A hardy "Welcome!" to OPNsense!
-
I thought gonzopancho was Jim Thompson but cmb just stated in that other thread that he doesn't do the forum so ??? :/
I am also confused by that - maybe gonzopancho is a puppet whose real name happens to also be Jim Thompson?
Do puppets have real names? -
I thought gonzopancho was Jim Thompson but cmb just stated in that other thread that he doesn't do the forum so ??? :/
I am also confused by that - maybe gonzopancho is a puppet whose real name happens to also be Jim Thompson?
Do puppets have real names?Hmm…
https://twitter.com/gonzopancho
Can't find the thread Derelict refers to, but I'm also wondering why gonzopancho switched to guest status recently. -
Really weird.
-
Can't find the thread Derelict refers to, but I'm also wondering why gonzopancho switched to guest status recently.
the thread -> https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=88244.msg518420#msg518420
-
I'm also wondering why gonzopancho switched to guest status recently.
He closed his forum account recently, that's just how SMF represents it now.
-
What are differences between pfsense and opensense? How about bugs? Do opensense have the same bugs as pfsense?
-
It's not a bug.
-
It's not a bug.
What is not a bug? Do you want to say that pfsense dont have any bug? I wasnt seen such software before, without any bug. If you say that pfsense dont have any bugs and even dont interested to find out this and you are developer, then this makes pfsense just "unknown and not trustable software"…..All developers are interested about possible bugs to find out, to fix them before someone other user installs software.
-
Do opensense have the same bugs as pfsense?
Mostly yes, plus more as they broke things that worked, and haven't kept up to date on things we've fixed, even just the short list of security fixes. Even when I was kind enough to tell them about a serious file corruption bug that we fixed, they "fixed" it in a way that doesn't actually fix the problem.
-
It's not a bug.
What is not a bug? Do you want to say that pfsense dont have any bug? I wasnt seen such software before, without any bug. If you say that pfsense dont have any bugs and even dont interested to find out this and you are developer, then this makes pfsense just "unknown and not trustable software"…..All developers are interested about possible bugs to find out, to fix them before someone other user installs software.
Of course we are. Derelict isn't a developer, and I think his reply was in jest.
-
http://forum.opnsense.org
Enroll and ask the same there. Great bunch of guys and extremely helpful!
-
@cmb:
It's not a bug.
What is not a bug? Do you want to say that pfsense dont have any bug? I wasnt seen such software before, without any bug. If you say that pfsense dont have any bugs and even dont interested to find out this and you are developer, then this makes pfsense just "unknown and not trustable software"…..All developers are interested about possible bugs to find out, to fix them before someone other user installs software.
Of course we are. Derelict isn't a developer, and I think his reply was in jest.
It was in reference to this thread: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=95969.msg534018#msg534018
-
@cmb:
Do opensense have the same bugs as pfsense?
Mostly yes, plus more as they broke things that worked, and haven't kept up to date on things we've fixed, even just the short list of security fixes. Even when I was kind enough to tell them about a serious file corruption bug that we fixed, they "fixed" it in a way that doesn't actually fix the problem.
Ok, I believe the same. I was always thinked that never make software that copies other software functionality, make instead new soft. In their website I read that they just know better how to make firewall but still dont put out no any comparison. No any original idea…Ok, I give up testing it.
-
http://forum.opnsense.org
Enroll and ask the same there. Great bunch of guys and extremely helpful!
Hah. For some definition of "great" that you won't find in a dictionary, where great == pathological liars who are in way over their heads.
It was in reference to this thread: https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=95969.msg534018#msg534018
Ah yes. Indeed there aren't any bugs involved there.
-
That is wrong. Totally wrong.
You couldnt be more wrong even if you tried.
-
-
-
I'm sensing tension…
-
To be honest…
I see code posted on github by opnsense dev's and copied into pfsense few days later ... A lot of the code and the way it works is WAY different than pfsense.
What they need is a better GUI and packages to be available to opnsense. The devs are very friendly, openminded and listen to the small but devoted community.
Whats really the issue here, is pfsense is opensource and it has been forked. Result is that pfsense is nothing but a trademark and a name. Its not a product since you can get similar performance and you dont have to sign over your grandchildren to some weirdo to get access to dev tools.
Pfsense is nothing without the people that use their sparetime to develop and maintain packages for this OS project and we can all see that many of the original "nice" guys have gone and is never heard of again in here.
Opnsense will succeed in what they want to achieve. Despite the badmouthing in here. Because of the shear friendlyness and the flow of information going on the forum from the dev's.
Lots of updates all the time and very short time to implement latest security patches.
And its bloody simple to update since it has been stripped of all the weird things that breaks things all the time in pfsense.
When the bacis packages are available then its goodbye to pfsense. Not because I dont like it, but because of the hostility of ESF. Its not a friendly place to be anymore.
Simples.
-
I don't know guy. To me it seems like you have been out on a mission to find fault with pfsense.
I mean, if you don't like pfsense just switch.
The rants are getting ridiculous already.
