[22:05] <murmel> arraybolt3: btw do you know if the free pro subs also have access to universe stuff?
[22:06] <arraybolt3> murmel: The free Ubuntu Pro subscriptions do come with access to the ESM Apps (universe maintenance), yes.
[22:07] <murmel> ahh interesting. trying to use server only with main restricted, as I wasn't sure about universe
[22:07] <murmel> but quite a lot of stuff is in universe :S
[22:07] <arraybolt3> murmel: Pretty sure you have to enable esm-apps specifically for it to work.
[22:07]  * arraybolt3 finds the post
[22:07] <arraybolt3> https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-pro-beta-tutorial/31018
[22:08] <arraybolt3> sudo pro enable esm-apps --beta    (I don't know if it's still in beta or not though)
[22:08] <murmel> what I do find quite odd, that no container software is in main
[22:08] <murmel> at least ubuntu.com/pro says it's still beta
[22:11] <murmel> arraybolt3: but thanks for the link. for some reason I always forget to look in the forums.
[22:14] <murmel> arraybolt3: any specific reason why the hate for half foss projects (and you using code anyway)
[22:15] <arraybolt3> I guess because the idea of "The product is FOSS, but it costs money, and if you want it to not cost money you have to put in this massive amount of maintenance work yourself" feels like it's kind of hijacked the purpose of FOSS.
[22:15] <murmel> I mean the second part sounds to me like "real" foss mentality ;)
[22:16] <arraybolt3> The point of stuff like the GPL was to make it so that software could be freely shared and developed by anyone, and using paywalls and effort requirements to limit that just defeats the purpose.
[22:16] <murmel> as in learn for yourself, put in the hours
[22:16] <arraybolt3> VSCode is still free for personal and commercial use, so while it is proprietary if you use the official build, at least it's still free, and if you want to freely share and develop it, VSCodium is there.
[22:16] <arraybolt3> Also locking some of the features behind a non-FOSS wall annoys me when there's a paywall involved.
[22:17] <arraybolt3> Thus why I can cope with using Google Chrome, but don't like the idea of using Red Hat stuff so much.
[22:17] <murmel> i mean reading about AAP, sounds to me like ready available playbooks :S. so I really wonder how many companies use that
[22:17] <arraybolt3> Well Red Hat seems to be surviving financially so obviously people use their stuff. I guess they might be getting all of their profit just from RHEL, but I don't know.
[22:18] <murmel> they earn the most from subs, but not sure how that would split up in rhel and rest. but I assume most of the profits/revenue is from rhel
[22:18] <arraybolt3> For me, Ubuntu seems to have hit the sweet spot - the FOSS stuff is *all* FOSS, payment is only needed when you're having to deal with things that require immense loads more work, and the proprietary stuff (Anbox Cloud, Landscape, etc.) is purely proprietary and not a halfway-FOSS offering.
[22:19] <arraybolt3> s/Ubuntu/Canonical/
[22:20] <murmel> interesting. for me it's rather the other way around, afaik rh open ups almost everything with a few exceptions
[22:20] <arraybolt3> And while I may not agree with all of their design decisions, they seem to learn what people really want and need and adjust to compensate (i.e., the recent adding of "hold Snaps forever" functionality to the Snap system).
[22:20] <murmel> while canonical has some stuff behind prop license
[22:21] <arraybolt3> murmel: I think that they limit the functionality of things like QEMU, and if you want the full functionality you have to pay for RHEV, no?
[22:21] <murmel> what do you mean by limit? 
[22:21] <arraybolt3> Like limits on the number of CPU cores that can be used or something.
[22:21] <murmel> yes they don't support every feature, but I would say that's also true with ubuntu
[22:21] <murmel> arraybolt3: no
[22:21] <murmel> just what features are supported, but thats why you have a sig
[22:22] <arraybolt3> They won't even tell you the difference between QEMU and RHEV without a subscription :-/
[22:22] <JanC> I'm sure Red Hat make a lot of money from support contracts on other stuff than their linux distro also
[22:22] <murmel> im not 100% sure, but sure that canonical doesn't support btrfs-on-root, same goes with some edge things with qemu and rh
[22:22] <murmel> JanC: they do, but most of their profits are still from subs
[22:22] <arraybolt3> murmel: BTRFS-on-root is fully supported, I believe.
[22:22] <arraybolt3> You just have to do manual partitioning.
[22:23] <murmel> arraybolt3: and how would that work, as a full good usable btrfs-on-root would mean you need to debootstrap a system
[22:23] <arraybolt3> murmel: Nope. Just select "Something else" at install time, make an EFI partition, a BTRFS root partition, and install.
[22:23] <arraybolt3> This worked last time I tried.
[22:23] <murmel> yeah but then you have a single partition, where root is not on a subvolume afaik
[22:24] <arraybolt3> Well you said BTRFS-on-root, not BTRFS+tons_of_crazy_functionality_out_of_the_box on root. More complicated things require more complicated tools.
[22:25] <murmel> no I would definitely say that without the whole subvolume shenanigans, why bother with btrfs, so don't go half way imo
[22:25] <arraybolt3> I seriously doubt you'd get rejected by support if you came on with an Ubuntu installation that was installed via debootstrap on a fancy BTRFS setup though. I mean one time people in #ubuntu walked someone through how to do a debootstrap installation to get Ubuntu to install on a system with Intel RST still enabled.
[22:25] <murmel> yeah but that's #ubuntu not canonical
[22:26] <arraybolt3> /shrug AFAICT, the policy is "If it uses Ubuntu's repos, comes from an official Ubuntu installation media, and has the ubuntu-minimal package fully installed, it's Ubuntu."
[22:26] <arraybolt3> Using debootstrap from official Ubuntu installation media would count, I believe.
[22:26] <murmel> huh, I really wonder :S
[22:27] <arraybolt3> We don't really care how you got things to work so long as they're using the official software in ways it was meant to be used.
[22:27] <arraybolt3> s/they're/you're/
[22:28] <arraybolt3> (Again, this is from a volunteer standpoint, it's entirely possible that Canonical's paid support might feel differently, but I highly doubt that, especially since us developers have a tendency to use crazy setups.)
[22:28] <murmel> that is definitely something I have to look into in the future
[22:28] <murmel> maybe I can go back to my *awesome* setup ;) snapshotting every 5-10 mins *cough*
[22:29] <arraybolt3> (You should see my desktop setup - /boot on a flash drive, / on an NVMe SSD that the BIOS can't boot from, then a couple of ZFS volumes, one mirrored accross two 6TB disks, one standalone on a 12TB disk. All with official software used in its intended fashion. Works like a charm.)
[22:30] <arraybolt3> I even use symlinks so that VMs are stored on the ZFS mirror.
[22:30] <murmel> sure, but the big question is, do you get paid support for that ;). I assume with your setup, yes
[22:30] <murmel> yeah I clone a lot of vms, and that's why I would like to use btrfs, because of --reflink :/
[22:31] <arraybolt3> Keep in mind that there are many many crazily complicated server setups out there.
[22:32] <arraybolt3> Supporting only "standard setups" would be quite bad for Ubuntu IMO, as it's the people with the crazy setups that are also the people who you'd want to support the most.
[22:32] <murmel> hm, I guess it depends on what you define as crazy. at least from what I have seen in the server space, most installs are super boring
[22:33]  * arraybolt3 stares at RAID and dedicated boot SSDs and wonders how that qualifies as boring
[22:33] <murmel> idk, to me that's super boring
[22:33] <murmel> :P
[22:33] <arraybolt3> And BTRFS is used heavily in the enterprise world (look at Facebook).
[22:34]  * arraybolt3 has to go afk, but this has been fun, see you later!
[22:34] <murmel> imo, meta uses btrfs in a way which doesn't really proof anything
[22:34] <murmel> arraybolt3: bye :)!