1 Topic by burhen42

  • burhen42
  • Guest

Topic: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

I hope it's okay but I thought I'd post a thread here for making suggestions and discussing
ideas for the upcoming HyperbolaBSD.

Previously, I asked if it's going to implement security features from HardenedBSD,
given that it's going to be based on OpenBSD.
https://www.hardenedbsd.org/content/eas … comparison

Right now, I wonder if HyperbolaBSD will feature an ISO creation tool where you can,
of course, create an ISO of your current build of the OS to run off a flash drive.
It would be excellent if you could encrypt it and run the operating system off of RAM.

Anybody else have any ideas?

2 Reply by interested_one (edited by interested_one 2021-02-23 21:42:56)

  • interested_one
  • Guest

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

I wonder, will HyperbolaBSD reverse some OpenBSD decisions, such as HT disabled-by-default, no Linux compatibility layer, no loadable kernel modules? Given different goals of OpenBSD and HyperbolaBSD, and planned filesystem support for HyperbolaBSD, it appears that coding style of OpenBSD is of no concern, so it may be possible to even port in some improvements from FreeBSD.

3 Reply by zapper

  • zapper
  • zapper
  • Hyper Cyber
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2017-10-18
  • Posts: 1,075

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

burhen42 wrote:

I hope it's okay but I thought I'd post a thread here for making suggestions and discussing
ideas for the upcoming HyperbolaBSD.

Previously, I asked if it's going to implement security features from HardenedBSD,
given that it's going to be based on OpenBSD.
https://www.hardenedbsd.org/content/eas … comparison

Right now, I wonder if HyperbolaBSD will feature an ISO creation tool where you can,
of course, create an ISO of your current build of the OS to run off a flash drive.
It would be excellent if you could encrypt it and run the operating system off of RAM.

Anybody else have any ideas?

Dunno, but as for the linux compatibility layer, that will taken a lot of convincing to make him want to change that. Might just not happen, idk...

As for the no loadable kernel modules, I don't know what to expect there.  And I don't know what HT is. 

We'll just have to see how things go in the future.

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

4 Reply by throgh (edited by throgh 2021-02-24 01:25:17)

  • throgh
  • throgh
  • Package Development and Community Coordinator
  • Offline
  • From: Planet Earth
  • Registered: 2017-12-28
  • Posts: 2,924

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

I think HT stands for "Hyperthreading" and yes: The kernel-development for GNU/Linux had to admit that OpenBSD was absolutely right about deactivating this.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!

5 Reply by interested_one

  • interested_one
  • Guest

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

throgh wrote:

I think HT stands for "Hyperthreading" and yes: The kernel-development for GNU/Linux had to admit that OpenBSD was absolutely right about deactivating this.

Performance impact really doesn't justify it on desktop and I imagine newer server chips have built-in hardware mitigations. Legacy servers, of course, are a big issue, as unlike home desktops, they are actually likely to be target of these attacks.

6 Reply by digid

  • digid
  • Guest

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

Taking advantege of that question:

It would be great if HyperbolaBSD herited some engineering advancements of FreeBSD such as base system separeted from userland, audio quality, etc and some principles such as simplicity, evolution instead rewriting, etc.

Those things were best described by Vermaden on https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2020/09/ … e-freebsd/

7 Reply by zapper

  • zapper
  • zapper
  • Hyper Cyber
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2017-10-18
  • Posts: 1,075

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

throgh wrote:

I think HT stands for "Hyperthreading" and yes: The kernel-development for GNU/Linux had to admit that OpenBSD was absolutely right about deactivating this.

I agree with that as well.

That makes sense that HT = hyper-threading.

Btw, I had a few suggestions

default install when completed, having a way to enable internet via command line curses via dhcpcd, or somrthing else or if possible, better yet, a simple gui.

I would also say, making a guide for using dhcpcd-cli would be pretty useful if no gui is added.

I wonder if there is a way to make HyperbolaBSD have a power manager like auto-cpufreq work on it.




Btw, if this unpopular, no worries, but I may have said this a lot of times already elsewhere, but yeah I still think this:

It would be wise if the focus for Stable was done in permissive code first and foremost probably.

BSD-4 is going be a hurdle otherwise in some places. Besides, I am not convinced that copyleft is even close to a silver bullet given that

OpenBSD's code is already mostly permissive anyhow. I am not sure what would be gained aka.

Even if you want to make alternative code to the BSD-4 stuff, it might slow down development in a rather annoying way firsthand.

That's just my feelings though.


I also would love to have a filesystem with stability greater than EXT4 but with all the benefits that OpenZFS has, if possible.

This would be good due to power outage issues.



Btw this is last part is  for the user below:

@interested_one

I think those "mitigations" have that effect usually anyhow.

Does OpenBSD not have, base system seperate from userland?

I would be surprised if this was the case, given OpenBSD's security protocol thinking.

And last but not least, Hyperbola will likely take the best of what they  can find and use for their implementations.

This is still being planned on certain aspects, so its a stay tuned moment - the TV aspect which normally is involved in stay tuned...

xD

HyperbolaBSD: The Future of Secure Libre Lightweight Operating Systems!

8 Reply by throgh

  • throgh
  • throgh
  • Package Development and Community Coordinator
  • Offline
  • From: Planet Earth
  • Registered: 2017-12-28
  • Posts: 2,924

Re: Suggestions for HyperbolaBSD?

We will hold on our roadmap and also "permissive" is not the only way forward - also part of our roadmap: https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id … la_roadmap

The current state of OpenBSD is quite more complicate than to be seen outside, especially with licensing. Otherwise we would have not that much work to do, especially to get rid of Original-BSD (BSD-4). I will close this thread now for the reasoning that we have made a roadmap especially to communicate open what is done. So it helps just more to go with us under this roadmap instead of creating more suggestions not planned for now or not even in reach.

OpenBSD has also not all files clear licensed and not all implementations are right away fine. That is common and not much of a surprise. HyperbolaBSD is completely different when going further, starting with a different bmake, therefore also different Makefile-syntax and clean code as much possible done under our circumstances. We want code shared and integrated, additions and enhancements likewise derivates the same. It is not helpful to go with permissive code while companies and others are invited on that way using the base without giving back anything they added.

There is a difference between Copyright (all rights reserved) and surely Copyleft (clear which rights are granted and you should foremost share also additions back). We have chosen that for the reason that Hyperbola is not oriented for "corporate licensing". If people have a problem to share back their code and modifications, free and libre licensed software and culture is surely not their nearest place. To protect technical emancipation we need Copyleft-licensing, not only permissive licensing. So in the end: Please participate with documentation, code-reviews and more ... as suggestions were once interesting, but on that stage now they are just dreamcastle-buildouts. And sorry: But if it is for some around annoying that we want to replace problematic licensed code, you should rethink the position about free and libre culture and software. Strict licensing to comply sharing code is the fundament of all. Otherwise we end back in a bad position, where code is misused for commercial interests without sharing anything or we will be hold responsible endless for support where we don't get anything more back for development or support, meaning therefore people demanding endless more. To underline a final last time: We build an operating-system, not a distribution where everybody goes for cherry-picking. Software wanted? Try help to port, either for packaging later on or direct now with building essentials for the kernel. We are also not in the position to make for everything a proposal of some alternative. When something needs to be removed, we will do it without adding more. I hope this is understandable: Hyperbola is free and libre software, no boundaries within. For everyone to handle.

Human being in favor with clear principles and so also for freedom in soft- and hardware!

Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices: For a life of every being full with peace and kindness, including diversity and freedom. Capitalism is destroying our minds, the planet itself and the universe in the end!