>>22310 Is there a reason you want to use OpenBSD other than autism?

>>22313 It's really lightweight and it might be a good learning experience.

>>22336 >will you save a meaningful amount of resources? >is there an expectation Linux isn't meeting that OpenBSD will? >is the downtime and relearning worth the realistic benefits? If you can honestly answer yes to those go for it I guess. Otherwise I get the autistic urge to try new shit but that's better done in a kvm than your actual home server. Depending on what you're using it for, that could be a LOT of reading, tinkering and trial/error before you have a functional system again. I personally see no reason to run anything but Linux on my servers, because I've been using it for 15 years and I see zero appeal in having to learn a new userland, firewall, hypervisor, and all this other shit just to save 12MB of RAM or be unofficially qualified for 25 jobs. AI is gonna obliterate IT and software development anyway.

>>22310 Why not NetBSD or Illumos?

I understand that for someone who knows what they're doing BSD offers security benefits but for the typical user is there really an upside compared to just using a GNU plus linux distribution?

>>22412 No

>>22455 Why not?

i tried it but honestly it's a bit too slow and the file system, while it works, is ancient. it's a great OS to put between your machines and the internet, though.

>>22310 Yes, Maca are great at most things

>>22412 OpenBSD has more secure defaults. It also has a better manual.

>>22543 Ok that makes sense, and I guess that's what people mean when they say they'd like to have BSD between them and the internet, even if they're not actually running it