> And does it make sense to talk about "containers" when it's such a vague concept. Well at some point we have to be able to talk about the widely-used and glu

> And does it make sense to talk about "containers" when it's such a vague concept. Well at some point we have to be able to talk about the widely-used and glued-together namespaces+cgroups+... concept. "Containers" is a perfectly fine thing to discuss (especially since the history of namespaces was definitely based in more "fully fledged" container technologies like Xen). > Also, there are now "VM containers" such as Kata. ... which are just VMs that can interact with container tools. I'm pretty sure that most people would not call these "containers" from an OS point of view because they do not share any of the primary properties that containers (or Jails/Zones) have -- the host kernel actually knows what the container processes are doing.