In case you didn’t hear TrueNAS is going partially closed source. However, there seems to be a lack of alternatives.
Any ideas on what to move to?
You must log in or # to comment.
Plain, good old Debian. It’s not that big of a deal to do all the config in console via SSH. You do it once and you’re done, so is the web interface that important?
I said this to someone once and they accused me of being “elitist”. The simple fact is when I learned how to do this stuff, there was no such thing as a GUI for any of it. You did it on the CLI, or not at all.
(Almost the exact same experience with git, funnily enough)
I 100% agree though; the bones of the setup of my NAS (admittedly mine is Ubuntu, just because everything else I run is too) was done once 18 months ago, and most has never been touched again. Just software updates every now and then and ignore it the rest of the time.
I don’t feel like I’ve lost any functionality doing things this way, either. I discovered when a disk died that it even uses SES to light the error LED and turn on the annoying beeping noise on the JBOD, and I didn’t have to do anything to set that up. I call that a win.
Nothing wrong with wanting a web interface, but for an experienced Linux user, there is no issue going without one.
I’m not exactly an expert, but I’m comfortable enough that I can figure out most things.
I still prefer a GUI option for a lot of things.
Make sure your data pool is well laid out zfs though.
Personally, I use BTRFS in RAID10 config. I don’t need crazy performance and my NAS is pretty low power with only 8GB of RAM (use to be 4GB on my previous setup).
zfs is about data integrity rather than performance.
BTRFS has plenty of features for data integrity, auto-correction, scrubbing, snapshots. I haven’t studied in details the differences with ZFS, I just went with BTRFS because the setup is fairly simple, it’s flexible and it does what I need.
I seem to recall reading that, but I think you have the wrong impression. I’m pretty sure it’s just there build system. They have always had two (one private for the paid stuff), and now they are just building everything “in private” not removing any source.
There are many projects that do not have open build systems, and I can understand them eanting to cut costs and simplify infrastructure.
e.g. just because redhat has a private build system and tries to restrict access to their binaries, that does not make them closed-source.
Open Media Vault with OMV Extras
I have it on Proxmox. Works like a charm
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 NAS Network-Attached Storage NFS Network File System, a Unix-based file-sharing protocol known for performance and efficiency RAID Redundant Array of Independent Disks for mass storage SSH Secure Shell for remote terminal access ZFS Solaris/Linux filesystem focusing on data integrity
[Thread #200 for this comm, first seen 29th Mar 2026, 23:30] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
I’m running XigmaNAS
I setup a standard Arch install, added BTRFS, NFS, SMB, restic (for offsite backups), etc and haven’t looked back.
I installed Cockpit thinking we’d need a GUI, but syncthing just works to mirror our laptops & phones with the NAS, and with multiple versions (by syncthing) I’m happy so far
The only thing that I had issues with was Immich and (major) postgresql updates, but that’s stablising now. And, TBH, the worst thing was just having to scrap the DB and just let it rebuild it (for a few days…)
I went with BTRFS because I can “see” it with standard linux tools like gparted, clonezilla, etc. So I can backup and modify the NAS OS itself, not just my data.
Apart from updates, I haven’t touched it for years.
Currently running proxmox and using cockpit to present smb, which is all that I was doing with TrueNAS. Gotta set up a few pieces manually but not really a hassle.
Does cockpit have proper UI for ZFS and NFS? That’s the only reasons I’m using TrueNAS currently and I’m a bit annoyed with it generally.
Proxmox has a UI for ZFS. But you don’t really need it, ZFS is kind of set and forget and setting it up is quite easy via CLI.
I know and I’m considering it, I’m already running Proxmox anyways. The connection between zfs, permissions and NFS is what I like in TrueNAS.
Not for zfs. I mount zfs on proxmox. Why I don’t just run samba on proxmox, I’m not sure. There is some fuckery with permissions to make it work in a container and permissions are unnecessary for my use case.
But you don’t really need a ui for zfs. I ran it for 10 years on TrueNAS and only used it for initial setup.
I know and I’m considering it, I’m already running Proxmox anyways. The connection between zfs, permissions and NFS is what I like in TrueNAS.
deleted by creator
I can’t see why somebody objecting to TrueNAS flirting with closed source would want to switch to a fully proprietary system like Unraid.
Great. Replace partial closed source with closed source.
Task failed successfully
I mean, I use it myself but I also get why it’s not really mentioned here, being partially closed-source as well and subscription-based on top of that.
