5 ms·

> Docker feels contrarian for no reason No, Docker is a mess.

intelVISA 3y ago
Docker may be a terrible mess, sure, but something something VC.
cpach 3y ago
What is it more specifically that you think is a mess? Do you mean the OCI Image Format, Docker Inc, Docker Engine, something else…?
- vachina 3y ago
  I couldn’t get Docker to run with WSL backend on a freshly installed Windows 11 Pro, a very common use case. I’m not sure if they even test their own software.
  - proxysna 3y ago
    Windows and WSL are a mess. Run docker on Linux instead. There is no reason to run docker on windows, except if you are planning to build windows containers.
    - JoBrad 3y ago
      If you're a Windows user, running Docker in WSL _is_ running it in Linux.
      - proxysna 3y ago
        Yes, Linux wrapped into countless unnecessary abstraction layers.
    - naasking 3y ago
      Incorrect. Portable .NET development natively uses Docker. Works pretty seamlessly with Visual Studio actually, though slower than I'd like.
    - taberiand 3y ago
      Funny that, WSL2 on Windows 11 with Linux containers works nearly perfectly for me (I think the only thing that'd make it better is another 8 GB or so of RAM), with using devcontainers, building images and running Docker compose - it's the Windows containers that cause the trouble, mostly with networking
  - JoBrad 3y ago
    You could just opt for the regular Docker for Windows approach, instead. Although I honestly only ran Docker in WSL on Windows, but haven't tried with Windows 11.
- SanderNL 3y ago
  You enumerated it yourself.
  - cpach 3y ago
    I agree that the naming of the different entities is not very clear. That doesn’t imply that each of these entities is a mess though.
- chriswarbo 3y ago
  Not sure if I'd count "OCI Image Format" under the Docker umbrella, since Docker doesn't actually follow it. Also, slight nitpick, but "OCI Image Format" is itself a bit of an umbrella, since there are images, manifests, layers, etc. It's easy enough to make a standards-compliant image using `tar`, `sha256sum` and `jq`, but it's rather hit-and-miss which tools will support it (e.g. AWS seems easy to please, but nerdctl rejects certain things, etc.) Personally, my main problems with Docker are: - Dockerfiles: these are basically just shell scripts, which throws away decades of improvements and leads to all sorts of insanity (e.g. running `apt install -y foo bar baz`, rather than making a .deb which depends on those). It also causes everything to happen "inside-out", with our compiler toolchains, etc. getting installed inside the container (requiring even more containers to try and extricate the build products, and so on) - Docker Inc: specifically, their over-complication of basic shit, as a way to funnel everything through themselves. Want to u̵p̵l̵o̵a̵d̵ push your t̵a̵r̵ ̵f̵i̵l̵e̵ image to a r̵e̵m̵o̵t̵e̵ ̵d̵i̵r̵e̵c̵t̵o̵r̵y̵ registry? No rsync for you: not only will you need to run the `docker` command, but it must be "logged in" first (??!); oh, and you'll need to pass credentials over stdio (hooray for the /proc filesystem!). Note that this is just my experience from using private f̵o̵l̵d̵e̵r̵s̵ registries (e.g. like https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECR/latest/userguide/docker-push-ecr-image.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECR/latest/userguide/docke... ). Fun fact: AWS provide a multipart upload API for u̵p̵l̵o̵a̵d̵i̵n̵g̵ pushing to a b̵u̵c̵k̵e̵t̵ registry, which uses the normal AWS credentials chain; so you can just whack a loop around that to u̵p̵l̵o̵a̵d̵ ̵f̵i̵l̵e̵s̵ push images without any `docker login` bullshit ;) Oh also, Docker Desktop for Mac is the only software I've used which makes the "ignore" button on update nags a "premium feature" (whilst simultaneously making it hard to actually update, since they only publish new binaries to a mutable "latest" URL, hence breaking its SHA256 and hoping people don't mind downloading random ever-changing binaries; the only stable URLs they provide are for "archived" versions, so no wonder I keep getting update nags.... urgh, I eventually just nuked the lot)

Docker may be a terrible mess, sure, but something something VC.

What is it more specifically that you think is a mess? Do you mean the OCI Image Format, Docker Inc, Docker Engine, something else…?

vachina 3y ago
I couldn’t get Docker to run with WSL backend on a freshly installed Windows 11 Pro, a very common use case. I’m not sure if they even test their own software.
- proxysna 3y ago
  Windows and WSL are a mess. Run docker on Linux instead. There is no reason to run docker on windows, except if you are planning to build windows containers.
  - JoBrad 3y ago
    If you're a Windows user, running Docker in WSL _is_ running it in Linux.
    - proxysna 3y ago
      Yes, Linux wrapped into countless unnecessary abstraction layers.
  - naasking 3y ago
    Incorrect. Portable .NET development natively uses Docker. Works pretty seamlessly with Visual Studio actually, though slower than I'd like.
  - taberiand 3y ago
    Funny that, WSL2 on Windows 11 with Linux containers works nearly perfectly for me (I think the only thing that'd make it better is another 8 GB or so of RAM), with using devcontainers, building images and running Docker compose - it's the Windows containers that cause the trouble, mostly with networking
- JoBrad 3y ago
  You could just opt for the regular Docker for Windows approach, instead. Although I honestly only ran Docker in WSL on Windows, but haven't tried with Windows 11.
SanderNL 3y ago
You enumerated it yourself.
- cpach 3y ago
  I agree that the naming of the different entities is not very clear. That doesn’t imply that each of these entities is a mess though.
chriswarbo 3y ago
Not sure if I'd count "OCI Image Format" under the Docker umbrella, since Docker doesn't actually follow it. Also, slight nitpick, but "OCI Image Format" is itself a bit of an umbrella, since there are images, manifests, layers, etc. It's easy enough to make a standards-compliant image using `tar`, `sha256sum` and `jq`, but it's rather hit-and-miss which tools will support it (e.g. AWS seems easy to please, but nerdctl rejects certain things, etc.) Personally, my main problems with Docker are: - Dockerfiles: these are basically just shell scripts, which throws away decades of improvements and leads to all sorts of insanity (e.g. running `apt install -y foo bar baz`, rather than making a .deb which depends on those). It also causes everything to happen "inside-out", with our compiler toolchains, etc. getting installed inside the container (requiring even more containers to try and extricate the build products, and so on) - Docker Inc: specifically, their over-complication of basic shit, as a way to funnel everything through themselves. Want to u̵p̵l̵o̵a̵d̵ push your t̵a̵r̵ ̵f̵i̵l̵e̵ image to a r̵e̵m̵o̵t̵e̵ ̵d̵i̵r̵e̵c̵t̵o̵r̵y̵ registry? No rsync for you: not only will you need to run the `docker` command, but it must be "logged in" first (??!); oh, and you'll need to pass credentials over stdio (hooray for the /proc filesystem!). Note that this is just my experience from using private f̵o̵l̵d̵e̵r̵s̵ registries (e.g. like https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECR/latest/userguide/docker-push-ecr-image.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECR/latest/userguide/docke... ). Fun fact: AWS provide a multipart upload API for u̵p̵l̵o̵a̵d̵i̵n̵g̵ pushing to a b̵u̵c̵k̵e̵t̵ registry, which uses the normal AWS credentials chain; so you can just whack a loop around that to u̵p̵l̵o̵a̵d̵ ̵f̵i̵l̵e̵s̵ push images without any `docker login` bullshit ;) Oh also, Docker Desktop for Mac is the only software I've used which makes the "ignore" button on update nags a "premium feature" (whilst simultaneously making it hard to actually update, since they only publish new binaries to a mutable "latest" URL, hence breaking its SHA256 and hoping people don't mind downloading random ever-changing binaries; the only stable URLs they provide are for "archived" versions, so no wonder I keep getting update nags.... urgh, I eventually just nuked the lot)