News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by gorgoiler on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @10:25PM (#34719379)
Daemonless operation sounds very compelling. It is often slow or complicated to deploy a docker installation just to be able to run a container when all I really want is a process. Conceptually (and I really mean conceptually, not technically) I don’t need a Python daemon to run a Python tool so why do I need a Docker daemon to run a containerized Python tool?

LXC did this nicely, imho, by storing the state and configuration of each container as files in a directory. It doesn’t seem like LXC/LXD has really taken off (see also: bzr) — bad luck Canonical, but thank you for trying.

Relating to both LXC vs Docker, and Docker vs Podman: oftentimes, the presence of competition is what drives the winner to victory. It might seem like wasted effort to have two competing solutions for a while but the final outcome of a winner that’s better than it would have been is of benefit to everyone. If I had a dollar for every project I started at work just to stone-soup one of my peers into action I would have more than… $20? $50?

Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by ungamedplayer on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @10:41PM (#34719487)
I know the interpretation 'stone soup' you use, however there are other parts of the world that know it in a different story, i'll tell it here.

When the english first attempted to colonize australia to Australia, an englishman noticed a native 'bush turkey' was not regularly eaten by the local native aboriginals. The englishman had tried to cook and eat them, but it ended up anything but tastey.

He asked one of the tribal elders the secret to eating them, the elder responded.

"You put a stone into the pot, you bring it to boil When its boiling you throw in the plucked bush turkey, you eat it when the stone is soft."

The lesson I take from this is "sometimes things are just going to be bad, you just gotta accept that and move on".

Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by SOLAR_FIELDS on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @11:21PM (#34719711)
I’m not sure I understand your anecdote. I had actually never heard of “stone soup” by grandparent but I found it in Wikipedia as this story: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Soup

My interpretation of grandparent as applied onto that story was that some of their colleagues had some local solutions that were part of the puzzle and OP purposefully created some ancillary solution (the “stone soup”) to get them to contribute to the bigger picture. But perhaps I’m seeing this entirely wrong?

Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by curryberto on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @11:52PM (#34719905)
The stone will never become soft in the soup - the bird will never be ready to eat.
Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by gorgoiler on Thursday February 09, 2023 @12:14AM (#34720041)
You got it, and thanks for replying! I added a ps to my original comment, to elaborate.
Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by mekster on Thursday February 09, 2023 @12:26AM (#34720110)
> It doesn’t seem like LXC/LXD has really taken off

Maybe for you but LXC is very useful for deploying development environment isolated for each developers. systemd-nspawn is quite simple but LXC provides tooling that makes operations easier.

Docker and LXD serve different purposes. Docker is meant for an app to be run isolated but LXD can run a whole OS.

Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by pkulak on Thursday February 09, 2023 @02:02AM (#34720619)
I actually run all my Docker containers in an LXC container.
Re:Podman vs. Docker: Comparing the two containerization tools by rhatdan on Sunday February 12, 2023 @06:55AM (#34762166)
Podman can actually quite easily run host environments in containers with systemd running as PID1, giving you very similar features as LXC.

Checkout `podman run --rootfs`