> Great documentation is a top priority. The built-in man pages are amazing. So if you're stuck on anything, searching the man pages on your own computer is going to give you a better answer than searching Google. (This makes it nicer to work offline, too.)
The OpenBSD documentation is absolutely stellar. It's well-structured, always up to date, has useful pointers and examples. If something is in base, then it's documented and you can use it today.
I still use Linux a lot (especially at work, I basically write Linux software for a living) and I've used it for a really long time (15 years, if not more), but I still regularly find myself reaching for a bookmark, or for Google, or for a bunch of notes I kept around because it took me hours to find out how to do <something> and never again.
In contrast, you can comfortably use and administer an OpenBSD box without needing anything but the man pages that ship with it. They're amazing.
It's not a "Linux is for plebs and it sucks" thing, it's just that serious documentation takes a back seat in its community (there are exceptions, but they're few and distro-specific). In contrast, the OpenBSD community encourages a culture where "good documentation" is part of "good software", not just something you get bonus points for.
In fact, despite how the media portrays it (usually through random quotes from Theo), the OpenBSD community is a refreshing island of sanity in today's computing field.
Note that if you're using the OpenBSD vtty (via wscons(4), at least), the default $TERM is `vt100`, which does not support color (beyond the cyan used to render italic text). I've had some luck setting $TERM to `vt220` to get more colors. In an xterm or something, this shouldn't be an issue.
An alternative would be to install some other version of `man` (you'll probably also need `groff` from ports, though some other implementation of troff/nroff might also work).
Frankly, though, I haven't seen colorized manpages before, so I'm not sure what else to tell you.
Unlike other operating system/environments, where any hope of comprehending what/how they work after a few iterations is progressively more difficult, and significant architectural changes hose you for hours/days on end (on even simple things like assigning an address to an interface), the slow methodical evolution of OpenBSD stays true to its roots. And tools like signify and doas, new additions to the fold, are almost instantly comprehensible, and never annoy like some of the Linux architectural changes of recent years.
Highly recommended for people who want a reliable, predictable, full featured, and comprehensible Un*x class operating system.
1) what is the main difference between FreeBSD and OpenBSD? I see, that OpenBSD provides a very minimalistic environment, which still, I think, will perfectly serve my daily workflow based on StumpWM+Emacs+Firefox. Does FreeBSD provide some more "cookies" in aspect of daily usage?
2) What is the state of RaspberryPi support in OpenBSD?
3) Is there some known big issues with video/wifi hardware in OpenBSD?
"Security" is the often-stated end goal, but in practice, it boils down to an emphasis on code correctness, maintenance, reliability, portability and sane defaults. Realistically, it's sometimes done at the cost of functionality, but I think it's a smart approach.
This isn't to say that FreeBSD emphasizes incorrect code, just that the OpenBSD team seems to be more inclined to not include (or yank out) code that's unmaintained or is of questionable quality, even if it does useful stuff.
Some of their ideas seems utopic at first (like the insistence of native, instead of cross-compiling), but they turn out to be annoyingly right in the end. My own attitude towards OpenBSD drifted from "what a bunch of loons" back when I was a Linux teenage fan, to "this is how you do computer stuff properly" as I grew up.
> perfectly serve my daily workflow based on StumpWM+Emacs+Firefox
My stack is pretty much similar, except I'm back to WindowMaker (me and tiling WMs had a fight and it didn't end well and we're not speaking anymore).
I don't write much Lisp anymore so I'm not up-to-date on what happened with the OpenBSD ports, but I think all major Common Lisp implementations run well on it (but if you want to run SBCL on 6.0, you'll have to watch out for the mandatory W^X). I don't know if it interests you, I figured you'd want to know if you also hack on StumpWM.
> 2) What is the state of RaspberryPi support in OpenBSD?
> 3) Is there some known big issues with video/wifi hardware in OpenBSD?
Basically, if it says nVidia on it, it doesn't work. If it says ATI on it and it's not too bleeding-edge, it works great. I heard good things about Intel GPUs, but I haven't tried it.
FreeBSD has more. More users, more developers, more features, more drivers, more ports, more money behind it, more settings to tweak, more bugs. By comparison, OpenBSD has a much bigger focus on cohesiveness, consistency, and sound defaults (e.g. custom kernel configs are discouraged/unsupported). I'd argue that OpenBSD has a more usable base system (including things like X11, doas, and tmux).
"Support" is nonexistent, but I think there have been a few changes in armv7 for Pi 2/3 and a couple developers are slowly working on it. Don't hold your breath.
The open-source Radeon drivers are pretty outdated at this point (I think the latest adapter with full acceleration support is something in the Radeon HD 7000 family), the Nouveau driver isn't ported, and there aren't proprietary drivers, so you don't really have the option of using a recent discrete GPU. Most effort goes into the Intel drivers (the developers use laptops a lot). 802.11n support is still pretty new and hasn't seen a huge amount of real-world validation yet. Drivers for n-capable hardware are older/better tested, but people have mostly run them in 802.11a/g modes.
Not to mention an actually pleasant /bin/sh (a modified version of pdksh; compare to FreeBSD's extremely minimal version of ash which is (sometimes) useful for running scripts and not much else).
2) I'll let Theo answer that...
3) Not "big issues". But since OpenBSD doesn't sign NDAs to get firmware or drivers, and since they like to rework any software that isn't up to their standards, they do lag behind in hardware support. A good way to check if what you have is supported is to read their release notes. For example https://www.openbsd.org/60.html has a list under "improved hardware support".
I love OpenBSD, but this is blatantly false. The installer is 20 years behind any other major OS. The only installation that is really supported is on a dedicated machine, overwriting everything in the drive. And in true OpenBSD fashion, it'll do it without prompting you twice. OpenBSD's fdisk is spartan at best.
Also for ideological reasons (that I share) the installation media does not include firmware. Lots of video and network cards needs firmware to work, so make sure you download a copy of any required firmware to a USB stick beforehand.
Both are stellar operating systems, and you'd be doing yourself a disservice if you didn't at least try playing around with them.
The fact that at least a firewall comes preconfigured seems like a big deal for people who just want to get a basic system going and not mess that part up.
 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12371688
For example what do the openbsd devs use?
I'm pretty much just going to buy whatever is suggested if I can verify that it's at least a half decent laptop.
You can run VMs in qemu, but the one time I tried it it was painfully slow.
There's also work on vmm introduced in 5.9 but I'm not sure how close it is to something that is really is complete and usable.
Also, OpenBSD has encrypted its swap partitions by default for ages.
For example - here are the instructions for upgrading from 5.9 to 6.0: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/upgrade60.html
Once you are done upgrading the operating system, you upgrade your packages with the command:
o pkg_add -u
Please change it to PC-BSD
(Although maybe the current page works as a "ah, turned off by the looks, effin' hipsters" kind of filter)
 the homepage has actually gotten slightly worse compared to around 2001 when I first saw it, https://web.archive.org/web/20010302003922/http://www.openbs... as the list below "About OpenBSD" now is messed up with one or two elements per line for unexplicable reasons