Re: Re: #OpenBSD   
     By: Ash-Fox to Deuce on Fri Oct 17 2008 11:00 am   
      
    > However, Tatu Ylonen did not design the original OpenSSH as just a OpenBSD   
    > daemon and the current OpenSSH developers have not treated this as such   
    > either. This is why OpenSSH has certain features such as it's own built in   
    > randomizer, should the system not provide a acceptable one (despite the   
    > fact it would never need one on OpenBSD).   
      
   Last time I looked, all those features are part of the -p modifications, not   
   part of the "clean" development branch.  Again, working from memory, new   
   development is always done in the OpenBSD-specific version, then hacks and   
   add-ons required for other platforms are added by the portability team.  In   
   other words, there is the "official" OpenSSH tree which ONLY runs on OpenBSD,   
   then this is hacked up to make the portable version which runs everywhere else.   
      
   Tatu Ylonen did not design OpenSSH, he designed SSH.  SSH was then forked by   
   Bjorn Gronwall as OSSH which was then forked by OpenBSD as OpenSSH.  Along the   
   way, non-OpenBSD code was removed and exists only as part of the glop that is   
   added for the -p releases.   
      
    > There was a time a lot of big names used OpenBSD. Right now, I can only   
    > think of Playboy (all the others don't use OpenBSD anymore). No other   
    > single large company comes to mind that runs OpenBSD anymore.   
      
   A lot of names still use it, just not for web servers.  I don't think even   
   Playboy uses it for their web servers.  And seriously, web servers are a very   
   small portion of total systems out there.  Regardless, I've never felt OpenBSD   
   as an OS was relevant, it was just the influence of the OpenBSD ideals which   
   was/is.   
      
    > Yes, I'm aware of the driver licensing scandals. However, it has gone both   
    > ways and I can assure you before these scandals even occurred, the overall   
    > dislike towards Linux was already felt. It didn't really bring   
    > more 'hatred', just more to ramble about.   
      
   The 'hatred' is generally based on behaviour of the Linux community (much as   
   the hatred of OpenBSD is).  On the whole, Linux distros and Linux application   
   developers view Linux as being the entire open source OS/application community.   
   As a result, Linux-specific code and behaviours are very common and standards   
   which target the family as a whole are ignored or even mocked.   
      
   On the whole, it boils down to intense dislike rather than hatred though.   
   Design decisions in Linux distros (and to a much smaller extent, the kernel)   
   are based on convenience or coolness rather than technical excellence.  The   
   Linux development model embraces fragmentation with the democratic idea that   
   end users should be the judges of what does and does not go into a complete   
   system.   
      
   Anyway, it doesn't really matter to me, I dislike most Linux distros and a   
   small number of things about the Linux kernel, and I dislike OpenBSDs ridged   
   adherence to technical standards.  Mostly though, I dislike comparisons of   
   "xBSD" vs "Linux" where "Linux" essentally includes all distributions.  This   
   type of thought process which is VERY common, is yet another source of abrasion   
   between the two groups.  It's rather like comparing Apache to Windows.   
      
   ---    
   Synchronet - Jump on the Web 0.2 bandwagon!   
      
   ---   
    þ Synchronet þ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)   
    * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:340/400)