I really like the general direction of Froxlor - it seems to mostly stay away from touching the underlying OS and whatever package manager your OS is using and just concentrates on being a config generator for the services that are running. This actually seems to make it pretty OS-agnostic.
I installed the version from FreeBSD ports (0.9.38.7) and they (port maintainers) didn't really modify it - they just use the port to pull in postfix, apache/nginx, mysql, BIND, etc. and then leave you with a message that you should carefully review all the file paths. So far, the biggest bit of work I did was just relentlessly go through settings and change "/etc/XYZ" to "/usr/local/etc/XYX" and "/etc/init.d/XYZ" to "/usr/local/etc/rc.d/XYZ" or "/etc/rc.d/XYZ". And I have a working system. I also grabbed the Gentoo xml file and did a similar search/replace and that gets me like 80% of the way there - I have cut and pasteable configs with correct paths. I imagine I could also substitute out various apt-get commands with "pkg add".
I know the developers aren't interested in officially supporting FreeBSD, but I'm going to update this version of Froxlor to the newest - I reviewed commits between 0.9.38.7 (what I have installed) and the latest and the only system/OS level thing I see of note there is adding "libnss-extrausers" which is a linux-only thing, but seems not to be required. Assuming the upgrade goes well, I'm probably going to go ahead with Froxlor on some FreeBSD VPS instances regardless.
Questions:
Are there any non-obvious OS-level compatibility issues I'm not seeing in my quick review of the code and the changes?
What tools, if any are used to enable/disable apache modules and similar that are actually from the OS (things similar to "a2enmod")?
Outside of the OS XML files, I think I only saw some paths being set in the .sql file that populates the db on install, not sure I care about that as that's easily changed in the web UI after install
Are there any plans currently to move Froxlor in a direction that does make it start to take control of the OS itself (firewall rules, managing packages, etc.)?
Question
sporkman
Hi all,
I really like the general direction of Froxlor - it seems to mostly stay away from touching the underlying OS and whatever package manager your OS is using and just concentrates on being a config generator for the services that are running. This actually seems to make it pretty OS-agnostic.
I installed the version from FreeBSD ports (0.9.38.7) and they (port maintainers) didn't really modify it - they just use the port to pull in postfix, apache/nginx, mysql, BIND, etc. and then leave you with a message that you should carefully review all the file paths. So far, the biggest bit of work I did was just relentlessly go through settings and change "/etc/XYZ" to "/usr/local/etc/XYX" and "/etc/init.d/XYZ" to "/usr/local/etc/rc.d/XYZ" or "/etc/rc.d/XYZ". And I have a working system. I also grabbed the Gentoo xml file and did a similar search/replace and that gets me like 80% of the way there - I have cut and pasteable configs with correct paths. I imagine I could also substitute out various apt-get commands with "pkg add".
I know the developers aren't interested in officially supporting FreeBSD, but I'm going to update this version of Froxlor to the newest - I reviewed commits between 0.9.38.7 (what I have installed) and the latest and the only system/OS level thing I see of note there is adding "libnss-extrausers" which is a linux-only thing, but seems not to be required. Assuming the upgrade goes well, I'm probably going to go ahead with Froxlor on some FreeBSD VPS instances regardless.
Questions:
Any other background I should know of?
Thanks!
5 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now