News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Red Hat Expecting X.org to “Go into Hard Maintenance Mode... by na85 on Friday June 28, 2019 @01:38PM (#20306836)
OpenBSD isn't performant enough to be a daily driver on a laptop, unless your laptop spends all its time plugged in.

The battery life on my X220 was a solid hour less under OpenBSD than under Debian, and it ran some 10 degrees hotter. Yes, this is post-apmd improvements.

I want to like OpenBSD but code correctness just isn't enough for me.

Re:Red Hat Expecting X.org to “Go into Hard Maintenance Mode... by djsumdog on Friday June 28, 2019 @02:52PM (#20307670)
OpenBSD (and the other BSDs too) are also pretty far behind on things like wireless hardware. There just aren't enough active developers to get a lot of the 802.11ac stack implemented (and ax or Wi-Fi 6 is coming around the corner too).

If there was a current port of Docker for FreeBSD and Wi-Fi ac support, it would totally be my daily driver right now. Currently I still use Gentoo on my laptops.

Re:Red Hat Expecting X.org to “Go into Hard Maintenance Mode... by earenndil on Friday June 28, 2019 @04:05PM (#20308327)
Does docker do anything for you that a jail couldn't?
Re:Red Hat Expecting X.org to “Go into Hard Maintenance Mode... by eropple on Friday June 28, 2019 @05:02PM (#20308757)
It has been a long time since I used a BSD in anger, but aren't jails pretty much a take-it-or-leave-it system? Docker containers are an aggregate of Linux namespaces and cgroups and can be manipulated in a pretty granular way. I can, for example, share a networking namespace between two containers to have one inspect the traffic of the other (and do so easily).

Not saying you'd want to do that, but my understanding is that this is part of a lot of the clever networking you see in orchestration systems.

Re:Red Hat Expecting X.org to “Go into Hard Maintenance Mode... by toast0 on Friday June 28, 2019 @05:30PM (#20308925)
FreeBSD jails have some flexibility. You can choose to pass through the host networking as-is, or pass a limited selection of ips; I think there's a way to have a more separated stack that that too, but I haven't used it. You can allow raw sockets or not, you can shield the processes or not, same with IPC.

I haven't had a need to have a jail inspect traffic of another, I suspect that might be tricky. However I've used them successfully as a lightweight alternative to a vm for QA/dev environments -- use hard links for the base OS to save space, and give each jail its own ip and you get fairly cheap multiple boxes. I've also used it them to contain statically compiled binaries -- TLS terminator runs without access to much of anything, if the next vulnerability after Heartbleed was worse, it would be a lot harder to escalate vs common deployment with OpenSSL linked into a webserver; similar with an environment running ffmpeg.

Re:Red Hat Expecting X.org to “Go into Hard Maintenance Mode... by djsumdog on Sunday June 30, 2019 @04:40PM (#20320364)
There are already so many Dockerfiles out there and guides based on them. Plus you get filesystem layering, the cgroups, process limits ... I have a feeling it would be possible to build a container system that's Docker API compatible, but uses zfs and jails under the surface. I think that's what the old "unmaintained" port did a few years back.