4 ms·

For simplicity and clarity of design, may I suggest FreeBSD? Though I am not sure I would want to run Gnome or any of those crazy things -- I run Joe's Window

For simplicity and clarity of design, may I suggest FreeBSD? Though I am not sure I would want to run Gnome or any of those crazy things -- I run Joe's Window Manager, jwm, because all I need from a window manager is to manage windows, not handle file types or show me a directory tree or emulate the the MS task bar or whatever.

dima55 12y ago
FreeBSD will not help him since "linux" is not his problem at all. If he didn't run all the fancy things, and did what you do, then his problems would be somewhere between non-existent and clearly-debuggable.
- mverwijs 12y ago
  This had me laughing. Not the FreeBSD bit. That bit is serious. The 'didn't run all the fancy things' bit. That was funny. The problem is: in Linux, pretty soon, you cannot do without the fancy bits anymore. I run a bunch of servers. Servers need a firewall. Nothing fancy, just iptables. Right? I'm running Ubuntu servers. They have 'firewalld' installed. Firewalld uses dark magic to manipulate iptables and ip routes. Oh, it's all great when it works, for as long as it works. You can simple open up a port by issuing a firewalld-cmd command. Until you can't. Until firewalld-cmd says it can't connect to firewalld even though it thinks it is running. And firewalld can't restart because it thinks the configuration files are wrong. I'm not a Linux newbie by any standard, but I could not solve this problem. After restarting firewalld, all the routes on the machine were gone. And thank god for iLO. This is on a production server providing secondary services to 200.000 users. Soon after, I found similar issues on our loadbalancers, webservers, database servers, all running firewalld. There was no other solution other than to reboot the server. I tried debugging firewalld and ran into (no particular order) apparmor, dbus, python, firewalld-cmd, firewalld, network-manager and libvirtd. No where was a hint to be found of why firewalld didn't work. I don't consider this to be anything fancy. This is supposed to be a simple wrapper around iptables. It is supposed to 'just work'. It is supposed to leave clear logs about what it is trying to do in /var/log/syslog. Sure, I'm getting old and cranky. But I'm really tired of having to get called out of my bed at 03:00 am because of this 'innovation' that tries to solve edgecases. And solves them badly.
  - VLM 12y ago
    linux doesn't eat its own dogfood anymore. This would never be tolerated if the devs actually used their product. Its all about serving the imaginary theoretical market researched noob (-only) user of gnome mobile phones that don't exist and everyone else has to go away because they don't matter anymore. To freebsd! Things actually work, there. Its the universal OS of the 10s just like Debian was the universal OS of the 90s/00s but now is just a gnome bootloader for ubuntu.
  - nisa 12y ago
    Huh? I never saw something like firewalld on Ubuntu? There is ufw but it's not enabled by default.. Looks like you mean Fedora/RHEL7? Ubuntu on the server (14.04) is quite okay in my experience.. you can even deinstall dbus and still use upstart.. RHEL7 made me furious (NetworkManager by default... ) but I'm not used to it so it may be just missing experience.
    - mverwijs 12y ago
      firewalld for Ubuntu in the 'universe' repo. Don't use it. It's horrible, unstable, slows network speed and is impossible to debug.

dima55 12y ago

FreeBSD will not help him since "linux" is not his problem at all. If he didn't run all the fancy things, and did what you do, then his problems would be somewhere between non-existent and clearly-debuggable.

mverwijs 12y ago
This had me laughing. Not the FreeBSD bit. That bit is serious. The 'didn't run all the fancy things' bit. That was funny. The problem is: in Linux, pretty soon, you cannot do without the fancy bits anymore. I run a bunch of servers. Servers need a firewall. Nothing fancy, just iptables. Right? I'm running Ubuntu servers. They have 'firewalld' installed. Firewalld uses dark magic to manipulate iptables and ip routes. Oh, it's all great when it works, for as long as it works. You can simple open up a port by issuing a firewalld-cmd command. Until you can't. Until firewalld-cmd says it can't connect to firewalld even though it thinks it is running. And firewalld can't restart because it thinks the configuration files are wrong. I'm not a Linux newbie by any standard, but I could not solve this problem. After restarting firewalld, all the routes on the machine were gone. And thank god for iLO. This is on a production server providing secondary services to 200.000 users. Soon after, I found similar issues on our loadbalancers, webservers, database servers, all running firewalld. There was no other solution other than to reboot the server. I tried debugging firewalld and ran into (no particular order) apparmor, dbus, python, firewalld-cmd, firewalld, network-manager and libvirtd. No where was a hint to be found of why firewalld didn't work. I don't consider this to be anything fancy. This is supposed to be a simple wrapper around iptables. It is supposed to 'just work'. It is supposed to leave clear logs about what it is trying to do in /var/log/syslog. Sure, I'm getting old and cranky. But I'm really tired of having to get called out of my bed at 03:00 am because of this 'innovation' that tries to solve edgecases. And solves them badly.
- VLM 12y ago
  linux doesn't eat its own dogfood anymore. This would never be tolerated if the devs actually used their product. Its all about serving the imaginary theoretical market researched noob (-only) user of gnome mobile phones that don't exist and everyone else has to go away because they don't matter anymore. To freebsd! Things actually work, there. Its the universal OS of the 10s just like Debian was the universal OS of the 90s/00s but now is just a gnome bootloader for ubuntu.
- nisa 12y ago
  Huh? I never saw something like firewalld on Ubuntu? There is ufw but it's not enabled by default.. Looks like you mean Fedora/RHEL7? Ubuntu on the server (14.04) is quite okay in my experience.. you can even deinstall dbus and still use upstart.. RHEL7 made me furious (NetworkManager by default... ) but I'm not used to it so it may be just missing experience.
  - mverwijs 12y ago
    firewalld for Ubuntu in the 'universe' repo. Don't use it. It's horrible, unstable, slows network speed and is impossible to debug.