Mastodon Feed
Boosted by taral ("JP Sugarbroad"):
david_chisnall@infosec.exchange ("David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)") wrote:
This post is an example of why no one listens to #FreeBSD advocates. They start by not understanding a Linux thing, and then claim a totally unrelated FreeBSD thing was there first and is better.
The soft reboot thing in RedHat is about providing an immutable base image (FreeBSD does not do this) and then a lightweight way of restarting userspace to use it.
The thing you link to is the reroot feature of FreeBSD, which was a copy of a Linux feature. Linux has had pivot root for a long time, the thing that is added is an administration layer that uses this functionality for a quick update path, integrated with the normal update flow. This does not exist on FreeBSD.
Similarly, FreeBSD has had jails for ages. Linux has also had shared-kernel virtualisation for almost as long. OpenVZ shipped five years after Jails (and before Jails had things like isolation for SysV IPC and so were actually useful for isolating workloads like Postgres). The value of Docker / OCI containers is not that you can create an isolated environment, it’s that it has a distribution model built on immutable layers and an orchestration model that lets you cleanly separate persistent data (volumes) from the software that runs on them so you can upgrade by simply rebuilding the image and then destroying and recreating the container. And FreeBSD now, finally, has an alternative to OCI containers on Linux: OCI containers on FreeBSD.
If you spent half the effort understanding why people like and use some of these features on Linux as you do telling people that barely related features on FreeBSD are better, then you might actually do some useful advocacy. As it is, you just reinforce all of the negative stereotypes the Linux users have about FreeBSD.