OpenBSD more like NopeBSD

This has been known for years. You're so behind.

Nice opinion, fagtron. Why virtualize the entire hardware and run another OS when you just need to interpret PE binaries and translate Windows function calls?

...

Fucking disgusting,
you do realize linux binaries are ELF.
What they have to do is to be able to link their correct libraries and work on the syscalls by linux since linux has way more syscalls than openBSD has.
Also when I think about it, I think its a good decision to not support linux binaries since by adding syscalls to the openbsd kernel they would increase their attack surface.

I just read the thread, my point still stands though.
It is a security issue and the reasoning is explained above.
I don't know how they handled the syscall part but either way they implemented it, is a security issue.

kek, imagine believing this stupid shit

It really does.

LORD THEO FROWNS UPON YOUR SUGGESTION
marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=119318909016582

List: openbsd-misc
Subject: Re: About Xen: maybe a reiterative question but ..
From: Theo de Raadt
Date: 2007-10-24 1:14:13
Message-ID: 200710240114.l9O1EDt3003562 () cvs ! openbsd ! org
[Download message RAW]

You've been smoking something really mind altering, and I think you
should share it.

x86 virtualization is about basically placing another nearly full
kernel, full of new bugs, on top of a nasty x86 architecture which
barely has correct page protection. Then running your operating
system on the other side of this brand new pile of shit.

You are absolutely deluded, if not stupid, if you think that a
worldwide collection of software engineers who can't write operating
systems or applications without security holes, can then turn around
and suddenly write virtualization layers without security holes.

You've seen something on the shelf, and it has all sorts of pretty
colours, and you've bought it.

That's all x86 virtualization is.

0.00001/10 b8