4 ms·

Not big, because I ensure that I don't use any platform-unique services and I document my configuration. I'm using Dropbox and I'm evaluating Hetzner, neither

by chalst 5y ago

Not big, because I ensure that I don't use any platform-unique services and I document my configuration. I'm using Dropbox and I'm evaluating Hetzner, neither of which has specialist services that are interesting for me; I'm also evaluating the new Julia compute platform and the GCP as providers that do have unique service offerings I might become interested in. I generally prefer to administer FreeBSD boxes to Linux, fwiw.

Dracophoenix 5y ago
Any reason in particular for a BSD, and FreeBSD at that? Running legacy SysV/POSIX-compliant code is the only reason I can think of.
- chalst 5y ago
  I just find it nicer to admin: things work the way I expect them. Two things in particular: I can configure FreeBSD jails easily and be confident in the security model, where Linux containers are just way too complicated if you want to run untrusted code. Second, systemd logging really rubs me up the wrong way, especially if something goes wrong when setting up a box. There's only one thing FreeBSD can do that Linux can't, which is Capsicum that I don't use, but for basic sysadmin I just find it nicer. The only Linux technology I really miss in FreeBSD land is KVM.
  - vermaden 5y ago
    But FreeBSD has Bhyve ... you do not need KVM having Bhyve.
    - chalst 5y ago
      You do not need FreeBSD jails if you have Linux containers; even so, jails are better for most sysop tasks. Likewise I much prefer KVM to Bhyve. I note SmartOS supports both KVM and Bhyve.