4 ms·

> No native docker support Honest question: why do you want this in MacOS? Do you understand what docker does? (it's fundamentally a linux technology, unless y

by duped 2y ago

> No native docker support Honest question: why do you want this in MacOS? Do you understand what docker does? (it's fundamentally a linux technology, unless you are asking for user namespaces and chroot w/o SIP on MacOS, but that doesn't make sense since the app sandbox exists). MacOS doesn't have the fundamental ecosystem problems that beget the need for docker. If the answer is "I want to run docker containers because I have them" then use orbstack or run linux through the virtualization framework (not Docker desktop). It's remarkably fast.

jeffhuys 2y ago
Docker Desktop now offers an option to use the virtualization framework, and works pretty well. But you're still constantly running a VM because "docker is how devs work now right?". I agree with your comment.
raydev 2y ago
> MacOS doesn't have the fundamental ecosystem problems that beget the need for docker. Anyone wanting to run and manage their own suite of Macs to build multiple massive iOS and Mac apps at scale, for dozens or hundreds or thousands of developers deploying their changes. xcodebuild is by far the most obvious "needs native for max perf" but there are a few other tools that require macOS. But obviously if you have multiple repos and apps, you might require many different versions of the same tools to build everything. Sounds like a perfect use case for native containers.
egorfine 2y ago
> why do you want this in MacOS? I have a small rackmounted rendering farm using mac minis, which outperform everything in the Intel world, even order of magnitude more expensive. I run macOS on my personal and development computers for over a decade and I use Linux since inception on server side. My experience: running server-side macOS is such a PITA it's not even funny. It may even pretend it has ssh while in fact the ssh server is only available on good days and only after Remote Desktop logged in at least once. Launchd makes you wanna crave systemd. etc, etc. So, about docker. I would absolutely love to run my app in a containerized environment on a Mac in order to not touch the main OS.
- mannyv 2y ago
  Funny, I ran a bunch of Mac minis in colo for over a decade with no problems. Maybe you have a config problem? Of course, I had a LOM/KVM and redundant networking etc. They were substantially more reliable than the Dell equipment that I used in my day job for sure.
  - egorfine 2y ago
    Hardware-wise I have exactly zero complaints. Software-wise it's much different to an expected behavior. For example, macOS won't let you in over SSH until you log in via Remote Desktop. You'll get "connection closed" immediately. Or sometimes it will. And that depends not on the count of connection attempts or anything you can do locally but rather on the boot process somehow. Sometimes it boots in a way that permits ssh, sometimes not. The same computer, the same OS. Then after you login on screen sharing and log out, macOS will let you in over ssh. For a few days. And then again will force you to login via GUI. Or maybe not. I have no idea what makes it. I have trouble reading macOS logs or understanding it. It spews a few log messages per second even idle. If you grep ssh these messages contain zero actionable data, like "unsuccessful attempt" or similar. Another complaint is that launchd reports the same "I/O error" on absolutely all error situations, from syntax error in plist to corrupt binary. Makes development and debugging of launchagents very fun.
    - rafram 2y ago
      https://support.apple.com/lt-lt/guide/mac-help/mchlp1066/mac https://support.apple.com/lt-lt/guide/mac-help/mchlp1066/mac
      - egorfine 2y ago
        Seriously?
- duped 2y ago
  What would a containerization environment on MacOS give you that you don't already have? Like concretely - what does containerization mean in the context of a MacOS user space? In Linux, it means something very specific: a user/mount/pid/network namespace, overlayfs to provide a rootfs, chroot to pivot to the new root to do your work, and port forwarding between the host/guest systems. On MacOS I don't know what containerization means short of virtualization. But you have virtualization on MacOS already, so why not use that?

by duped 2y ago

jeffhuys 2y ago

Docker Desktop now offers an option to use the virtualization framework, and works pretty well. But you're still constantly running a VM because "docker is how devs work now right?". I agree with your comment.

raydev 2y ago

> MacOS doesn't have the fundamental ecosystem problems that beget the need for docker. Anyone wanting to run and manage their own suite of Macs to build multiple massive iOS and Mac apps at scale, for dozens or hundreds or thousands of developers deploying their changes. xcodebuild is by far the most obvious "needs native for max perf" but there are a few other tools that require macOS. But obviously if you have multiple repos and apps, you might require many different versions of the same tools to build everything. Sounds like a perfect use case for native containers.

egorfine 2y ago

> why do you want this in MacOS? I have a small rackmounted rendering farm using mac minis, which outperform everything in the Intel world, even order of magnitude more expensive. I run macOS on my personal and development computers for over a decade and I use Linux since inception on server side. My experience: running server-side macOS is such a PITA it's not even funny. It may even pretend it has ssh while in fact the ssh server is only available on good days and only after Remote Desktop logged in at least once. Launchd makes you wanna crave systemd. etc, etc. So, about docker. I would absolutely love to run my app in a containerized environment on a Mac in order to not touch the main OS.

mannyv 2y ago
Funny, I ran a bunch of Mac minis in colo for over a decade with no problems. Maybe you have a config problem? Of course, I had a LOM/KVM and redundant networking etc. They were substantially more reliable than the Dell equipment that I used in my day job for sure.
- egorfine 2y ago
  Hardware-wise I have exactly zero complaints. Software-wise it's much different to an expected behavior. For example, macOS won't let you in over SSH until you log in via Remote Desktop. You'll get "connection closed" immediately. Or sometimes it will. And that depends not on the count of connection attempts or anything you can do locally but rather on the boot process somehow. Sometimes it boots in a way that permits ssh, sometimes not. The same computer, the same OS. Then after you login on screen sharing and log out, macOS will let you in over ssh. For a few days. And then again will force you to login via GUI. Or maybe not. I have no idea what makes it. I have trouble reading macOS logs or understanding it. It spews a few log messages per second even idle. If you grep ssh these messages contain zero actionable data, like "unsuccessful attempt" or similar. Another complaint is that launchd reports the same "I/O error" on absolutely all error situations, from syntax error in plist to corrupt binary. Makes development and debugging of launchagents very fun.
  - rafram 2y ago
    https://support.apple.com/lt-lt/guide/mac-help/mchlp1066/mac https://support.apple.com/lt-lt/guide/mac-help/mchlp1066/mac
    - egorfine 2y ago
      Seriously?
duped 2y ago
What would a containerization environment on MacOS give you that you don't already have? Like concretely - what does containerization mean in the context of a MacOS user space? In Linux, it means something very specific: a user/mount/pid/network namespace, overlayfs to provide a rootfs, chroot to pivot to the new root to do your work, and port forwarding between the host/guest systems. On MacOS I don't know what containerization means short of virtualization. But you have virtualization on MacOS already, so why not use that?