4 ms·

The fact that the Docker port was allowed to die is a pretty good indicator of how little interest there is in using FreeBSD in the industry, particularly in cl

The fact that the Docker port was allowed to die is a pretty good indicator of how little interest there is in using FreeBSD in the industry, particularly in cloud environments.

icedchai 7y ago
"jails" are the native solution for FreeBSD. You wouldn't set up a FreeBSD server to run docker.
- twblalock 7y ago
  Most companies would rather use Docker than jails and that alone is a reason to avoid BSD.
  - icedchai 7y ago
    That's fine. I've been running various Linux distros since 1993 and FreeBSD since 1996. Each has its strengths and weaknesses.
- pepemon 7y ago
  And how can I run OCI-compliant image straight to the jail? Docker isn't just a namespaced runtime.
  - icedchai 7y ago
    It's simple: You shouldn't run Docker images on FreeBSD.
    - twblalock 7y ago
      Wrong answer. This means you can't run modern cloud-native apps on BSD.
      - icedchai 7y ago
        Tell that to companies like Netflix: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Netflix-FreeBSD-2019 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Netflix-... Not all applications require Docker.
        twblalock 7y ago
        Last I checked, FreeBSD is only used in their CDN appliances and Netflix is deploying their services in containers on Linux.
        icedchai 7y ago
        As I said, Linux and FreeBSD have their strengths and weaknesses. I use both, and definitely wouldn't deploy certain types of applications under FreeBSD.
dbuder 7y ago
You are probably still right but MIT license means that you just won't see what industry uses. Industry has used free BSDs and not contributed in code or money nearly to the extent that it has for some Linux flavors.
- bluGill 7y ago
  The license has nothing to do with that. GPL2 doesn't require industry to contribute back either. I decline to speculate on why industry adopts Linux.
  - kls 7y ago
    A bit of it had to do with the SCO lawsuits, it had a freezing effect on BSD and it's adoption numbers dropped way behind Linux after that and never really recovered.
    - wbl 7y ago
      That wasn't SCO. It was an earlier set of lawsuits by AT&T because 4.4 BSD had evolved from AT&T unix.
      - kls 7y ago
        Your right, It's been a while and I got the two mixed up. Funny how time can play tricks on memory. It was the AT&T lawsuit. SCO was Linux. Sorry for the misinformation. IIRC Linux had come out a few years before the BSD lawsuit, but I do recall a time when they where neck and neck and BSD started dealing with the legal issues and it just seemed like Linux keep on gaining traction after that.
    - nichohel 7y ago
      The SCO lawsuit targeted Linux vendors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes Earlier a USL (Unix System Lab) lawsuit went after some BSD stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc._v._Berkeley_Software_Design,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc.....

The fact that the Docker port was allowed to die is a pretty good indicator of how little interest there is in using FreeBSD in the industry, particularly in cloud environments.

icedchai 7y ago

"jails" are the native solution for FreeBSD. You wouldn't set up a FreeBSD server to run docker.

twblalock 7y ago
Most companies would rather use Docker than jails and that alone is a reason to avoid BSD.
- icedchai 7y ago
  That's fine. I've been running various Linux distros since 1993 and FreeBSD since 1996. Each has its strengths and weaknesses.
pepemon 7y ago
And how can I run OCI-compliant image straight to the jail? Docker isn't just a namespaced runtime.
- icedchai 7y ago
  It's simple: You shouldn't run Docker images on FreeBSD.
  - twblalock 7y ago
    Wrong answer. This means you can't run modern cloud-native apps on BSD.
    - icedchai 7y ago
      Tell that to companies like Netflix: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Netflix-FreeBSD-2019 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Netflix-... Not all applications require Docker.
      - twblalock 7y ago
        Last I checked, FreeBSD is only used in their CDN appliances and Netflix is deploying their services in containers on Linux.
        icedchai 7y ago
        As I said, Linux and FreeBSD have their strengths and weaknesses. I use both, and definitely wouldn't deploy certain types of applications under FreeBSD.

dbuder 7y ago

You are probably still right but MIT license means that you just won't see what industry uses. Industry has used free BSDs and not contributed in code or money nearly to the extent that it has for some Linux flavors.

bluGill 7y ago
The license has nothing to do with that. GPL2 doesn't require industry to contribute back either. I decline to speculate on why industry adopts Linux.
- kls 7y ago
  A bit of it had to do with the SCO lawsuits, it had a freezing effect on BSD and it's adoption numbers dropped way behind Linux after that and never really recovered.
  - wbl 7y ago
    That wasn't SCO. It was an earlier set of lawsuits by AT&T because 4.4 BSD had evolved from AT&T unix.
    - kls 7y ago
      Your right, It's been a while and I got the two mixed up. Funny how time can play tricks on memory. It was the AT&T lawsuit. SCO was Linux. Sorry for the misinformation. IIRC Linux had come out a few years before the BSD lawsuit, but I do recall a time when they where neck and neck and BSD started dealing with the legal issues and it just seemed like Linux keep on gaining traction after that.
  - nichohel 7y ago
    The SCO lawsuit targeted Linux vendors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_disputes Earlier a USL (Unix System Lab) lawsuit went after some BSD stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc._v._Berkeley_Software_Design,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc.....