5 ms·

I have absolutely no hope for docker support on OSX, let alone iPadOS

danieldk 6y ago
I am hoping that WSL/WSL2 makes Windows so attractive for developers, that Apple feels the pressure to either implement Linux syscall emulation or very lightweight VMs like WSL2. (I know that macOS has Hypervisor.framework)
- harpratap 6y ago
  I don't think it's economically feasible for them to do so. Microsoft invested in WSL because they are trying to lure developers into Azure's cloud ecosystem and Docker + Kubernetes is a big part of it. Apple has no incentive to do, Macbook sales hardly matter to them as evident from their behaviour.
lukevp 6y ago
I'm confused about this - I don't use OSX for anything other than Logic, but there's a Docker desktop app for OSX [0] so I assumed it could run docker containers? Is that not true? [0]: https://hub.docker.com/editions/community/docker-ce-desktop-mac https://hub.docker.com/editions/community/docker-ce-desktop-...
- zerkten 6y ago
  I think the poster may mean performance, or other aspects are problematic. You can definitely use the Docker desktop app for macOS to run docker containers.
- harpratap 6y ago
  It's running inside a Linux Virtual Machine, so the performance is piss poor. My i7 Macbook pro runs hot 24*7 because of such high usage.
jagged-chisel 6y ago
Docker works great on macOS. It builds images, runs containers, and you don't even need the Official Desktop App - brew install docker.
- harpratap 6y ago
  It's not a real container, it's a Linux virtual machine.
  - garethrowlands 6y ago
    It's a Linux virtual machine running real containers though.
    - harpratap 6y ago
      So? That's not real support. This is akin to saying MS Office is supported on Linux because you can run it inside a VM.
  - adolfojp 6y ago
    I don't see an alternative though. If your deployment target is Linux and your development machine is not then you need a Linux VM of some sort to host your Linux containers. How would you implement "real" containers without a VM in that scenario.
    - harpratap 6y ago
      Support cgroups and namespaces in your kernel and let CRI-O do the rest?
      - adolfojp 6y ago
        I'm a bit out of my element so I apologize if I'm missing something. Microsoft implemented cgroups and namespace analogues in Windows Server 2016 to allow it to run "real" Docker containers without the need for virtual machines. The limitation is that the real Windows containers can only run Windows based applications because the underlying architecture is still Windows. Something similar would happen with macOS. The underlying architecture of macOS would remain macOS regardless of whether it could run real containers or not.

I am hoping that WSL/WSL2 makes Windows so attractive for developers, that Apple feels the pressure to either implement Linux syscall emulation or very lightweight VMs like WSL2. (I know that macOS has Hypervisor.framework)

harpratap 6y ago
I don't think it's economically feasible for them to do so. Microsoft invested in WSL because they are trying to lure developers into Azure's cloud ecosystem and Docker + Kubernetes is a big part of it. Apple has no incentive to do, Macbook sales hardly matter to them as evident from their behaviour.

lukevp 6y ago

I'm confused about this - I don't use OSX for anything other than Logic, but there's a Docker desktop app for OSX [0] so I assumed it could run docker containers? Is that not true? [0]: https://hub.docker.com/editions/community/docker-ce-desktop-mac https://hub.docker.com/editions/community/docker-ce-desktop-...

zerkten 6y ago
I think the poster may mean performance, or other aspects are problematic. You can definitely use the Docker desktop app for macOS to run docker containers.
harpratap 6y ago
It's running inside a Linux Virtual Machine, so the performance is piss poor. My i7 Macbook pro runs hot 24*7 because of such high usage.

jagged-chisel 6y ago

Docker works great on macOS. It builds images, runs containers, and you don't even need the Official Desktop App - brew install docker.

harpratap 6y ago
It's not a real container, it's a Linux virtual machine.
- garethrowlands 6y ago
  It's a Linux virtual machine running real containers though.
  - harpratap 6y ago
    So? That's not real support. This is akin to saying MS Office is supported on Linux because you can run it inside a VM.
- adolfojp 6y ago
  I don't see an alternative though. If your deployment target is Linux and your development machine is not then you need a Linux VM of some sort to host your Linux containers. How would you implement "real" containers without a VM in that scenario.
  - harpratap 6y ago
    Support cgroups and namespaces in your kernel and let CRI-O do the rest?
    - adolfojp 6y ago
      I'm a bit out of my element so I apologize if I'm missing something. Microsoft implemented cgroups and namespace analogues in Windows Server 2016 to allow it to run "real" Docker containers without the need for virtual machines. The limitation is that the real Windows containers can only run Windows based applications because the underlying architecture is still Windows. Something similar would happen with macOS. The underlying architecture of macOS would remain macOS regardless of whether it could run real containers or not.