4 ms·
It seems you are right. The OPS documentation mentions that you can deploy it on bare metal, but this is a recent comment [0] that contradicts that . right
by exceptione 3y ago
It seems you are right. The OPS documentation mentions that you can deploy it on bare metal, but this is a recent comment [0] that contradicts that .
right now we don't have any plans to support bare metal
installs like this as that would imply a bunch of other
mgmt related tooling that would not be present
(eg: start/stop the server, configure networking,
deploy a new one, access rights, etc.) it also breaks
the assumptions we have that it is only being deployed
as a vm which means having to support a ton of random
hardware drivers, nanos is intended to always be ran on
top of a hypervisor of some kind - whether it's public
cloud or something under your own control
(eg: proxmox/vsphere/etc.)
It seems like they make some distinction between true bare metal and somewhat bare metal, which is highly confusing.
___
[0]: https://github.com/nanovms/ops/issues/1522 https://github.com/nanovms/ops/issues/1522
- sweetjuly 3y agoIt's bare metal in the sense that it's self-bootstrapping but the "metal" it supports is only a paravirtualized system. This is what they mean when they say that they don't want to support tons of random hardware drivers: they've written support for KVM paravirt devices (which are nearly universally available on VMs), and that allows the kernel to run on most hosting providers.
- RetroTechie 3y agoSo (if I understand correctly): It minimizes the software stack (and with that: attack surface) that application sits on, inside a VM. It does not (nor is it expected to) help to minimize said application. And it does not minimize the software stack that runs the VM.
- convolvatron 3y agoexactly. its an adpater that provides a short path between the applications expectations and what the VM provides.