A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (donβt cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
Resources:
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
This issue is already quite widely publicized and quite frankly "we're handling it and removing this" is a much more harmful response than I would hope to see. Especially as the admins of that instance have not yet upgraded the frontend version to apply the urgent fix.
It's not like this was a confidential bug fix, this is a zero day being actively exploited. Please be more cooperative and open regarding these issues in your own administration if you're hosting an instance. π
I disagree.
IMO, we should be using Nix and OCI.
When someone says docker in the context of images today, they're already talking about the OCI format.
OCI uses Dockerfiles and runs Docker images as docker images are just KVM image, which is what OCI runs. Nix is absolute overkill for the orchestration of a web server workload and would be better for managing the container host (whatever you're running kubernetes or docker swarm on).
I don't really know how to put this, but nearly every single web service you encounter and interact with is built using a dockerfile just like how Lemmy is doing. If you're going to disqualify Lemmy as a viable platform based on it having a dockerfile, I got bad news
I thought KVM was virtualisation, as in separate kernels.
And I thought containers shared the hosts kernel. Essentially an "overlay os".
So, a KVM could virtualise different hardware and CPU architectures.
Whereas a container can only use what the host has
Lmao