4 ms·

I don't know, I find "Linux Containers" to be sufficiently generic as Linux has native support for them. LXD/LXC, Docker, etc, are simply tools built upon that.

• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• sp332 6y ago
  I agree. Most people who read "Linux Containers" are going to think of Docker, not LXD.
  • cyphar 6y ago
    Which is ironic given that LXC long predates Docker (having been involved in the original discussions of the kernel APIs being used by containers today), and Docker used LXC for a long portion of its history.
  • josteink 6y ago
    People are different. When I think about containers, I think about isolated system images, lightweight VMs, which I can use and adapt to solve a problem at hand. When I hear Docker, I think about static, locked-down application-images made by others, to deploy in the cloud, which I'm not given to adapt to my needs, and I also think about things which is not natively integrated into my Linux-distro and for which I will have to provide glue manually. I also think about a startling amount of complexity in a new stack which I would have to learn, just to manage what is actually really just basic Linux-systems. While all that may or may not be true, that's what I think about when I hear "Docker". Hearing "containers" on the other hand, makes me happy. And yeah, I'll got with LXC/LXD any day.