Top
Best
New

Posted by chalmovsky 7 hours ago

WTF Ubuntu?(chalmovsky.com)
1111 points | 534 commentspage 4
HarHarVeryFunny 6 hours ago|
This is a valid concern.

AI is now capable of, and being applied to, find so many bugs recently that infrastructure providers need to up their game and respond quickly.

Hopefully this is a passing phase as bugs are quickly patched, and we'll get past it without too many incidents.

thatonehack 5 hours ago||
I’ve always hated Ubuntu. I simply don’t understand the pitch as to why someone would use Ubuntu over just good ol fashion Debian. Better yet: FreeBSD.
jjcm 2 hours ago||
A hot take - agents with root access dynamically updating your system have crossed over the threshold of being more secure than not using them.

I still haven't done this for my servers with SOC2 compliance (for obvious reasons), but I've moved over my personal project servers to this pattern. They all run ubuntu and this CVE was fixed within 1hr of my agent seeing chatter on twitter about it.

Still in the testing phase of this pattern, but while I initially thought it'd be a terrible idea[1], I'm coming around to it more and more with the amount of major CVEs hitting.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50221604

neuropacabra 6 hours ago||
What would you recommend to use on servers? Would you host you apps off Arch? Or better to take Fedora or similar? I am genuinely interested in answers not distrowars
freedomben 6 hours ago||
After painful Ubuntu upgrades in the past, I moved to Alma Linux and have been very happy. It takes a small adjustment to dnf instead of apt, but realistically I was over that hump in 30 to 60 minutes and this was before AI. With AI to translate and test install scripts and the like, it might be a 5 minute task depending on how much automation you already have in place. Though even an entirely un-automated setup that is just a README.md, claude wrote me an Alma Linux version of a very ubuntu specific project that gave instructions for Alma instead of Ubuntu, and it worked almost perfectly first time and AI was able to (with prompting) see the issue and quickly found a workaround. We're a small org, but at some point when we hit scale and have compliance requirements, a migration to RHEL is also largely trivial if/when the time comes.
sersi 6 hours ago|||
Good question... I run ubuntu on servers because the LTS has clear 5 years of security fix.

I use arch linux for my NAS because it's fun and I don't care if it occasionally goes down but I wouldn't use it for production (on my NAS it's mostly stable but has gone down a few times)

So what's next? Centos is a rolling upgrade, nixos?

rochacon 6 hours ago|||
As always, it depends on how and what you're managing on it.

VPS/VM? Debian is a great choice. Use it as base and run your software via systemd+podman if you want the most up to date stuff, Debian tends do lag a bit. It is very low maintenance.

Bare metal? Fedora Atomic is awesome. It does require an update every other week since it keeps packages closer to upstreams, but this is where the immutable base shines, any issue is an easy reboot to revert. Also systemd+podman for your own software.

I wouldn't recommend Arch on servers.

Edit: clarified Fedora immutable spins are called Fedora Atomic.

dullcrisp 4 hours ago|||
I like Alpine but I’m not a serious person.
LastTrain 6 hours ago|||
Debian stable of course.
wltr 4 hours ago||
I use Arch for servers too, for almost a decade, and to my memory only once I had an issue. That was booting off an encrypted RAID and some change which needed some investigation and then reconfiguring. I am planning to run them servers on Arch for as long as I can. It’s a bliss to never upgrade my system (only update it).
miladyincontrol 1 hour ago||
Similar. While theres something to be said about declarative and immutable distros, if you're not going that route a minimally opinionated distro works a treat for server workloads.

And besides, just about every workload you can containerize should be containerized. Ideally though many with more isolation than what plain old runc provides.

runjake 6 hours ago||
I have the same general feelings, but then I recall my years as an OSS developer and being abused by people who contributed absolutely nothing to my projects. Not money, not code, not documentation, not even grammar corrections. I'm sure anyone who's been involved with reasonably popular OSS can relate.

I am not contributing to Ubuntu in any way, and that puts it into perspective.

(I still directly contribute to OSS and release OSS projects, but absolutely refuse to engage with the least bit of hostility. Any of that is an insta-block.)

Edit: Whoah the downvotes and comments. I'm not saying that Ubuntu is doing well here. I'm trying to point out that a a vast percentage of the complainers are not paying customers, and maybe if they did pay, Ubuntu would have more incentive and resources to work more quickly.

yjftsjthsd-h 6 hours ago||
People are paying money for Ubuntu, though. I suppose if only the free versions were unpatched we could consider the ethics and merits of who is allowed to complain about what, but when the paying customers are also being left out in the cold I don't think your argument has much merit.
runjake 5 hours ago||
Sure, and those people have a right to complain.

But, imagine if the complaint vs paid ratio were more equal.

Right now, the ratio is massively skewed towards complainers vs paid. (>99.9% I'd guess)

pezgordo 5 hours ago||
I guess yes on internet, enterprise customers just call their account managers rather than write a blog.
basilikum 6 hours ago||
Ubuntu is a for profit product by a commercial company, Canonical.
runjake 5 hours ago||
Most of it's user base are non-paying "free tier" customers.
sufficientsoup 5 hours ago|||
Their product is their product. It's not as if they should deprive their paying customers of a fix to spite the non-paying.
basilikum 4 hours ago|||
How is that relevant?
hedora 2 hours ago||
We were using ZFS in prod a few years ago, and there was a one-line patch to fix data loss issues.

It took Ubuntu something like 6 months to “backport” it. I’m not at all surprised they are taking forever to patch a severity 11 wormable exploit.

Mildly disappointed, but not surprised. Anyway, the ZFS thing (and, before that, widespread systemd-related breakage of an old LTS) are why I don’t trust them in prod anymore.

arjie 7 hours ago||
It is strange, agreed. I just manually mitigated it using Claude and also blocked ipoptions at the router and in every node iptables.
euph0ria 4 hours ago||
I migrated all servers off Ubuntu as well due to this and slow PHP patching as well. Now running a mix of AWS Linux 2023 and Debian.
512bitCrypto 7 hours ago|
Should we also talk about the snaps when trying to install package in Docker image (such as chromium-browser)?
newsoftheday 6 hours ago|
I keep Snap disabled on my systems:

cat /etc/apt/preferences.d/nosnap.pref

Package: snapd Pin: release a=* Pin-Priority: -10

More comments...