Why Sup Forums haven't yet installed openbsd?

>simple encrypted installation 1-2 min
>minirootXX.fs size 4.7MB
>running everywhere arm,amd64,i386 and others
>only two remote holes
>written in C

Attached: rt.jpg (294x320, 24K)

The licence is retarded.

>only two remote holes
Kek. TempleOS has 0.

>>simple encrypted installation 1-2 min
Manually creating the softraid stuff is not 1-2 min. You can't get volume encryption without manually making the softraid CRYPTO level. And it's mutually exclusive with RAID1 softraid.

These faggots still haven't figured out TRIM

Below is an example license to be used for new code in OpenBSD, modeled after the ISC license. It is important to specify the year of the copyright. Additional years should be separated by a comma, e.g. Copyright (c) 2003, 2004 If you add extra text to the body of the license, be careful not to add further restrictions. /* * Copyright (c) YYYY YOUR NAME HERE * * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any * purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above * copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. * * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES * WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF * MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR * ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES * WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN * ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF * OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. */


For me this just sounds like a "use it or dont and now gtfo and suck my balls" license.
Only clause I'd like to add is to prohibit normies to use it.

>Manually creating the softraid stuff is not 1-2 min.
bioctl -c C -l /dev/wdxx softraid0 ok, 1 second

>These faggots still haven't figured out TRIM
You can use old 80GB IDE hard drive

This is what GPL cucks actually believe.

>>minirootXX.fs size 4.7MB
>smaller than GPG binary
how can GNU even compete?

seems like reducing attack surface is a good stratergy

You know you have aspergers when any of those 'reasons' seem like something beneficial

Attached: boy-with-headset-500.jpg (500x300, 47K)

It's slow as balls running anything with a JIT and doesn't support my laptop's wifi in 802.11ac mode.

There isn't an .iso for x86-64

Yes there is you fucking retard.
>amd64

But I have an Intel CPU

what does .fs stand for?
Im thinking of trying openbsd but should i use the .iso which is like 330 mb or the .fs

all distros say it as amd64. even debian and gentoo

* cuck license
* featureless and slow.

>Only clause I'd like to add is to prohibit normies to use it.

then it would be nonfree retard.

AMD did it first, so distros picked up the name. At the time ia64 meant Itanium.

It's a nice OS, but it has worse performance on a pentium 4 than debian.

they all it AMD64 because that's the name of the ABI/calling convention for 64 bit x86. in windows, it would be appropriate to call it x64.

Attached: b90.png (645x729, 127K)

>fs: disk image that can be written to a USB flash drive or similar device
>iso: ISO 9660 image that can be used to create an install CD
I'm not really sure how they differs, maybe something in bootloader.
But the decision is: with sets or without (http source). Would take without sets since it automatically sets up mirror after first boot. So minirootXX.fs for USB or cdXX.iso for CD or VM

thanks man and do both .fs and .iso images have text based installers?

yes with every new user the license grows STRONGER and they'll totally know if you use it