How does OpenBSD compare to say Slackware or Gentoo for speed.

The OpenBSD people advise against trying to optimize the kernel for say a i686 based system.

To me that would mean a lesser performance.

Anyone have any experience with this?

And did you read the article in Slashdot today?

OpenBSD guy flaming Linux.

That got reading up on OpenBSD.

It seems to be superior in security but they don't mention stellar performance.

Yea, I read that article too mianve..

I have tried OpenBSD a few times.. Problem with that OS is their drivers.
Seems like all the equipment I have is always too new. And I'm not cutting edge either,
I always wait for the price to drop a bit. Linux also has its problems there, but not to
the OpenBSD extent.

Did you happen to read the article underneath that by chance??
Daniel Robbins, the founder of Gentoo, just got a job with Microsoft. And WOW,
is he getting hammered by the open source zealots. Wonder what's gonna happen
with that distro? Sure doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy, and I'm a Slack user >= 5 years.

ya I read that also and thought it was total crap. First of all, slackware isn't for speed, as the Slackware book says: "The Slackware Linux operating system is a powerful platform for Intel-based computers. It is designed to be stable, secure, and functional as both a high-end server and powerful workstation." not rice like gentoo. They say "We produce Gentoo Linux, a special flavor of Linux that can be automatically optimized and customized for just about any application or need. Extreme performance, configurability and a top-notch user and developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience." which is from gentoo's homepage. It was like comparing a drag racer which migh go fast of might drop a cylinder to a good truck that has done its job everyday for the past 15 years. Second of all I don't know how much more stable slackware can get. Also doesn't slackware and gentoo share alot of scripts? When was the last time when a security problem was caused by slackware and not 3rd party software? I hate how BSD people think that they are better than everybody. on a side note if you want fast run zipslack that is self compiled.

Wow... That was a pretty scathing article... The guy is just pissed because his OS isn't in the spot light. Thats all I gathered from that rant... There is a little bit of truth in that BSD is generally more secure and a better OS in some areas, but linux is total crap? Come on... Sounds like he has a pretty big head. I still have FreeBSD on my lappy and I like it alot. It's like a wierd version of Slack that runs pretty damn good. I never had to much luck with OpenBSD but I only used it for a month or so. Apples and Oranges in my book. Not flowers and dung....

That's interesting about the Gentoo developer. Anyone have a link with some official info?

http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/05/0...id=109&tid=106

Thats the Gentoo article..

I've moved over to freebsd. mostly because the linux kernel especially as of 2.6 is a piece of sh$t. there is no quality control system in place. freebsd doesn't just release a new kernel whenever they feel like it. it is also run by commitee instead of the one man philisophy "linus". they have a superior quaility control system in place. it also has lots of other things going for it as well. central ports system with dep, and only one distro... freebsd with one standard. yeah there is openbsd and netbsd but freebsd is by for the dominate one and used by over 90%.

also the bsd kernel really does follow the unix standard to a tee. linux tends to follow it here and their, and partially over their, none here. posix compliant, yeah right whatever you say linus.

hmmm..interesting...how do you know there are no ctrl quality in linux kernel?? let me know

Aside from business, I don't have any particular need for computers OR Linux. But because of my job, I have an urgent need for both, but don't have any particular brand loyalty.


To ensure that I'm not making the wrong decisions as a network admin, I try to keep tabs on what the distributions have to offer. I'm not going to use Slackware, thinking that it's still the "best" for me without gathering evidence.


And while it isn't perfect, and it never will be, Slackware still comes out on top in my estimation for the combination of broad (and backwards) x86 hardware compatibility, conservative release cycle, minimal demand for machine resources, reliability under load, and overall ease of installation and configuration on a broad spectrum of hardware.


With regard to ease of installation and configuration, yes there are distributions out there that are "easier" if every machine one has to administer is a P4 with at least a GB of RAM, and equipped with Linux friendly peripherals.


But when one has to "make do" with what one has, and when one is looking for a consistent administrative environment and reliability across that broad spectrum, Slackware continues to look very good. Even Debian introduces more complexity and headaches for me. RedHat, Fedora, Mandriva, SuSE? I'd have to start replacing a lot of hardware, and get back on that treadmill. With Slackware, I upgrade hardware when the hardware itself becomes unreliable, not because I can no longer run a router with 32 MB RAM, or a small FTP server on a still good P120.

Maybe there is not changelof in the 2.6.12 kernel?

The issue of Quality Control in Linux is addressed in some of Eric Raymond's writings. Basically, if feedback mechanisms are in place so that user input can make it's way back to the developers/coders then there is Quality Control.

It is not the Inhouse control that MS uses but it has several advantages. It it larger, more diverse and historically leads to faster development.

One element that slows down Linux development is when hardware developers do not open source their drivers. By making an effort to purchase only hardware that supports the open source concept users can place financial pressure on hardware manufacturers to open source the drivers.

FUD campaigns and meritless lawsuits are also being utilized to slow Open Source development.

Well, I just wiped my HDD and installed OpenBSD 3.7 after being reminded of it above... Runs pretty good... My generic bsd.mp doesn't seem to be picking up a 2nd proc but maybe it only supports physical procs and not HT... ICH5 SATA detected no prob. NIC, SOUND et. all detected. Other than having a totally useless default shell I'm pretty pleased with it. It's crippled to say the least without PORTS. Comes with absolutley nothing. Once you download/extract the ports tarball into /usr you can totally customize your install base with what you need. Me likely....

So, yea... I guess I have considered switching, or rather did switch. Temporarily anyway... I can never seem to stay away from Slackware for long..

I would never consider anything other than Slackware...as far as I can see anyway. I remember trying several different distros along the way, but always returning to Slack. Eventually, I just accepted the fact that Slackware was the distro for me.

I'm not sure if this is the third or fourth time I've posted here, but here goes nothing.

I'm a die-hard slacker, and lately, after reading some of Jamie Zawinski's posts (livejournal.com/users/jwz) about why he switched to a Mac, I'm beginning to put together a real list of things that I, to get my job done and enjoy myself in off hours, need.

It's led me to try some of the newer "user friendly" distros again, and I have this to say thus far:

Xandros 3.0.1 is still not right for me. It doesn't autodetect my four-year-old hardware-- hardly cutting edge. I'd hate to see what I'd do on the laptop I'll be inheriting when we get my wife into an iBook...

Fedora Core 4 has crashed on install on every machine I've tried it on. All two of them, granted, but still. Hardly polished.

Slackware still gives me the best balance of control and power. I can do everything under Slack that I want, except a few things that'll require a 2.6 kernel, and I'm too lazy to compile one for myself.

The other thing I've tried and been really impressed with is Puppy Linux. I'm using it right now, because I've not yet reinstalled Slack after the disastrous attempt at Xandros (It's locked up at random places while booting three times now! And still no working wireless under Xandros) and Puppy is quick to start and easy to configure. A three command shell script gets me up wirelessly in seconds, and I'm on my way. I've got a friend that's a big DamnSmall fan, and I think he might like Puppy even more.

Actually my intial favorite was FreeBSD, which was ok until they cut the release CDs to 2 from 4. But I left FreeBSD for Slackware because of a buggy USB implementation.

I quit using Slackware for Simply MEPIS 3.3. I am not as happy with MEPIS as I was with BSD because, I'd have to do apt-gets some of which would be broken. Like mplayer.

While I liked Slackware's simplicity, adding software is very painful. I NEED mplayer. I don't want to spend my time chasing dependency problems.

Slackware is a good Server OS as is Open/Net/FreeBSD.

Hope this helps...

i just switched from using slack for 2 years to Gentoo a couple weeks ago. I didn't think I'd find a distro that I liked better than Slack, but I've gotta say. I've been really impressed with gentoo. I liked slackware because of all the tinkering it forced you to do to get things just right, and that effect is 10x greater in gentoo. the package system in gentoo is the best i've seen yet (the portage system, along with the "USE=" system, is genius, and makes it almost hard to get dependency problems.). although it's kind of a pain in the ass to wait for every package to compile every time you wanna install something new (you can just get the binary package, but this is not the default behavior), i have really seen a pretty big speed increase because of all the compile time optimizations i've added. i still love slackware, but i think i've found my new favorite flavor. if you have a couple days to waste (it takes forever for the initial install, as it compiles the whole system from source), give a stage 1 gentoo install a try. as for the founder going over to microsoft, i think that's actually a wise decision for him to make. like brennz says in his reply to the article, he has paid his dues and is obviously just looking in his and his family's best interest. he's obviously a talented and smart man, and microsoft recognized this. this can only have a positive effect since most of the world uses microsoft products, and his presence in the company can only improve things. as for the gentoo, i'm not worried about it's future, since the beauty of a linux distro is the community effort it takes to build it. any one man will have an almost negligible effect on it.