3 ms·

Justification? For what? Seems like you're the one who feels entitled for something, it's you who needs justification. > and then (seriously, as best I can tel

Justification? For what? Seems like you're the one who feels entitled for something, it's you who needs justification. > and then (seriously, as best I can tell) suggested I should have solved it by nesting a VM within the existing VM You were the first to suggest anything like that. My answer did not offer any suggestion for solution at all, read it again. > No, the most useful feature is locking down a machine spec that Just Works. That's not a feature Docker ever had or intended to have. Seems you have misunderstood something about what containers actually are. They're very explicitly not "virtual machines lite", and it sounds like you want an actual virtual machine instead.

hedora 5y ago
There are things that containers acually do (I discussed those above, and won't repeat), and things they ostensibly do, but do not actually do, such as security sandboxing, or providing a fixed, "just works" environment for your binaries, like a VM would. As far as I know, the people making the incorrect claims/assumptions are distinct from the people that built commonly-used containerization software. If you want to understand what containers are, start with the mental model that it is a chroot with /dev, /sys and /proc mounted, and with processes running with uid=0. Their sandboxing isn't quite that bad, but they are closer to chroot environments (or bsd jails) than a VM. Next, package a few things by writing dockerfiles, then deploy them to a raspberry pi or something. If you still care, then follow up by reading the kubernetes tutorials. Edit: This message is directed to SilasX.