Students find OpenBSD easier

[n0cmonkey]

I thought this was interesting.

Just thought I would let the OpenBSD folks know that students in my class found OpenBSD easy to use compared to other Unix-like operating systems.
The course is a college "Introduction to Unix" class, and on the last class of the semester, I set up a bunch of different versions of Unix-like operating systems for comparison. I break the student up into groups and give them some basic tasks, such as adding new users, booting to single user mode, mounting a volume, configuring a network interface, or viewing system resources. I used Linux, OpenBSD, Darwin, and
Solaris. The OpenBSD group usually finished tasks first.

 

[daniel49]

Although I have never tried free bsd somehow I believe that

edit:
took a few minutes to read about it its unix based and sounds like its basically for servers. why do you suppose they found it easier noc what seperates bsd from linux that would make it more intuitive?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: daniel49
took a few minutes to read about it its unix based and sounds like its basically for servers. why do you suppose they found it easier noc what seperates bsd from linux that would make it more intuitive?[/b]

OpenBSD can be used for whatever a person uses a operating system for. Not just file servers...

Students probably find it quicker to use in his class because it's simplier. Less crap to get in the way of getting the job done.

 

[cleverhandle]

Documentation, simple package management, documentation, absence of crack rock, documentation, slim default install, and documentation.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: cleverhandle
Documentation, simple package management, documentation, absence of crack rock, documentation, slim default install, and documentation.

Documentation.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: daniel49
Although I have never tried free bsd somehow I believe that

edit:
took a few minutes to read about it its unix based and sounds like its basically for servers. why do you suppose they found it easier noc what seperates bsd from linux that would make it more intuitive?

I use it for just about everything, not just servers.

 

[daniel49]

so does it have documentation...lol

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: daniel49
so does it have documentation...lol

A little bit.

It's pretty good too.

All sorts of up to date stuff

 

[RocknTrixi]

I can't even figure out exactly what files I need to download.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: RocknTrixi
I can't even figure out exactly what files I need to download.

It depends on your hardware. Basically cd36.iso. Burn it to disk and do an ftp install. The install instructions are available, USE THEM.

 

[CTho9305]

The disk partitioning step of the install is ridiculous (partly because OpenBSD uses a device naming convention I haven't used elsewhere). Otherwise, it's a great, VERY easy-to-use OS. The documentation rocks.

 

[LBmtb]

What distro of Linux did you use?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: LBmtb
What distro of Linux did you use?

If you're talking about the original email I linked to, he never said.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Solaris docs were hard to find, Linux docs are always out of date or
apply to the wrong distro. Darwin just does a lot of stuff in different
ways, such as Netinfo. OpenBSD docs are good, and given that the course
was a command-line intro to the traditional Unix environment, OpenBSD's
lack of reliance on GUI tools was a major benefit.

 

[yelo333]

Originally posted by: CTho9305
The disk partitioning step of the install is ridiculous (partly because OpenBSD uses a device naming convention I haven't used elsewhere). Otherwise, it's a great, VERY easy-to-use OS. The documentation rocks.

Heh, yes...Even though I've ran/installed all sorts of linux flavors over the past few years (slackware, SuSE, Fedora, gentoo, debian, knoppix, ubuntu, etc) , and even a bsd flavor (freebsd). I must admit, the openbsd partitioning step takes the cake as the absolute hardest-for-me-to-understand step of any install of any OS, ever. I did get it eventually, but it was only after many, many reboots, and rereads of the docs. The docs explain it clearly, you just need an open mind. I must agree, read the docs. Again.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: yelo333

Originally posted by: CTho9305
The disk partitioning step of the install is ridiculous (partly because OpenBSD uses a device naming convention I haven't used elsewhere). Otherwise, it's a great, VERY easy-to-use OS. The documentation rocks.

Heh, yes...Even though I've ran/installed all sorts of linux flavors over the past few years (slackware, SuSE, Fedora, gentoo, debian, knoppix, ubuntu, etc) , and even a bsd flavor (freebsd). I must admit, the openbsd partitioning step takes the cake as the absolute hardest-for-me-to-understand step of any install of any OS, ever. I did get it eventually, but it was only after many, many reboots, and rereads of the docs. The docs explain it clearly, you just need an open mind. I must agree, read the docs. Again.

It takes 2 minutes to properly partition a disk.

 

[nweaver]

but it takes 10 to read the docs and understand them....

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: nweaver
but it takes 10 to read the docs and understand them....

It'll take 20 minutes to find up to date and relevant documentation on how to partition the disk during a Linux install.

 

[Jzero]

While a bit archaic, I've never found the OpenBSD partitioning to be all that hard...

 

[nweaver]

I've done very little with BSD's. It's on my list though....maybe time to banish Gentoo from my laptop.

One thing about Gentoo (N0c's favorite linux distro to bash ) is that it has very nice install instructions, until you find an error, then it's off to the gentoo forums to search for a fix.

I recall installing freeBSD a year back, and it seemed pretty easy, but it was a minimal install.

 

[Netopia]

Originally posted by: yelo333

Originally posted by: CTho9305
The disk partitioning step of the install is ridiculous (partly because OpenBSD uses a device naming convention I haven't used elsewhere). Otherwise, it's a great, VERY easy-to-use OS. The documentation rocks.

Heh, yes...Even though I've ran/installed all sorts of linux flavors over the past few years (slackware, SuSE, Fedora, gentoo, debian, knoppix, ubuntu, etc) , and even a bsd flavor (freebsd). I must admit, the openbsd partitioning step takes the cake as the absolute hardest-for-me-to-understand step of any install of any OS, ever. I did get it eventually, but it was only after many, many reboots, and rereads of the docs. The docs explain it clearly, you just need an open mind. I must agree, read the docs. Again.

I found partitioning to be a TITA until I did it about 5 times... and then it all became clear and after that I was able to format/partition in Linux (NOT during setup... but adding drives) easier because of what I had learned with BSD.

Joe

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Netopia
I found partitioning to be a TITA until I did it about 5 times... and then it all became clear and after that I was able to format/partition in Linux (NOT during setup... but adding drives) easier because of what I had learned with BSD.

Joe

I use OpenBSD docs for figuring out things on just about every other *nix based OS I use.

 

[Nothinman]

Linux docs are always out of date or apply to the wrong distro

Then they were doing it wrong. It's undeniable that OpenBSD has more comprehensive docs than Linux, but a decent distro will come with relevant docs. Debian ships docs in /usr/share/packagename and nearly all of the tools and config files have man pages for them and most of the config files have comments describing the format.

It'll take 20 minutes to find up to date and relevant documentation on how to partition the disk during a Linux install.

The difference is that you don't have to find the docs, 90% of the time the installer is self-explanatory as long as you understand partitioning and if you don't there's an 'automatic' button. Even Debian has such a button.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Then they were doing it wrong. It's undeniable that OpenBSD has more comprehensive docs than Linux, but a decent distro will come with relevant docs. Debian ships docs in /usr/share/packagename and nearly all of the tools and config files have man pages for them and most of the config files have comments describing the format.

Linux documentation is still anemic, at best. Debian is a step above the others in most areas, I'll admit. I still can't find a supported hardware list.

There are also a bunch of how-tos around, and half are ass.

I wonder how many man pages are out of date...

The difference is that you don't have to find the docs, 90% of the time the installer is self-explanatory as long as you understand partitioning and if you don't there's an 'automatic' button. Even Debian has such a button.

I've never seen a decent automatic partition scheme. The OpenBSD partitioner isn't tough, it just makes you have to read teh docs once or twice. If it's your first time installing the system you should be reading the install docs anyhow.

And Debian is a poor example of easy installers. I remember having to read the documentation to get it installed.

 

[Sunner]

The problem with the OpenBSD partitioner is when you wanna setup a dual boot config IMO.
Aside from that, it's fine, takes a minute or two, and you're done.