Please wait...
ooo the register noticed us . ( not uncensored, but 9Front.. )
https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/01/9front_humanbiologics/
Hilariously, myself and a bunch of other people upgraded to FreeBSD 14.0-RELEASE the day it hit the update servers, the official announcement came a week later.
Fri Dec 01 2023 07:15:29 EST from Nurb432Looks like FBSD 14 is out.
"meow"? :)
Could one not use LXC as a docker base? Then still get all the other
advantages of PVE
Good question. That would basically be a container runtime inside another container runtime. I know you can do that with CNCF-compliant container runtimes, for example you can run Docker inside Docker by giving it access to the control socket.
If I get the servers I asked for, what I really want is to run Kubernetes on bare metal. It uses resources way more efficiently than putting it in virtual machines. That's what I'm building at ${dayjob} actually. We're splitting up VM and Container workloads onto separate clusters to save our customers the "v-tax". Of course, it's different there, because it's hosted on VMware and they rape you on licensing costs for virtual memory, and you *can't* run any container runtime other than theirs on the bare metal -- if you want anything other than theirs (which is also megabucks) you have to run it in virtual machines.
What might get me onto PVE is the cluster filesystem. That stuff is a pain in the neck to integrate manually.
Clearly not the same VMWare i grew up with, and supported. They were not an oppressive authoritarian beast back then. Of course they were still an independent company..
And ya, docker on top of lxc is a 2nd layer, I just figured it might be worth the little bit of overhead to get the rest of the cool bells and whistles. And i agree PVE offers nothing you cant do manually, but a huge time saver isn't trivial.
Then around 2009 or so they replaced it with "ESXi" which removed the management VM and you could no longer run generic Linux software in the root domain.
They claim "it's not Linux" but it is definitely Linux; you can run unmodified Linux binaries on it if they are static linked. But the userspace is stripped down and bastardized so you can't just put your ordinary management software, monitoring agents, backup agents, or container runtimes on it like you could on ESX. They don't want anything on there that isn't specifically built for VMware.
Read more at [ https://vmiss.net/esx-vs-esxi/ ] for a decent third party perspective.
They are a company in trouble, and they know it. For a while they were owned by EMC (and then EMC got bought by Dell) but then they spun it back out; now they just got acquired by Broadcom. I don't know why. As with all tech infrastructure companies they are under siege by the three-headed beast of AWS/Azure/GCS that is eating everything in its path.
Furthermore, from what I can tell, the "repatriation" movement (when people realize they're spending too much with the Beast and move back out of the clown) does NOT involve a move back to VMware. These customers were smart enough to move out of the clown, which means they're smart enough to avoid locking back in to VMware. They already refactored their workloads to clown native and distributed when they moved *in* to the clown, so when they move out they're using clown native technologies in their new target environments.
Ya about the time esxi came out, we formed a 'legit'; vmware team, so i didnt have to screw with it anymore, along with my other job ITSM dude and semi-developer.
New OS build ( Debian based ) released for my Starfive V2 RISC-V. Bunch of improvements listed..... Yay.. download....rip out current eMMC, burn it.. now it wont boot from eMMC..wtf... read a lot. no, it still should work. Hmm, how about ... flip switches try SD instead ( easier for me to keep burning anyway ).. that boots. oh well, boot from SD and flip to m.2 is good enough for me for this.. and m.2 is faster than eMMC anyway.
copy to m.2, setup the 'flip' service... reboot.. works.. yay.. kick off an update and a shell script to add add supported apps. zzzz nap time.... eventually... yay its done... reboot with a monitor plugged in ( was doing it remote ) GPU is now unusable.. you can watch the screen paint its sooooo slow...... really???
Grr Frustrating. Back into storage it goes.
The Linux New Media dudes are doing some inventory clearing, so if you wanna grab some magazines at a discount before they throw it away, you have until January 4th or so. The best issues are already out of stock, which is a bit of a bummer.
One of these days I'm going to try hosting a personal website from my house. The server will run a BSD, probably DragonflyBSD or NetBSD, but NOT OpenBSD. NetBSD is fast, and Dragonfly is VERY fast, but OpenBSD is just a sloth in comparison, don't you agree?
Why was 'real' FreeBSD not considered? if i was going to do *bsd and it wasn't on some old esoteric hardware, i would not think twice about FreeBSD
Sat Dec 23 2023 16:33:03 EST from msgrhysOne of these days I'm going to try hosting a personal website from my house. The server will run a BSD, probably DragonflyBSD or NetBSD, but NOT OpenBSD. NetBSD is fast, and Dragonfly is VERY fast, but OpenBSD is just a sloth in comparison, don't you agree?
sigh, i mean i would not think twice and choose FreeBSD.. i worded that really poorly.. i do wish we could edit our posts when we do stupid stuff like that.
Sat Dec 23 2023 18:42:36 EST from Nurb432Why was 'real' FreeBSD not considered? if i was going to do *bsd and it wasn't on some old esoteric hardware, i would not think twice about FreeBSD
Sat Dec 23 2023 16:33:03 EST from msgrhysOne of these days I'm going to try hosting a personal website from my house. The server will run a BSD, probably DragonflyBSD or NetBSD, but NOT OpenBSD. NetBSD is fast, and Dragonfly is VERY fast, but OpenBSD is just a sloth in comparison, don't you agree?
Well I've tried them all in the past and I liked NetBSD and Dragonfly the most, that's all. Dragonfly to me "feels" faster than FreeBSD (hope I haven't offended the cat ;) ). For most people who just want something that works and has good documentation I think FreeBSD would be the best choice. FreeBSD has a nice handbook, whereas OpenBSD mainly just has man pages, which are not the greatest experience for non-wizards ;)
What I was really trying to ask is: Am I the only one who has noticed how slow OpenBSD is compared to the others? I suppose for some people it's worth it because of all the security features, but it's not worth it for me.
Sat Dec 23 2023 18:42:36 EST from Nurb432Why was 'real' FreeBSD not considered?
While totally political, i would not touch OpenBSD with a 10 foot pole. Theo is an ass. Needs beat down. I dislike him even more than Pottering i think, but its at least a close tie either way...
NetBSD, to me while not bashing it at all, is of value on oddball/old/esoteric hardware but anything for 'serious' use woudl be FreeBSD for me. Stable, mature, documented, updated, used everywhere, and 'just works' ( in the server world anyway ).
Of course these days since i'm so removed from that world as i was forced to go back to penguin a long time ago ( GPU/WiFi drivers and such, now due to ARM/Risc-V drivers ), id just go Debian since i'm used to it now..
Sat Dec 23 2023 19:09:45 EST from msgrhysWell I've tried them all in the past and I liked NetBSD and Dragonfly the most, that's all. Dragonfly to me "feels" faster than FreeBSD (hope I haven't offended the cat ;) ). For most people who just want something that works and has good documentation I think FreeBSD would be the best choice. FreeBSD has a nice handbook, whereas OpenBSD mainly just has man pages, which are not the greatest experience for non-wizards ;)
What I was really trying to ask is: Am I the only one who has noticed how slow OpenBSD is compared to the others? I suppose for some people it's worth it because of all the security features, but it's not worth it for me.
Sat Dec 23 2023 18:42:36 EST from Nurb432Why was 'real' FreeBSD not considered?
One of these days I'm going to try hosting a personal website from my
house. The server will run a BSD, probably DragonflyBSD or NetBSD,
but NOT OpenBSD. NetBSD is fast, and Dragonfly is VERY fast, but
OpenBSD is just a sloth in comparison, don't you agree?
I haven't looked at it lately, but that was my experience in the past. Particularly with respect to multithreaded and I/O heavy workloads. MySQL was the perennial favorite example but Citadel was of course my experience. I took some abuse from a few people who blamed the software but it was definitely the operating system. I don't know whether that is still the case.
I might choose OpenBSD for a security focused workload such as a network gateway. It has that nice packet filter, and I've recently learned that it has a built-in NAT46/NAT64 gateway that I'd like to try. To do that on Linux I have to add Jool, which is a third party module. But no, I wouldn't try running a web site on it. For that it would definitely be FreeBSD or Linux.
And for running Internet web sites at home I must of course shill for my favorite service: [ https://www.aceinnovative.com/internet-access/static-ip-vpn/ ] for doing so. I've mentioned this a number of times but it's just that simple to operate and that good.
2023-12-23 16:33 from msgrhys
One of these days I'm going to try hosting a personal website from my
house. The server will run a BSD, probably DragonflyBSD or NetBSD,
but NOT OpenBSD. NetBSD is fast, and Dragonfly is VERY fast, but
OpenBSD is just a sloth in comparison, don't you agree?
I haven't checked NetBSD as of late, but its performance under low load used to be the same as OpenBSD's, I think.
Honestly, if all you want to do is hosting a personal site using a standard PHP / Python / Perl / Redis stack, you won't notice much of a difference among systems.
For personal services I like OpenBSD because their reference httpd is quite easy to work with and because I also like their reference load balancer. Yes, I use a load balancer for my personal services.
Just pick one that sounds good to you and roll with it :P
2023-12-23 18:42 from Nurb432
Why was 'real' FreeBSD not considered? if i was going to do *bsd and
it wasn't on some old esoteric hardware, i would not think twice
about FreeBSD
If one wants to be purist, one can say NetBSD is a real BSD...
What I was really trying to ask is: Am I the only one who has noticed
how slow OpenBSD is compared to the others? I suppose for some people
it's worth it because of all the security features, but it's not
worth it for me.
OpenBSD has abyssmal IO, that is not a secret. FreeBSD and DragonflyBSD have put more effort in performance, by miles.
True. Since 386bsd is long since dead.
Sun Dec 24 2023 09:39:13 EST from darknetuser2023-12-23 18:42 from Nurb432
Why was 'real' FreeBSD not considered? if i was going to do *bsd and
it wasn't on some old esoteric hardware, i would not think twice
about FreeBSD
If one wants to be purist, one can say NetBSD is a real BSD...
If one wants to be purist, one can say NetBSD is a real BSD...
True. However, I think the "unix pedigree" stopped mattering a long time ago.
No one cares about whether an operating system has Bell Labs lineage, whether it has Berkeley lineage, or what The Open Group says about it. No one has ever cared about those things, even back in the bad old days of a dozen commercial unix variants. All anyone cares about is "will my software work on this system?"
And for developers, it's "will my intended users be able to make my software work on this system?"
In other words, the current standard bearer for Unix is NOT the entity who owns the Unix trademark.