Starch Linux: OpenBSD Atop Arch's Linux Kernel

[BSD SUCKS DICKS]

It gets them, because it's far more popular than bsd crap and more people are looking at it.

Linux code is far more audited then BSD code. It's far more cleaner and correct, more bug-free and more maintainable. BSD code is not just old, it's buggy, slow, a mess and shows signs of shitty programming and to make it compiler-able with clang, the code has gotten even worse. the FreeBSD Kernel is now >300MB compared to linux's which is only 70MB and yet linux is more portable, has more drivers, more features (superior features) then BitchesSickingDick (BitLight's mom sucking my dick)

[LightBit]

No, idiot. Show me BullShitDaily comparable security mechanism like Linux has. Linux is far more secure than your toy OS. BSD is no way advanced operating system! It's legacy OS that lacks ANY real world security protection. There's a reason why Linux was chosen by National Security Agency. One more thing: even Linux chroot is more secure than bsd jails, so don't compromise yourself further.

I don't know for BullShitDaily, but FreeBSD has SEBSD.
Also this mechanisms are too complex to be useful.

[Cthulhux]

Stop bull shitting, you mean they port Linux applications to their shitty as fuck portstree? thats what I meant by third part apps.

They do. But actually they review it before doing so. I maintain some ports myself, I know that.

It gets them, because it's far more popular than bsd crap and more people are looking at it.

So why did KDE recently have a 10 years old bug fixed? More people looking at it, eh?
FAILed QA.

No, idiot. Show me BullShitDaily comparable security mechanism like Linux has.

It just does not need them like your Linsux does.

There's a reason why Linux was chosen by National Security Agency.

Because Americans are too stupid to handle Unix?

One more thing: even Linux chroot is more secure than bsd jails

How?

[ncopa]

1. OpenRC is SHIT. It's slow, BSD licensed. Systemd is way better.

systemd is "way better" for those who only cares about speed. But, yes, it is technically better.

2. musl and uClibc are jack fuck shit compared to glibc. glibc is robust, versatile, lightwieght and secure.

GNU libc has more features than both musl and uClibc but its not lightweight. Its pretty bloated if you compare.

3. Both pacman and apk-tools are far superior to the rusty ports used in all BSDs.

I bet you never used apk-tools.

OpenBSD is not more secure then Linux, its actually less secure because they do not have anything like AppArmor or SELinux. They rely on the hopes of their OS being bug free so if it isn't, there's no layers of defence.

I disagree. OpenBSD does a pretty good job with security and Linux' pluggable security model is overrated. If you want a secure Linux kernel, have a look at Grsecurity patch.

[ncopa]

One more thing: even Linux chroot is more secure than bsd jails, so don't compromise yourself further.

Linux chroots were never intended as a security feature and should never ever be used as such. bsd jails is more like linux containers and linux containers are like chroot, not intended for security isolation so use those with care.

[ncopa]

There, Just relying on the barely OS to have no holes and thus no layers of protection.

This is directly false.

They were pretty early with propolice and stack smashing protection. They implemented W^X and they are pretty good with privilege separation. (read about why they wrote their own ntpd and invented BSD auth instead of PAM and the privilege separation ideas they implemented there).

Basically, they assume that the software that runs is buggy and tries to make it hard to exploit those bugs. Thanks to this they have discovered many bugs in 3rd party apps and thus contributed that Linux userland has become safer.

[gamerk2]

This is directly false.

They were pretty early with propolice and stack smashing protection. They implemented W^X and they are pretty good with privilege separation. (read about why they wrote their own ntpd and invented BSD auth instead of PAM and the privilege separation ideas they implemented there).

Basically, they assume that the software that runs is buggy and tries to make it hard to exploit those bugs. Thanks to this they have discovered many bugs in 3rd party apps and thus contributed that Linux userland has become safer.

Shhhh! You are attempting to defeat a troll with logic! [/sarcasm]

[Kristian Joensen]

Does this mean that some people will hate it for the Linux kernel while others will hate it for the OpenBSD user space?

[Ultrich]

It's fake. Look at the project core repository (http://mirror1.starchlinux.org/pkg/core/) recomended for update. It install standard utillinux and coreutils packages. Nothing used from OpenBSD.

[Ultrich]

It's fake project. In repository only packages utilslinux and coreutils, nothing form OpenBSD.