have to worry about somebody hacking it because they wont get anything of value.


But if they hack your VM, they've still got a VM running on a machine that they can use. So, they can still get something of value. Having the VM means you now have two OSs to secure. There's still value in having a hacked machine, even if it's just used as a zombie.



Easy Rhino said:


> all of the important root and OS stuff is running on the host and it is impossible to get from the VM to the host.


You can't know this for sure. There could be a bug in the VM software that would allow access to the host. If you hack a VM, it's pretty easy to be able to tell your in a VM. At that point, you can start on the VM software. Or try to hack the host directly.

I'm not saying there's no use for VMs. Obviously they can be immensely useful or the software wouldn't be as popular as they are today. I even use them occasionally.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 8, 2010)

beowuff said:


> But if they hack your VM, they've still got a VM running on a machine that they can use. So, they can still get something of value. Having the VM means you now have two OSs to secure. There's still value in having a hacked machine, even if it's just used as a zombie.



so long as you are a good admin and you constantly monitor your machines it is highly unlikely. you just shut down the VM without having to shutdown the entire PC. 




> You can't know this for sure. There could be a bug in the VM software that would allow access to the host. If you hack a VM, it's pretty easy to be able to tell your in a VM. At that point, you can start on the VM software. Or try to hack the host directly.
> 
> I'm not saying there's no use for VMs. Obviously they can be immensely useful or the software wouldn't be as popular as they are today. I even use them occasionally.



thus far no bugs have been found allowing access from the VM to the host. in fact, the only way in theory is if you can somehow determine the virtual cpu clock cycles and match it with the host cpu clock cycles at the right time. and i really dont think that is going to happen anytime soon.


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 15, 2010)

Decided to try something different...

Prior to installing openBSD on my main desktop,
I installed it on a spare computer that was given to me,
so last night I pulled that same spare computer out
(Dell Dimension 2300) and installed DragonflyBSD.

There were a few issues w/ partitioning and then
a reoccurring failed temp sensor reading which
kept displaying on the command line, but I did get
it installed successfully. 
I used the package manager to download
the 5 or 6 xorg meta packages as well as a window manager
and a few other apps. I really liked pkg_*r*add as opposed 
to pkg_add which saved me some time (didn't have to look up a mirror).
I selected the "Hammer" file system which, from what I read, offers some 
neat features, but I didn't spend to much time reading the details. 

All in all, I prefer openBSD which has been running 24/7 as my primary 
desktop and file server for at least 3 weeks now. Operation has been flawless
and there were no installation issues. I'm probably going to add a second
network card to that spare computer and replace DragonflyBSD with openBSD.
Then (when I get more time) experiment with router and firewall configurations.

To be fair, now that DragonflyBSD is installed it seems solid, but I'm not
going to leave it on long enough to really evaluate. I know what I like and 
it's openBSD 

The story continues...


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 27, 2010)

i just realized... NO SCREENSHOTS!!! where are they at?!?!?!?


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 28, 2010)

Your absolutely right...
I'll post screenshots from now on

Here is my current desktop...


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 28, 2010)

did you find the openbox docs helpful? i am currently working on openbox on ubuntu and would like to know how to find current video resolution and what not.


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 28, 2010)

Easy Rhino said:


> did you find the openbox docs helpful? i am currently working on openbox on ubuntu and would like to know how to find current video resolution and what not.


I didn't read the docs. 

I don't use any Openbox utilities like obmenu, I find it much easier to edit my menu.xml file
and as for display resolutions/options, If I don't like the initial resolution I'll edit my xorg.conf file.
(NOTE: I usually stick with one resolution, so there is no need to change on the fly)

Lately systems have gotten better at detecting hardware so an xorg.conf may not exist,
but it's a simple matter to generate one.

I usually prefer to manually edit config files over using any GUI front end, but thats' just me...


----------



## Bink (Apr 29, 2010)

Congrats on thinking/playing outside of the Linux box.  I’ve been using OpenBSD for many years now—and, pretty much, replaced Debian with it.  Regarding window managers, if you are open to something minimal, you might want to try the built-in cwm.  It’s quite decent, lightweight and, well, built-in.  While I would not consider OpenBSD a desktop-oriented OS—I use it mainly for routing, firewall and related functions, which it excels at—it’s very clean, consistent and will still make for a decent desktop (I hope you don’t care for anything Adobe Flash…  ).

Cheers.


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 29, 2010)

Bink said:


> Congrats on thinking/playing outside of the Linux box.  I’ve been using OpenBSD for many years now—and, pretty much, replaced Debian with it.  Regarding window managers, if you are open to something minimal, you might want to try the built-in cwm.  It’s quite decent, lightweight and, well, built-in.  While I would not consider OpenBSD a desktop-oriented OS—I use it mainly for routing, firewall and related functions, which it excels at—it’s very clean, consistent and will still make for a decent desktop (I hope you don’t care for anything Adobe Flash…  ).
> 
> Cheers.


Hi Bink,
Thanks for the post.

I may try cwm, but...
Is this project active, has there been any development since 2005??

As for Flash, swfdec works OK for the older stuff and the long awaited 
*Demise of Flash*  is just around the corner!!


----------



## Bink (Apr 29, 2010)

regexorcist said:


> I may try cwm, but...
> Is this project active, has there been any development since 2005??
> 
> As for Flash, swfdec works OK for the older stuff and the long awaited
> *Demise of Flash*  is just around the corner!!


cwm is now part of OpenBSD’s base—so while the original project might have been abandoned, the OpenBSD devs have become its new in-tree stewards and have been updating/fixing bugs the code regularly ever since its import in 4.2.  As for Flash, yes, I too look forward to its demise…


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 29, 2010)

Now I remember...
It was in the fvwm menu as an option initially.

I'll try cwm along with a bunch of other window managers
when I upgrade to 4.7 (just a few weeks away) 

So Bink,
What do you use for your desktop OS


----------



## Bink (Apr 29, 2010)

regexorcist said:


> So Bink,
> What do you use for your desktop OS


I hate to say it in this forum, and it’s a bit OT, but I primarily run Windows 7—as my day job keeps me quite involved, primarily, with Windows.  Then again, while it is proprietary/near monopoly/closed software, Windows 7 has proven pretty damn decent—and it still does power management better than any UNIX-like OS I’ve ever used (perhaps with the exception of OS X, but I find Apple, in many ways, to be worse than Microsoft).

While I look forward to the day I can run open source, particularly OpenBSD, on almost everything, it’s not a religion for me and closed source still has its place—and is still better than open source at quite a few things.


----------



## regexorcist (Apr 30, 2010)

Bink said:


> While I look forward to the day I can run open source, particularly OpenBSD, on almost everything, it’s not a religion for me and closed source still has its place—and is still better than open source at quite a few things.


Just as open source is better at quite a few things also. 

As for that day...
For some of us, it's already here and for others it may never come.

Thanks for posting on my OpenBSD thread!!


----------



## regexorcist (May 22, 2010)

As of last night...
I had to take a detour off the OpenBSD road due to hardware compatibility.

Just received my new ATI 1 gig. video card w/ HDMI connector.
To get any 3D capabilities and HDMI sound, I have to use the
ATI Catalyst Driver for Linux. Even so, configuring sound was still
a bit of a chore.
Now I use a 32" LCD TV for a monitor, so it makes sense to use
the video card and Catalyst driver even if I have to transfer back
to a Linux distro.
My choice was between Arch and Slackware...
While Arch is a fairly clean slate to develop on, I prefer that 
Slackware's philosophy was to produce the most "Unix like" OS
and as J.R. "Bob" Dobbs reminded me... I must have slack!! 

As for OpenBSD...
*I'll be back!!!* when hardware permits.

For now I'll put it on a laptop or secondary system


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 22, 2010)

i know what you mean. my graphics requirements kept me from sticking with freebsd even though i have an nvidia card. 

slackware is a good choice but i simply could not get used to it. plus the community acted highly elite and would not answer questions unless you phrased them in a specific way. now, i was used to that since i played around with freebsd for several years, but these guys were just lame. 

you could always go with something like gentoo or centos. both have strong communities and are very clean. gentoo actually uses the portage system


----------



## regexorcist (May 22, 2010)

yes I had Gentoo before and found it to be a PITA 

Actually, I considered BSD because I was familiar w/ Portage
so it was Gentoo that got me to BSD indirectly. 

I say it was a PITA because at the time, I was trying many different
development systems so I would emerge/compile for like
45 minutes, try it out, not like it, uninstall and try another one, repeat, repeat...

I would sometimes get a note at the end to manually change some config file
or change my make config to ignore some library version, etc...

All in all, I preferred Arch to Gentoo.

As for a specific "distro" community, I don't bother,
they are always wayyy toooo seriousss!! 
*General Nonsense* is more my speed 

NOTE:
I'm not putting Gentoo down, I learned more about Linux
from Gentoo than any other distro, period!!


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 22, 2010)

i hear yea. the ubuntu community has been very helpful and i find them patient enough. same with the fedora community but they are not clean enough if you want to develop and start from a clean slate.

when you get arch up and running you should create another thread and take some screen shots


----------



## regexorcist (May 22, 2010)

A good community is important for a distro to grow and Ubuntu is
probably the largest community. I used to listen to LUG Radio
and now A Shot of Jaq oggcasts w/ Jono Bacon (Ubuntu Community Manager).

Arch is a very good system,
at one time I was running Arch w/ JWM and just a few xfce and obscure apps.
I couldn't have been any lighter and made it a point to not
install any gnome/kde libraries, a few were required for different things
but not too many.
I liked pacman and yaourt but a rolling release isn't for me, I would
update the system every few weeks and worry if something broke.
It never did, but that didn't stop me from worrying.
I like fixed stable releases, not bleeding edge or high maintenance,
I liked OpenBSD, but I also like to get as much out of my PC
hardware as I can. It's slackware for now and I'll upgrade from
this release candidate (13.1 RC2) to 13.1 release when it comes out.

Now it's time to play with some things that were not available to me on BSD.


----------

