Talk:OpenBSD/Archive 3

message: I just put the old discussions into the side there, it was starting to get really long in this page.  Janizary 16:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archived 

message: I think that it may be nice to add in a bit about how the project is structured, I'm not volunteering for it of course, just throwing the idea out, as I've not even finished my work on the OpenBSD history article.  I don't think we can get away with the Theocracy pun, but talking about how de Raadt has the final say on anything done in the system, how contributors can get commit bits and eventually become central developers that make key contributions to various areas of the system may be nice for anyone reading.  Janizary 08:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not opposed to having a paragraph about this, but are there any sources? Where would you see it fitting into the article? NicM 09:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional ideas 

message: How's this technical shit coming along?  And your history page blows.  Hell, I could do the two of them faster than you monkeys.  What happen, relatives of both of you die?  You die?  There was a flurry of work on the article and then this sputtering death throw.  Where's the passion?  Where's the editors?  65.95.125.69 07:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and nice work on the aricle, by the way, I just hate to see it go unfinished, it looked like the throng of people was going to really make something magic, then it got featured and died.  65.95.125.69 07:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Feel free to do so if you think you can do it faster than them, it's not like they're being payed to do it or anything.  And you're so going to hell if a relative of either really did die.  Nate 08:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So... 

message: The images of the Puffy mascot were deleted, someone registered should reupload them.  65.95.124.5 22:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puffy 

message: We have far too many yellow boxes at the top of this page, so I've compacted all the less useful ones into one single one. Having so many you can't even see the start of the real page is horribly ugly and intimidating for new users. It would be different if all of them were important or useful but most of these are just fluff. If compacting them isn't right, we need to select which ones are really important and list the rest as archived (like Talk:Hydrochloric_acid), remove them, or list them in a different way. I'd say list the todo list as a proper section at the top of the page rather than a box, list the peer review as archived, lose the userbox one or mention it in a section, and keep the FA and the main page one. Not sure about the crypto project at all, this article is mostly not about cryptography, OpenSSH perhaps, but I'm not convinced about OpenBSD. NicM 07:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boxes 

message: In the article "OpenBSD security features", footnotes 11 and 13 appear to be swapped, as are footnotes 10 and 12.
:This is why you should use the new form of referencing as described in Wikipedia:Footnotes. It's much cleaner and prevents such problems from occurring. —Michiel Sikma, 12:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to the new system. jacoplane 20:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about changing OpenBSD security features too? NicM 08:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes swapped 

message: At this moment the article says that Puffy is a pufferfish. However this is inaccurate, as pufferfish do not have spines. The image is a porcupinefish which does have spines.
As a result this statement is incorrect:
:Puffy was selected because of the Blowfish encryption algorithm used in OpenSSH and the strongly defensive image associated with some species of pufferfish, such as the porcupinefish with its spikes to deter predators.
A porcupinefish is not a pufferfish or a species of pufferfish. They are related, but not the same species or even the same family. I understand that the OpenBSD community has decided to name their logo a pufferfish, but this being an encyclopedia there should probably some note that technically the image is a porcupinefish and not a pufferfish. Janderk 12:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, that is what I intended with that phrase, modifying it to be even more clear is fine by me. The only thing that is not okay is just changing all occurances of pufferfish to porcupinefish: the accuracy of the drawing is irrelevent, Puffy is supposed to be a pufferfish (hence the name Puffy) and is always referred to as such. NicM 12:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about "and the strongly defensive image most people associate with the pufferfish, and with similar species like the porcupinefish which have spikes to deter predators."? Or say "Although Puffy is usually said to be a pufferfish, in fact pufferfish do not possess spikes: images of Puffy are closer to a similar species, the porcupinefish." NicM 12:43, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I changed it.--JK the unwise 09:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Porcupinefish 

message: Before I get reverted again: may I offer that Dutch spelling conventions say that the first article or adposition in a Dutch name should be capitalised when the first name is omitted? One would write either "Theo de Raadt" or "De Raadt". Will apply changes later today. Will wait. Olav L 14:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. This article is in English. De Raadt is capitalised only at the start of the sentence. NicM 14:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Please don't turn this into another silly revert war a la license/licence. The current form is acceptable and Wikipedia policy is to not make unnecessary changes of style. NicM 14:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This article is in English, but English does not have spelling rules for Dutch names as far as I am aware. I was certainly not planning to get into a revert war, that's why I am coming to this talk page. The current form however, is wrong and just looks silly to any Dutch person who has learned to write properly. Have a look at Capitalization#Compound_names, as well (the rule does not apply only to "van"). Olav L 14:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your way looks silly to many native English speakers. Either is perfectly correct in English, so there is no reason to change. NicM 14:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure how correctly spelled names could look silly to anyone. But I do not care enough about this article to make this into an issue. Have it your way, then. Bye. Olav L 16:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are missing the point. They are correctly capitalised in English, as either form is acceptable. Only in Dutch would this be incorrect. NicM 16:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, since both are acceptable, why not go to the Dutch form?  Or ask Theo de Raadt which he does?  65.95.127.109 23:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Wikipedia policy is to not make unnecessary changes of style. Ask Theo if you like, but if he even cares I would be surprised. Anyway, we do not necessarily follow what Theo does; there is considerable evidence the OpenBSD project prefers to use the American spelling of licence, but we still use licence despite either being acceptable. NicM 07:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper spelling 

message: What is this sentence supposed to mean?  Does it make any sense to anyone else?  I can't figure it out.
:"Also worth mentioning is the development, after licence restrictions were imposed on IPFilter, of the PF packet filter, which first appeared[20] in OpenBSD 3.0 and is now available in DragonFly BSD, NetBSD and FreeBSD; more recently, OpenBSD releases have seen the GPL licensed tools diff, grep, gzip, bc, dc, nm and size replaced with BSD licensed equivalents."
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.235.168.183 (talk • contribs) .
:I don't really understand what you find unclear here, but basically the sentence means that in addition to the other licence efforts, the replacement of IPFilter with PF is worth mentioning. This happened because IPFilter's licence was changed to be more restrictive. Also, it covers the fact that GPL licensed versions of the tools listed were removed from the source tree and BSD licensed versions were imported. NicM 21:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing 

message: So apparently, according to WP:EL#What_should_be_linked_to, external link (and books too, presumably) belong in the references section if they are used in the creation/editing/verification of the article, even if they are not inline (though they can be in subsections, of course). Anyways, were the items in the "External links" and "Books" sections used in the creation/editing/verification of the article? If so, I think they should be moved to subsections of the "Notes and references" section. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 19:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It is fine as it is. NicM 20:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To expand on this, as it is we have three clear, distinct sections without ugly subsections. Merging them even partially will make a mess. If there is something in books or external links you think deserves to be in the references, cite it explicitly with a proper reference number by including a quote or using it to back up an existing point in the article. We worked hard to get rid of all the subsections for a clear, simple ToC during the FA process, and adding them back now would be a bad idea, particularly for no real purpose. It isn't as if we have a lack of references and need to pad the section out... NicM 20:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 21:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "External links" and "Books" vs. "Notes and references" 

message: Oooh, excellent work guys.  Can I get some of you to work on the unix and operating system articles?  Ideogram 02:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's so excellent, I am nominating it for the print version of Wikipedia.  65.95.127.68 14:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent 

message: I've moved the old stuff on in to archive 3, feel free to start those discussion up again here, just don't reply to them in the archive.  Janizary 23:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old stuff 

message: : " originally developed by former OpenBSD developer Ejovi Nuwere."
While this little factoid is true it has no place in the lead of the OpenBSD article, if anything it belongs in some of the notes in the ports collection article.  Janizary 01:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed bit... 

message: Well, this year's Ruxcon is about to gear up and if the presentation, "Exploiting OpenBSD," has anything worth noting it may be good to add some stuff from or about it.  This is kinda a notice to anyone who reads this and actually sees the presentation, since there has been no information on it and seems to be pretty smoke and mirrors at the moment, something vaguely about getting through all the security messures in OpenBSD, but they're not letting anything out until the presentation it seems.  Janizary 14:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential information 

message: Article says:
"The nascent BSD Certification project performed a usage survey which revealed that 32.8% of BSD users (1420 of 4330 respondents) were using OpenBSD,[10] placing it second of the four major BSD variants, behind FreeBSD with 77.0% and ahead of NetBSD with 16.3%.[11]"  
32.8 + 77 + 16.3 > 100
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.68.207 (talk • contribs).
:People were allowed to pick multiple options. NicM 19:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can read a more detailed explanation at :Image:Bsdusage.gif#Explanation_of_chart.  : )  Armed Blowfish (talk|mail) 20:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Market share percentages add to over 100% 

message: NetBSD (the oldest of the three most popular BSD-based operating systems still active today, with FreeBSD being the third)
I thought FreeBSD was the oldest and then NetBSD and then OpenBSD —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.135.112.43 (talk) 03:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NetBSD's first release in April 93 was a few months before FreeBSD's in December. NicM 08:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

text: FreeBSD started out as a bunch of patches, if I remember correctly, which makes this a bit more complex.  — Armed Blowfish (talk|mail) 11:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of them came from patchsets to 386BSD. NetBSD was the first to make a formal release, which is good enough for me, but it may be best just to strip out "oldest," this article isn't the place for that kind of fact. Nor is it really the place for lists of the most popular BSDs (people occasionally try to add DFLY), although its nice to mention FreeBSD and NetBSD in the first paragraph. Maybe we should just get rid of the whole section in parentheses. NicM 15:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds good to me.  History and popularity can be discussed in more detail elsewhere.  For readers, the parenthetical version of the lead can be found here.  —  Armed Blowfish (mail) 01:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this right 

message: Just sorta added to it, but I think perhaps there should be a sub-page made, like the archives and todo which holds the assessment stuff, just having a link to it instead of the many templates repeating the same thing.  All the stuff that mentions FA should probably be put there if it were to be done, but that ould probably mess up those templates' inner workings, how they add to various lists and whatnot, so I won't do any such thing myself.  But I will leave this comment here, to fester in the minds of any who read it.  74.13.60.113 07:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At least the small ones are now out of the way a bit, and if we do something special we have extra maintenance and people adding them back in the wrong place. NicM 08:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A lot of crap 

message: It's probably best not to use phrases like that, in case there isn't someone maintaining the page, if it does fall out of step with what presently is happening, would it not be best to have it state a date?  Not that the people working on the article will disappear, but if they did, it would probably be for the best if everything was linked to a time, no?  74.13.57.76 23:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely right. The preferred form is "As of (year)". I've fixed this here. Feezo (Talk) 00:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree, it just invites people to change it every year rather than just fixing it when something actually changes. But since it is policy, who am I to argue ;-). NicM 11:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the idea behind the guideline is that, if left unchanged, (if people forget, or if it's printed out, or republished) the text will continue to be correct in years to come, even if it starts to sound a bit dated. The ideal solution IMHO would be to find a reference (posting by Theo or someone) that would confirm the date. We could then use "as of 20XX" with less risk of people robotically incrementing the year.   Feezo (Talk) 20:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about just removing the sentence entirely? Even without it it is pretty clear the removal hasn't been undone. NicM 11:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "At present" 

message: Technically OpenBSD is not a UNIX, it's a BSD, and while BSDs and UNIXes share code, they are not the same.  In both conventions and in the actual implementation of many tools and systems, the UNIXes are different from OpenBSD.  While OpenBSD has imported a UNIX compiler, awk and many other tools, that doesn't make them a UNIX.  To do that at this point would require a big pile of money, as Apple has thrown around in order to get Mac OS X's most recent release certified.  I have because of this reasoning, reverted the change from Unix-like to Unix.  74.13.43.249 00:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. That's how the article stated the situation until just a few hours before your edit. An anonymous user made this change without explaining why it should be so. (A similar change was made to the FreeBSD article.) There's also the small matter of the court battle in the 1990s, which settlement resulted in the BSDs not being able to claim to be UNIX, and which is how UNIX-like came about. Mindmatrix 14:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  UNIX versus Unix-like 

message: Think we can compile a list of OpenBSD releases similar to this table?
Colour	Meaning
Red   	Old release; not supported
Yellow	Old release; still supported
Green 	Current release
Blue  	Future release
Version 	Code name                                 	Testing name	Release date	Supported until   	Features and Changes
4.10    	Warty Warthog                        	Sounder     	2004-10-20  	2006-04-30        	Initial release; ShipIt
5.04    	Hoary Hedgehog                       	Array       	2005-04-08  	2006-10-31        	Update Manager; Upgrade Notifier; readahead; grepmap; laptop suspend, hibernate and  standby; dynamic frequency scaling; Ubuntu hardware database; Kickstart; installation from USB devices; UTF-8 by default; APT authentication
5.10    	Breezy Badger                        	Colony      	2005-10-13  	2007-04-13        	Usplash (graphical boot sequence); "Add/Remove..." application tool; easy language selector; logical volume management support; full Hewlett-Packard printer support; OEM installer support; Launchpad integration
6.06 LTS	Dapper Drake                         	Flight      	2006-06-01  	2009-06 (desktops)	Long Term Support (LTS) release; Live CD and Install CD merged onto one disc; Ubiquity graphical installer on Live CD; Usplash on shutdowns; Network Manager for easy switching of multiple wired and wireless connections; 'Humanlooks' theme implemented using Tango guidelines, based on Clearlooks and featuring orange colours instead of brown; LAMP installation option; installation to USB devices; GDebi graphical installer for package files Ubuntu -- Package Search Results
6.06 LTS	Dapper Drake                         	Flight      	2006-06-01  	2011-06 (servers) 	Long Term Support (LTS) release; Live CD and Install CD merged onto one disc; Ubiquity graphical installer on Live CD; Usplash on shutdowns; Network Manager for easy switching of multiple wired and wireless connections; 'Humanlooks' theme implemented using Tango guidelines, based on Clearlooks and featuring orange colours instead of brown; LAMP installation option; installation to USB devices; GDebi graphical installer for package files Ubuntu -- Package Search Results
6.10    	Edgy Eft                             	Knot        	2006-10-26  	2008-04           	Ubuntu 'Human' theme heavily modified; Upstart init daemon; automated crash reports (Apport); Tomboy notetaking application; F-spot photo manager; EasyUbuntu merges into Ubuntu via meta-package installs and features
7.04    	Feisty Fawn                          	Herd        	2007-04-19  	2008-10           	Migration assistant; Kernel-based Virtual Machine support; easy codec and restricted drivers installation; Compiz desktop effects; Wi-Fi Protected Access support; PowerPC support dropped; Sudoku and chess games added; disk usage analyser (baobab) added; GNOME Control Center; Zeroconf for many devices
7.10    	Gutsy Gibbon                         	Tribe       	2007-10-18  	2009-04           	Ubuntu AppArmor security framework;Gutsy Gibbon - Tribe 3 test release | Ubuntu fast desktop search;Gutsy Gibbon - Tribe 4 test release | Ubuntu fast user switching; some plug-ins for Mozilla Firefox now handled by APT (Ubufox);Gutsy Gibbon - Tribe 5 test release | Ubuntu graphical configuration tool for X.org; a revamped printing system with PDF printing by default; full NTFS support (read/write) via NTFS-3G
8.04 LTS	Hardy Heron                          	Alpha       	2008-04-24  	2011-04 (desktops)	Long Term Support (LTS) release;Ubuntu Weekly Newsletter: Issue 36Ubuntu's new Linux sports debugging tool; Better Tango compliance; compiz usability improvements; tracker integration;; Brasero disk burner, Transmission BitTorrent client and Vinagre VNC client by default; PulseAudio by default
8.04 LTS	Hardy Heron                          	Alpha       	2008-04-24  	2013-04 (servers) 	Long Term Support (LTS) release;Ubuntu Weekly Newsletter: Issue 36Ubuntu's new Linux sports debugging tool; Better Tango compliance; compiz usability improvements; tracker integration;; Brasero disk burner, Transmission BitTorrent client and Vinagre VNC client by default; PulseAudio by default
8.10    	Intrepid Ibex	Alpha       	2008-10-30  	2010-04           	Complete interface redesign; improvements to mobile computing and desktop scalability; increased flexibility for Internet connectivity
Altonbr (talk) 03:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an entire article of that, along with other historical notes regarding OpenBSD.  I don't see what this idea has which shows superiority over the already existing article.  74.13.29.9 (talk) 17:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: If you want to improve the existing OpenBSD timeline article, that would be really great, but including such a table in the main article would be a mistake. NicM (talk) 07:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline/releases for OpenBSD 

message: Hi. In the page Comparison of boot loaders, the column for OpenBSD (the only BSD of the table) is nearly empty. Could some people fill it with bootloaders able to boot OpenBSD ? JeromeJerome (talk) 13:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which bootloader ?