I think so.
It is LXD + KVM, so way more and finer tune control on lxc instances. It can run OCI images as well, so for docker instances with only a few configs and no persistent storage, it is actually quite handy. For docker instances that need pretty complicated compose files, I just run docker inside an lxc for now, until I figure that out.
Bash variable manipulation is really, really fun.
More incus:
Next:
I was just joking around, I hope you didn’t take it too personally. I’ve been hearing a lot of KDE enthusiasm lately.
And xfce is great, but it has its pitfalls.
I also get excited about projects, I’m no different.
I have a surface pro 6 and I love it.
You should, however, mention that the cameras do not work (yet), which makes this a no-go as a full laptop replacement.
I just vi the systemd/system/fancyname.service files father than use systemd edit, but I think the result is the same.
There are two configs you can add to the [service] directive:
user=someuser
This should allow you to run the service under the credentials of your choosing.
Remember to systemctl daemon-reload after making changes to unit files.
That is not normal. I have much the same setup, sabnzbd, Plex, jellyfin, sonar, radar. They all run under a particular user and their /opt and /var/lib folders don’t ‘revert’ to their old ownership and permissions.
Either something is watching those folders and setting permissions, or some kind of immutability is in play, but permissions normally don’t revert like that.
Because NAT acts as a firewall with a “default deny” policy for incoming packets, but no other rules. You cannot prevent a device on the private subnet side of a NAT from attempting to communicate with an “outside” ip with nat alone, nat doesnt understand the concepts of accept/deny/drop.
All nat does is rewrite address headers.
The machines behind a NAT box are not directly addressable because they have private IP addresses. Machines out on the general Internet cannot send IP packets to them directly. Instead, any packets will be sent to the address of the NAT box, and the NAT box looks at its records to see which outgoing packet an incoming packet is in reply to, to decide which internal address the packet should be forwarded to. If the packet is not in reply to an outgoing packet, there’s no matching record, and the NAT box discards the packet.
It’s a confused topic because for a lot of people, nat does essentially everything they want. As soon as you get into more complex networking where a routing table needs to be updated, or bidirectional fw rules, it becomes apparent why routing + fw + nat is the most common combo.
Yes, Lxc, docker, whatever cgroup2 isolation environment, but not VMS, true.
Vms can achieve the same thing through shares
Assuming it’s not a 1-1 NAT it does make for a functional unidirectional firewall.
That’s like saying a router and firewall are the same thing. NAT appears to be a “firewall” because it’s usually deployed with one. NAT itself has no filtering functions the way you’re describing.
Now, a pure router in the sense of simply offering a gateway to another subnet
A “pure” router, as you put it, understands upstream subnets and routing tables. NAT does not, and is usually overlayed on top of an existing routing function.
You can set up NAT between two subnets as an experiment with no iptables and it will do its job.
NAT simply maps IPS across subnet boundaries in such a way that upstream routing tables don’t need updating.
If you use destination NAT forward rules to facilitate specific destination port access, you are using a firewall.
Each cgroup container mounts a host path. That’s it.
Op means, as they said, a firewall on the server itself.
NAT is, effectively, a firewall.
No it isn’t. Stop giving advice on edge security.
Zfs (and most modern filesystems) are fine with concurrency.
I mount the same data store into several instances, it works well. Just needs some planning for permissions.
Why bother with truenas? Just put the media in a zfs pool and mount it directly into jellyfin.
Oh yeah, sorry. There is some vendor lock-in with all bookstores, but kobo looks the other way.
I have calibre-web setup with kobo sync, so calibre-web pretends to be part of the kobo store to my reader and I’m able to add non-drm books to my reader while still using the kobo store if I like.
Kobo does not block non-drm. Calibre is used as a server all the time, see calibre-web.
Your view unfortunately doesn’t show you how shitty the unpaid experience has become. XBMC used to be a good product. Since becoming Plex, now we have:
If this were clear from the outset , no one would be upset. But pulling back features Plex at one time promised “forever” (remote streaming), is complete rug-pull bullshit.
You can enjoy that warm and fuzzy reverse-fomo feeling now, but you should know that they’ll start limiting your paid experience eventually.
Side question, but where are you hearing this about incus?
I’m wrapping up 9 years of using proxmox and I have very specific reasons for switching to incus, but I this is the third time I’m fielding questions in the last month about incus.