# OpenBSD or FreeBSD? Ideas?



## initpy (Nov 9, 2012)

Hi all,

I'm using FreeBSD on my netbook and desktop machines, but there's that old P4 that I like, that has some 128MB RAM IIRC, and a 40GB IDE HDD. So I thought that I'll just use it like a torrent box, and a git server (for my own projects) and SSH to access it on my LAN (WIFI)

I know FreeBSD would do the trick, but since I never used OpenBSD before, I thought that I'd give it a try on this; learn me some OpenBSD, and give this machine a second life. Is it worth the time? Any general ideas, advice for this setup? It will be a headless machine, and will be as minimal/light as possible.

Thank you for your help and suggestions


----------



## SirDice (Nov 9, 2012)

So a guy walks into a church and asks if he should believe in God or the devil. Not that I'm equating either one to FreeBSD or OpenBSD but I think you know what answer you're going to get on a _FreeBSD_ forum :e

But if you want to try OpenBSD, than by all means, go for it.


----------



## initpy (Nov 9, 2012)

Thanks, SirDice!


> But if you want to try OpenBSD, than by all means, go for it.



I like this spirit, and this is why I love this community.

So, let's rephrase my questions:


Is OpenBSD _that_ different from FreeBSD, that I will learn new stuff?
Is a minimal install of OpenBSD equivalent to a minimal install of FreeBSD?
What will I really miss if I opt for OpenBSD? --Given my minimal needs, and my machine.
There's not a 4th question. Why did I thought there will be a 4th one?


----------



## SirDice (Nov 9, 2012)

1) Superficially they aren't that different. Internals however can differ quite a lot (although there's also a lot in common). As a user you probably won't notice the differences.

2) If I remember correct OpenBSD is a little more barebones even.

3) Nothing much but OpenBSD does have a lot less ports, so a specific port might not be there.


----------



## jpierri (Nov 9, 2012)

If you need to run BGP (as I do) then your best choice, AFAIK, is OpenBGP under OpenBSD.

If you need a proxy (as I do), Squid maybe better under FreeBSD ... FreeBSD's ports have version 3.1 while OpenBSD's ports (last time I saw) only have 2.7 ...

On the other hand, FreeBSD's update is better than the OpenBSD way ...

On the other other hand :e OpenBSD's PF is said to be capable of tricks that FreeBSD's PF is not (I can't personally endorse that but ...)


----------



## sossego (Nov 9, 2012)

Why don't you just set up a dual boot environment?

You would have both and be able to see the performance differences.


----------



## initpy (Nov 10, 2012)

Thanks for your input, @jpierri and @sossego!

In fact, I don't need BGP or Squid. All I need is: git, transmission-daemon, NFS and that about it. Yes, PF in openBSD is more advanced, probably with a simpler syntax, but that's also the case with FreeBSD's PF, IMHO.

@sossego, I don't want to dualboot actually. I already have some other boxes with FreeBSD, and speed or performance isn't an issue for me, since this headless home server is well... a simple home server on a Celeron, with about 128MB of RAM.

Thanks again for your help, guys


----------



## J65nko (Nov 10, 2012)

Before installing OpenBSD please study the OpenBSD FAQ thoroughly. After having done that you will know which habits your acquired in running FreeBSD are applicable for OpenBSD. 

I will just mention two of the main hurdles experienced FreeBSD users have with OpenBSD: 


*Ports*

On FreeBSD you run a x.release or x-stable kernel/userland with the "current" version of the FreeBSD ports. You cannot do this on OpenBSD.

From http://openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html#NoFun


> 15.4.1 - I'm getting all kinds of crazy errors. I just can't seem to get this ports stuff working at all.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> ...



*Custom kernel*

If you are accustomed to compile your own FreeBSD kernel then you should know that this is discouraged for OpenBSD. Read Why do I need a custom kernel? to find out why.


----------



## initpy (Nov 10, 2012)

Thanks, @J65nko!

I, in fact, just installed it. 5.2/386 that is.

Right now it's the barebone thing. I plan to install git, and transmission-daemon and tmux (or does tmux come with their base system?)

Now, the real off-topic question: the CPU fan is noisy, I set the CPU at 660 MHz and was wondering if I could just unplug the fan. Anyone did this? I'll Google and see if that won't hurt.


----------



## NewGuy (Nov 13, 2012)

*differences*



			
				initpy said:
			
		

> Thanks, SirDice!
> 
> 
> Is OpenBSD _that_ different from FreeBSD, that I will learn new stuff?
> ...



1. Yes, they are quite different. The general design is similar, but their functionality and style are quite different. Especially in the way updates and initial configuration are handled.

2. No, they're not equivalent.

3. OpenBSD is primarily designed to be secure and.... that's about it. Really good for firewalls and such, I suppose, but it really isn't designed to be the general OS/server that FreeBSD is.


----------



## throAU (Nov 14, 2012)

How old is the P4?  Does it have hyperthreading or multiple cores?  If so - I believe OpenBSD's SMP support is lacking/non-existent...


That said, for the workload you're proposing, assuming your hardware is supported it should be fine.  And exposure to another OS to see how things work is never a bad thing.


----------



## shepper (Nov 14, 2012)

> Right now it's the barebone thing. I plan to install git, and transmission-daemon and tmux (or does tmux come with their base system?)



The install52.iso includes tmux, xorg with some x-apps like xterm.  Git and transmission are available as precompiled binaries.  Also included in the base install is lynx, a text base browser which would allow you to pull your *.torrent files directly into the P4.  OpenBSD is also easy to turn into an FTP/SFTP server so your downloads can be pulled into other computers on your LAN.  If you have questions http://www.daemonforums.org is a good place to ask openbsd questions.

Given that you want to keep it text based and light I would also look at rtorrent/libtorrent.  rtorrent can be set up to automatically poll a local folder and start torrents that reside in that folder.  Alternatively, you can select random folder (tab completion) and down load to specified folder. rtorrent will also run without xorg if you desire.  It is recommended that you install xorg (some of the base applications were compiled with xorg dependencies) but you do not have to start xorg in order to run rtorrent.


----------



## initpy (Nov 15, 2012)

Thank you NewGuy, throAU, and shepper!

I have the system set up and running, and I read most of the FAQ (or maybe all of it). You were all right. OpenBSD is even "simpler" (as in: more barebones) than FreeBSD, and for my needs it was the better solution IMVHO.

Overall, I'm very satisfied with the experience; it was fun and enriching. There, in fact, are some differences with FreeBSD (like the configuration way) but that was just a detail: the concept is the same, the implementation is a bit different.

The machine (I changed the processor several times) is a Celeron 1 GHz (I will probably downgrade it to a 500 MHz) and I run it fanless. It's at average 97% idle. Now if it weren't that noisy PSU, that machine would be more awesome than my netbook.

Also, I'm happy I installed it, because I had to relearn, and hone my PF knowledge, and I will probably post another thread for opinions about my current configuration.

Again, thank you guys. That was fun!


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Nov 29, 2012)

I've been trying out OpenBSD 5.2 for the past week on my PC. It's not as polished as a desktop OS as FreeBSD, but on the surface you wouldn't tell it from my FreeBSD box at a glance.

OpenBSD doesn't have Flash but it has Gnash, which still allows me to watch YouTube videos. It only has the generic nv Nvidia driver instead of the legacy driver FreeBSD has for my GeForce3, but I very rarely play games anyway. My FreeBSD pf.conf file worked on my OpenBSD box with the exception of the syntax for the scrub rule which needed tweaking. Xorg worked out of the box without having to configure it and it supports HT for my P4. Overall, it was very familiar to set up and operate.

The biggest difference I see in the two is in the ports system and the way the disk is partitioned off during build. OpenBSD recommends using packages and ports is one of the things I like best about FreeBSD. You can still populate the ports tree but the /usr space it resides on was only allocated 4GB out of 80GB available using the AUTO partitioning option, which didn't take long to fill up once I started compiling ports.

I'll probably revert it back once FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE comes out (hopefully tomorrow) but it was a good learning experience for me and I could get by with nothing but OpenBSD as an OS if it came down to it.


----------



## bbzz (Nov 29, 2012)

Yeah, they almost feel the same, almost.

Two major issues for me are lack of ZFS and a proper disk encryption mechanism on OpenBSD. 

Two killer features.


----------



## xibo (Nov 29, 2012)

vnconfig is not issuing a proper disk encryption mechanism?

I agree on ZFS though.


----------



## bbzz (Nov 29, 2012)

No, it's not as nearly as good as GELI.

Depends on what you are using it for, however.


----------



## throAU (Nov 30, 2012)

bbzz said:
			
		

> Yeah, they almost feel the same, almost.
> 
> Two major issues for me are lack of zfs and a proper disk encryption mechanism on OpenBSD.
> 
> Two killer features.



For what OpenBSD is commonly used for (internet facing firewall with low resource utilisation), probably not important.

Machine shouldn't be storing data...


----------



## bbzz (Nov 30, 2012)

Oh, totaly agree.
I was thinking desktop/workstation.

OpenBSD is great if for nothing than latest pf.


----------



## kpedersen (Dec 1, 2012)

I found OpenBSD to be quite sluggish for things like compiling software.

All that security junk gets in the way of my pure speed!


----------



## zspider (Dec 1, 2012)

Besides as soon as you start installing things out of the OpenBSD ports tree, you potentially open security holes, thus kind of nullifying the ultra secure aspect.


----------



## Martillo1 (May 9, 2013)

bbzz said:
			
		

> Yeah, they almost feel the same, almost.
> 
> Two major issues for me are lack of zfs and a *proper disk encryptio*n mechanism on OpenBSD.
> 
> Two killer features.



I am sure you want to check softraid0 and its associated command bioctl. They give full partition encryption.


----------



## pacija (May 9, 2013)

On my network OpenBSD and FreeBSD work together, complementing each other. As opposed to FreeBSD which I use for various servers - DNS, SMTP/IMAP, Web, proxy, database, jabber, SIP etc., OpenBSD does great job when it comes to routing and firewalling. Setting up BGP peering with upstream providers is as easy as editing a few lines in bgpd.conf. OSPF routing with internal routers - peace of cake in ospfd.conf. Want to have them redundant? Just put a few lines regarding carp in hostname.if. Packet filtering? pf.conf syntax is very understandable even for a newbie. Need to shape your traffic? HFSC is cool. If you add pftop and get to know a bit of tcpdump you get quite a control of what gets in and out of your network. Need VPN for Windows clients? OpenBSD 5.3 introduced npppd, which is a great pptp/l2tp server. IPsec? Again, a few lines.


----------



## Carpetsmoker (May 10, 2013)

initpy said:
			
		

> Is a minimal install of OpenBSD equivalent to a minimal install of FreeBSD?





			
				SirDice said:
			
		

> 2) If I remember correct OpenBSD is a little more barebones even.



It seems you remember wrong ]What will I really miss if I opt for OpenBSD? --Given my minimal needs, and my machine.[/quote]

The Opera browser doesn't run very well on OpenBSD, which may or may not be an issue. Other than this, I never noticed significant differences for desktop use.


----------



## shepper (May 11, 2013)

Another example of matching your hardware to the BSD version.  I have an old ViaC3 powered Desknote.

NetBSD < 6.0 will not even boot.
FreeBSD 9.0/9.1 inter*r*upts lead to a high pitched squealing noise.  Decreasing kern.hz lowers the pitch of the noise.  Noise is also generated when the partially working Touchpad is activated.
OpenBSD - works like a charm.  Touchpad driver easily configured (vertical scroll, tap to click) via synclient with no additional drivers installed.  Running a lightweight desktop on current with bulk package binaries on a near weekly basis.


----------



## hitest (May 12, 2013)

NewGuy said:
			
		

> OpenBSD is primarily designed to be secure and.... that's about it. Really good for firewalls and such, I suppose, but it really isn't designed to be the general OS/server that FreeBSD is.



OpenBSD is a good OS for desktop and server.  I'm currently running OpenBSD 5.3 on one of my boxes with XFce 4.10.


----------



## RichardET (Aug 22, 2013)

I have an old Sun UltraSparc, Blade 100, I think OpenBSD is better on it than FreeBSD.


----------



## sossego (Aug 22, 2013)

RichardET said:
			
		

> I have an old Sun UltraSparc, Blade 100, I think OpenBSD is better on it than FreeBSD.



Isn't SPARC what Theo started OpenBSD on?


----------



## RichardET (Aug 24, 2013)

I would actually prefer to use freebsd FreeBSD for Sparc64, because *I* think the freebsd FreeBSD community is more helpful, but I s*i*mply cannot get *X*.Org, or anything like this to install on a freebsd FreeBSD 9.1 system, Sparc64, Sun Blade 100. But all this works out of the box with openbsd OpenBSD, why is this? `pkg_add -r xorg` will not work on freebsd FreeBSD, for Sparc64, but with openbsd OpenBSD, it is already installed with the installer.


----------



## CoTones (Aug 25, 2013)

Most OpenBSD developers runs OpenBSD everyday as a main system. Rumors says, FreeBSD developers - MAC OS. See the difference (emphasis on rumors and MAC OS)?


----------



## sossego (Aug 25, 2013)

CoTones said:
			
		

> Most OpenBSD devs runs OpenBSD everyday as a main system. Rumors says, FreeBSD devs - MAC OS.
> See the difference ( emphasis on rumors and MAC OS )?


This not not true. Think about it. Those developers who want to- and need to if a job requires such- run MacOSX, can.


----------



## kpedersen (Aug 25, 2013)

CoTones said:
			
		

> Most OpenBSD devs runs OpenBSD everyday as a main system. Rumors says, FreeBSD devs - MAC OS.
> See the difference ( emphasis on rumors and MAC OS )?



You are not the only one who has said this, I remembered hearing it somewhere else.

http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=5070#post33574

I don't know if this is some *BSD rivalry banter or something or if FreeBSD developers are just more partial to iTunes  whilst they are hacking on ZFS, VirtualBox and DTrace


----------



## CoTones (Aug 26, 2013)

Looks not good.

I expected "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated".


----------



## ChalkBored (Aug 27, 2013)

kpedersen said:
			
		

> You are not the only one who has said this, I remembered hearing it somewhere else.
> 
> http://www.daemonforums.org/showthread.php?t=5070#post33574
> 
> I don't know if this is some *BSD rivalry banter or something or if FreeBSD developers are just more partial to iTunes  whilst they are hacking on ZFS, VirtualBox and DTrace



I thought it was because several of them worked at Apple.


----------

