Readme updated today:
This repository is no longer actively maintained.
The TrueNAS build system previously hosted here has been moved to an internal infrastructure. This transition was necessary to meet new security requirements, including support for Secure Boot and related platform integrity features that require tighter control over the build and signing pipeline.
No further updates, pull requests, or issues will be accepted. Existing content is preserved here for historical reference only.
https://github.com/truenas/scale-build
Wondering if this is just the first step towards doing a minio in the future.
You must log in or # to comment.
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]
Always blaming security bullshit. I anxiously await a community fork.
Next step is requiring a subscription.
Why are they always coming up with some kind of bullshit excuse? :D
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.
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?
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.
Link to article?
There’s a link to the github page that has the depreciation notice right there…?
Truenas went to shit when they killed BSD support, the OS it was founded on
I ordered a TrueNAS system from iXsystems a few years ago, and the reasoning they gave me is that Linux has better driver support, especially for home users.
Whether that was actually the reason, I have no clue. But that’s what they said.
The reason they gave me is people can run apps with docker on Linux, and docker isn’t compatible with FreeBSD jails…
And yet they went with K3s at first, a crappy implementation at that, and refused to even consider adding Docker for like a year, then suddenly it became super important to replace their k3s stack with docker in the next release, barely giving people 2-3 months to get all their apps updated.
