9/6     Any opinions on OpenBSD vs NetBSD for running it on an old Alpha
        or sparc? How do they compare feature-wise? I already know about
        OpenBSD being an uber-secure system, I want to know what other
        things set them aside. Which is more fun to work with?
        What about hardware support?
        \_ I prefer OpenBSD. The installation was exteremly easy and it
           has some nifty features other than security (RaidFrame for
           example). OpenBSD is pretty fast on a SS10 and a Pentium 150
           200 class machine. It is probably the best maintained OS
           (free or otherwise) I have ever used (upto date manpages, good
           online docs, frequently updated bug lists, stable and fully
           featured release code). ----ranga
           \_ uhh, netbsd has sw raid as well ....
              \_ Working/Stable? When I tried it (a while back now) it
                 didn't work very well and not many people seemed
                 interested in it.
                 \_ well I've been using netbsd for years and its fine.  -ERic
        \_ OpenBSD has the 'old' style install system.  You get the
           pleasure of mucking with disk labels and such if you like.
           I prefer it for paranoia's sake but I wouldn't call it the
           easiest install of the *bsd's.  I don't want to use default
           partitioning but I don't want to muck with the cruddy 25+
           year old disk label program either. Yes, I do run openbsd so
           I found it worth the trouble.
           \_ What BSD has a nicer install program than OpenBSD? FreeBSD?!?
              Surely you jest. OpenBSD install may not be graphical and
              have a "window" driven interface (a la RH Linux) or a menu
              interface (a la FreeBSD) but you can't screw it up. It gives
              you all the functionality you need in a neat tight package.
              The running system is quite nice too. I run both OpenBSD and
              FreeBSD, and I like OpenBSD more. The *only* reason I'm
              running FreeBSD is that I need servlet support and FreeBSD
              has a native jdk (emulated under OpenBSD).
                \_ When I did a 2.4 install, it was ok but not great.  Yes,
                   fbsd was easier imo and has more packages for the lazy,
                   although this is being corrected soonish.  It isn't about
                   \_ I'm a new comer compared to you. I've only installed
                      OpenBSD 2.6 and 2.7, both of which were exteremely easy
                      to use much better than anything else I've ever installed
                      including FreeBSD (2.2.6, 3.0 release, 4.0 release, 4.1
                      release), Solaris (2.2-8), RHL (4.0-6.2), Debian (m68k
                      kernel 2.0.34), LinuxPPC (R3-5,1999,2000), HPUX (10.20,
                      11), MacOS (3.0-9). Solaris 7,8 and MacOS 8.5 & 9 both
                      come pretty close, but MacOS requires a GUI (- for me)
                      and Solaris has problems in text only.
                   guis.  I dont prefer guis.
                   \_ The current one 2.7 is much better than 4.1 FreeBSD
                      or RH 6.2.