Always blaming security bullshit. I anxiously await a community fork.
Next step is requiring a subscription.
Volker Theile (lead dev of FreeNAS 2006-2009) maintaines OpenMediaVault, based on debian, version 8 was released recently. Not a drop in replacement, and it has its own quirks, but no evil company in the background
I love it so much that I donaged twice to the project. There are also some easter-eggs hidden in the software, like quotes from Dune.
Looks like no zfs support?
It's not in there by default, you have to install the omv extras plugin, from there you can install zfs: https://wiki.omv-extras.org/doku.php?id=omv8%3Aomv8_plugins%3Azfs
I question why this gets recommended so much when we discuss truenas.
Without a doubt zfs is one of if not THE reason to go truenas. It does so much more for you than other filesystems.
I guess OMV at least has btrfs but not the same thing.
ZFS is in the omv extras repo: https://wiki.omv-extras.org/doku.php?id=omv8%3Aomv8_plugins%3Azfs
As it's just plain debian under the hood you can use any basic debian stuff, e.g. I use zfs-auto-snapshot from apt, and the zfs plugin can list and manage the snapshots perfectly.
Ahhh that is good to know. Thank you.
I have it on my installation, you've got to replace the kernel with the proxmox one, it's fairly easily done by installing a plugin
Since omv 7 it works with the default kernel, you can install the proxmox one though if you want that.
Weird, some time ago it booted with the default kernel by mistake and it couldn't see my zfs pool
From the docs:
The Standard Debian Kernel (selectable) can be used for ZFS. However, since ZFS kernel modules are not installed in the Debian kernel by default, they must be built by the ZFS plugin when it is installed. While this process works, building the modules is a long process that requires continuous access to online repos. Accordingly, the potential for a build error exists. For this reason, while the Standard Kernel is very usable for ZFS, it is not ideal.
I found a post on the forum:
https://forums.truenas.com/t/scale-build-git-repo-going-closed-source/64313
This is only their old build system which they weren't using themselves, the rest of the OS will remain open source. However they also said some worrying stuff about including "proprietary pieces of the OS".
According to their own documentation: https://github.com/truenas/scale-build
The TrueNAS build system previously hosted here has been moved to an internal infrastructure.
This doesn't sound like they are no longer using the build tool, they are simply not open-sourcing it anymore.
In a years time will the public be able to build trueNAS for themselves without developing their own build tools?
If not then the TrueNAS is no longer Open Source as people can't practically build it for themselves
(or verify that during the build some code wasn't injected)
XigmaNAS is still being developed and is a fork of the original FreeNAS code before iX acquired the name.
There are alternatives
Security through obscurity isn't security.
There goes my excuse for not giving up and just paying for Unraid.
Unraid pay system switch made me never want to use them
you can always just bypass their security.
Huh
Unraid uses a pretty whacky "license" checking system. There's cracks for it out there that hook into the core license system and use it to generate a valid one for the current version.
One key note is that you HAVE to update the crack before updating Unraid itself.
ive cracked it before but was unsure if i trusted it or not
well the crack is only supposed to affect the license checking.
but if you want an alternative, MOS is shaping up pretty well.
And Unraid is OSS?
So my option are (potentially both) closed source storage software bjt one needs to be paid?
Well...I know what I'll not choose.
Odd choice of timing… I wonder if they are sitting on a cache of hard drives.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| Git | Popular version control system, primarily for code |
| LTT | Linus Tech Tips YouTube channel |
| NAS | Network-Attached Storage |
| PIA | Private Internet Access brand of VPN |
| VPN | Virtual Private Network |
| ZFS | Solaris/Linux filesystem focusing on data integrity |
[Thread #153 for this comm, first seen 10th Mar 2026, 00:40] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
Good bot
Are they lying about secure boot being a reason or can I go back to thinking SB is part of Microsoft's EEE attack on software freedom?
@tabular @Ek-Hou-Van-Braai They are lying. Debian supports Secure Boot and remains open.
Although "related platform integrity" stuff might be something they're being forced to include by a government agency or paid to include by another company.
It can be a bit of both.
I don't think secureboot is an attack on freedom exactly (and it's certainly not an instance of EEE), but I definitely think it shouldn't be Microsoft holding the keys.
Literally today Chris Titus released a video where he emphasized that no one should be using secure boot because the default backend is Microsoft and no one changes their secure boot config.
If that's true there's an argument that the name "secure boot" is hardly detachable from the defaults and thus that name is kid of burnt and shouldn't be recommended out of an abundance of caution for new users.
Do you know the name of this video? I keep trying to search for a secure boot video by Chris Titus released today/yesterday but I'm not finding anything.
It was in his reaction video to LTT trying it Linux again
yeah that's the one
So... nobody changes the default settings, therefore everyone should change the default settings... to the wrong option?
edit: Why is it that homo sapiens is always willing to go an extra mile just to hurt itself?
Oh so they are going to use the Puppet excuse to move away from open source?
we must move to have our code internal only for now. Totally just for security reasons nothing to do with us also changing licensing to make it harder for those building things for us
no don't bring up the security incident we're referring to that shows us as the issue not having code visible! (ie they cheaped out on people/set up and vendor had keys visible)
So glad I went with OpenMediaVault so many years ago
Why are they always coming up with some kind of bullshit excuse? :D
Damn man. Technology kinda fucking sucks now. Everything I use is imploding in on itself. Yay!
Not Proxmox! Use it for free at home, but buy it for your business if you can! (But they never force you to)
/hoping it doesn’t bite the dust too
Been running my own storage boxes off of rocky w/ zfs, samba and nfs for years simply for the ease of integration of samba + freeipa.
Especially being able to use ipasam.so to allow password authentication for shares on machines that aren't easy/reasonable to use kerberos keytabs from (think android clients, and off domain boxes)
Plus last time I tried truenas you couldn't use a keyfile to encrypt drives unless it was stored on the root dataset which for some reason couldn't be encrypted. Meaning each array had to have its own password instead.
I won't lie I had to write several wiki articles to document this lol.
Uggh, I just got to the point where I'm as familiar with TrueNAS as my old Synology, but I want to move towards more freedom. TrueNAS beats Synology, but where is this going?
Link to article?
There's a link to the github page that has the depreciation notice right there..?
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.
No spam.
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
Submission headline should match the article title.
No trolling.
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.
Resources:
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!