4 ms·

I tried out FreeBSD and loved it, between the documentation, cohesion, and the ports system. Unfortunately, I need Docker for work on a few different projects

I tried out FreeBSD and loved it, between the documentation, cohesion, and the ports system. Unfortunately, I need Docker for work on a few different projects -- one for Supabase migrations, and another project that's orchestrated (in development too) via docker-compose. Highly recommend it otherwise.

ptx 3y ago
You could run Docker in a Linux VM, which is what Docker Desktop does anyway. FreeBSD has Bhyve for this.
- waynesonfire 3y ago
  I have a similar requirement and will be doing exactly this.
- magicalhippo 3y ago
  I do this and the only thing that sucks is that network speed is limited. Between host and guest I only get about 1.5Gpbs on a Threadripper 1950X. NIC pass-through should work though, I already got NVMe pass-through working, so if I had a spare PCIe slot I'd do that with a 10G adapter.
- dehrmann 3y ago
  Do you even need a VM? FreeBSD has linux binary compatibility.
  - wut42 3y ago
    Docker is a container based tech. the binary compatibility won't help.
    - dehrmann 3y ago
      Binary compatibility is the key part. You can ignore a lot of what cgroups and namespaces give you and containers will still "work" (but without the insecure sandbox). Without the binary, you're out of luck.
- gigatexal 3y ago
  Having to use a VM for docker is no different than what MacOS users have to do and then at that point why not just use a Mac.
  - globular-toast 3y ago
    Why not use a Mac for my ZFS-based NAS? Is that your question?
inferiorhuman 3y ago
I've been running FreeBSD for homelab stuff for years now and the documentation is a huge pain point IMO. The handbook is okay, but beyond that it's pretty poor. E.g. every single major upgrade in recent memory has shat the bed. There's always a new reason, at one point it's because I rolled past the 3AM deadline and the periodic scripts absolutely fucked freebsd-update. So this time around I thought it'd be nice to script the 13.x install so I'd have a nice repeatable process. Except the documentation around unattended installs still references sysinstall (which was replaced eons ago) in some parts. After quite a lot of digging I realized the automation story is "roll your own ISO". Nothing that even comes close to kickstart or quickstart in Linux land (geee no wonder AWS adoption is fairly low). So I dug into some stuff that would've made automated installs from a stock ISO easier, got a proof of concept working and fired off an email to one of the names on the current installer (which is still missing features from sysinstall!). And that's where the story ends. I'm ready to get off of this train, and were it not for ZFS I would've already bailed. Don't get me started on the ports tree. I would not run FreeBSD in a production environment without a good reason. If you're already tied to docker that's a great reason to stay with Linux.
- bionsystem 3y ago
  You could try SmartOS for native ZFS support + virtualization built in (including linux containers) + pain free upgrades. Not a BSD but shares a decent amount of values (and code). It's a candidate for my home server and so far I love it. FreeBSD was another candidate but just skimming through the docs, what's easy on other systems looks painful there. Want to start a VM ? Here is a set of commands, different for every guest OS, with a bunch of unexplained options...
- doublerabbit 3y ago
  > If you're already tied to docker that's a great reason to stay with Linux. I'd say the opposite. A great reason to run from Linux.
  - inferiorhuman 3y ago
    I'm not much of a docker fan but there are benefits to the docker ecosystem which you would lose completely by switching.

ptx 3y ago

You could run Docker in a Linux VM, which is what Docker Desktop does anyway. FreeBSD has Bhyve for this.

waynesonfire 3y ago
I have a similar requirement and will be doing exactly this.
magicalhippo 3y ago
I do this and the only thing that sucks is that network speed is limited. Between host and guest I only get about 1.5Gpbs on a Threadripper 1950X. NIC pass-through should work though, I already got NVMe pass-through working, so if I had a spare PCIe slot I'd do that with a 10G adapter.
dehrmann 3y ago
Do you even need a VM? FreeBSD has linux binary compatibility.
- wut42 3y ago
  Docker is a container based tech. the binary compatibility won't help.
  - dehrmann 3y ago
    Binary compatibility is the key part. You can ignore a lot of what cgroups and namespaces give you and containers will still "work" (but without the insecure sandbox). Without the binary, you're out of luck.
gigatexal 3y ago
Having to use a VM for docker is no different than what MacOS users have to do and then at that point why not just use a Mac.
- globular-toast 3y ago
  Why not use a Mac for my ZFS-based NAS? Is that your question?

inferiorhuman 3y ago

I've been running FreeBSD for homelab stuff for years now and the documentation is a huge pain point IMO. The handbook is okay, but beyond that it's pretty poor. E.g. every single major upgrade in recent memory has shat the bed. There's always a new reason, at one point it's because I rolled past the 3AM deadline and the periodic scripts absolutely fucked freebsd-update. So this time around I thought it'd be nice to script the 13.x install so I'd have a nice repeatable process. Except the documentation around unattended installs still references sysinstall (which was replaced eons ago) in some parts. After quite a lot of digging I realized the automation story is "roll your own ISO". Nothing that even comes close to kickstart or quickstart in Linux land (geee no wonder AWS adoption is fairly low). So I dug into some stuff that would've made automated installs from a stock ISO easier, got a proof of concept working and fired off an email to one of the names on the current installer (which is still missing features from sysinstall!). And that's where the story ends. I'm ready to get off of this train, and were it not for ZFS I would've already bailed. Don't get me started on the ports tree. I would not run FreeBSD in a production environment without a good reason. If you're already tied to docker that's a great reason to stay with Linux.

bionsystem 3y ago
You could try SmartOS for native ZFS support + virtualization built in (including linux containers) + pain free upgrades. Not a BSD but shares a decent amount of values (and code). It's a candidate for my home server and so far I love it. FreeBSD was another candidate but just skimming through the docs, what's easy on other systems looks painful there. Want to start a VM ? Here is a set of commands, different for every guest OS, with a bunch of unexplained options...
doublerabbit 3y ago
> If you're already tied to docker that's a great reason to stay with Linux. I'd say the opposite. A great reason to run from Linux.
- inferiorhuman 3y ago
  I'm not much of a docker fan but there are benefits to the docker ecosystem which you would lose completely by switching.