6 ms·

Linux Hackers Rebuild Internet From Silicon Valley Garage

138 points by smanuel 13y ago

hga 13y ago
Classic MSM: refer to an offsite item, in this case here, without linking to it (just the site): Show HN: CoreOS, a Linux distro for containers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6128700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6128700 Also this, which has some general discussion: CoreOS Vagrant Images: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6149638 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6149638
- throwaway1979 13y ago
  I'm a bit confused about containers. I know the ideas are quite old (keep hearing about the old Berkeley Jails and chroot). These days, I'm hearing about LXC containers, Warden, Docker, ... They way I'm seeing it is that various projects are making it easier to use containers and adding more function. Is this correct or am I missing something?
  - nickstinemates 13y ago
    That's correct! LXC offers primitives for containerization with a bit of sugar which projects like Docker leverage to provide a much lower barrier to entry for most people. Today, you lose some flexibility due to lack of options, but it appears that should only be temporary. Depending on context, Docker containers can be thought of as a fat binary for your application. Meaning, as long as a Docker Host is running, your application can run without any additional dependencies. It's the exact same environment your application is running in no matter where you are. The cool part about the Docker internals is that pushing an update to another Docker Host is incremental. Very similar to a `git diff`.
theboywho 13y ago
I like what the CoreOS guys are doing and I don't mean to be mean, but this is clearly a sponsored post. No technical details, just plain dream-marketing bullshit.
- yapcguy 13y ago
  Yesterday Wired published a similar puff piece for App.net. Does anybody know how much it "costs" to have a sponsored article?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - nijiko 13y ago
    Cheap, especially if you know people.
- hga 13y ago
  Why not take that one more level: its also a guide to how to get such a piece published by a major player.
- 6cxs2hd6 13y ago
  That is so cynical. The Jesus shot is sober photojournalism: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/CoreOS_272.jpg http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2013...
  - pnathan 13y ago
    > Linux Hackers Rebuild Internet From Silicon Valley Garage That's clearly not trying to play on any biases whatsoever.
- arjie 13y ago
  Looks like you've spotted the submarine (CoreOS is in YC): http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- vidarh 13y ago
  I think that's cynical, given that Wired has published these kind of articles since their inception. They love the "underdog geniuses are about to change the world with technology and a dream" angle. And technical details have never been common at Wired.
btipling 13y ago
Core OS is awesome. The problems it is solving (discussed previously on HN see links others have posted) are needed. This is the kind of idea that's really going to change deployment and managing distributed applications and services for the better. This is really important for where I work, because we want to be able to distribute our application to others, and I think we'll be able to do this with CoreOS. It is something we are still investigating seriously, because working with enterprise level companies we need some option that doesn't exist yet that works with our infrastructure. For many large companies, web based SAAS doesn't work with their security requirements. And really, this time around there are a great batch of companies featuring some of the Cloudkickers/Rackers who worked on CK (polvi, ifup) and Floobits (ggreer, kansface) who I know are dedicated to meaningful technology. You can't expect MSM to get into the nitty gritty, but I found this article to do a good job to import the benefits one can derive from CoreOS in a way that is more accessible to non-engineers.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
binarycrusader 13y ago
The article seems a bit hyperbolic with captions like this one: ...are building a new kind of computer operating system That's more than exaggerating slightly. If they were talking about a completely new OS architecture, I might accept that statement. So much fluff here and so little technical detail.
throwaway1979 13y ago
The article mentions someone giving a tutorial on linux drivers and someone building a USB thermometer(quite tangential to the story). I've been interested in this topic for quite a while but have found it a bit inaccessible.. can anyone point at a good book or simple project I can work with to develop my chops? I'm pretty handy with Arduino and RasberryPI. But I've never written any code in kernel space and want to satiate my curiosity. Thanks in advance if anyone replies.
- philips 13y ago
  LDD3 is good but slightly out of date. http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/ http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/ You can also find lots of skeleton code in the kernel that can help you learn: Filesystem, ramfs: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/ramfs/inode.c https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.... USB device driver, skeleton: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.... PCI, probably UIO: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/uio https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.... Video, skeleton FB: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/video/skeletonfb.c https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux....
- jnbiche 13y ago
  kernelnewbies.org has some excellent information, including a good kernel howto and advice on intro Linux kernel projects: http://kernelnewbies.org/CompleteNewbiesClickHere http://kernelnewbies.org/CompleteNewbiesClickHere
peterwwillis 13y ago
Applications are like cogs in a giant piece of machinery. You can set up the machine to run a particular way, and even have parts of the machine independent of other parts. Eventually parts get old and break down, or a flaw is found. This part needs to either be replaced or upgraded. With slotted services (CoreOS), you can replace an individual part and only affect that part of the machine, as long as it's not integral to the entire machine. But the machine is complex. Sometimes you have to change how fast output shaft spins, or the gearing on a transmission. Or perhaps some other part of the machine's operation has to change, and that impacts this part because they connect to each other through more gears and pulleys. (comparison: API/ABI changes, database changes, network or protocol changes) All slotted services do is provide momentary independence. They do not reduce overall support, and they only ease maintenance for that particular service. All other complex facets of server and service maintenance remain the same. The features of CoreOS - service discovery, systemd, a minimal OS, integrated deployment, etc - can all be provided with traditional linux distributions. CoreOS doesn't do anything new or difficult. On top of that, by using such a specialized system to run your apps, you lose all the flexibility of having a full linux OS to troubleshoot and debug from. You now have to rely on them building on all the components that already exist in regular Linux world, like debuggers, tracers, sniffers, profilers, etc. You'll have to slip all that into your application deploy to troubleshoot a weird one-off bug. And forget about ever having a service contract that requires a supported OS like RHEL or Ubuntu. This is a product designed to make them money via service and support contracts. In that sense, they may be successful. But as a sysadmin I know there's nothing this provides that I can't get from existing open source tools. Rebuilding the internet? More like repackaging.
- vishvananda 13y ago
  This is an insightful post. Deploying production applications in containers with an auto-updating kernel underneath still has to be proven in the real world. I do want to quibble with one point, however: "On top of that, by using such a specialized system to run your apps, you lose all the flexibility of having a full linux OS to troubleshoot and debug from. You now have to rely on them building on all the components that already exist in regular Linux world, like debuggers, tracers, sniffers, profilers, etc. You'll have to slip all that into your application deploy to troubleshoot a weird one-off bug." CoreOS is a full fledged linux, and since applications are running in containers, there is no reason you couldn't use debugging tools on the host. Most production services have strict controls anyway, so it isn't like it is common practice to log in to a production database server and do apt-get/yum install gdb and start banging away.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
scarmig 13y ago
Is this just a re-implementation of SmartOS using the Linux kernel?
- stass 13y ago
  Yes, essentially. An attempt at.
oscargrouch 13y ago
im also forking chrome to create a new sort of browser (dont know if we can call it that way) , not from my garage, but from a room turned into a office :) I would definitely like to get in touch with this guys if possible, maybe to exchange some experience since we share the same codebase even if its for different purposes
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
bifrost 13y ago
I'd say the article is poorly titled, but what Polvi and crew are doing is pretty important. Linux has always had a big problem of bloat in the OS, when it reality the OS should be stripped down to a base level (the Core as it were) and then everything else should be managed as an addition. This is basically what most of the BSDs do, and PC-BSD has gone even further with it and basically "containerized" OS additions. Linux needs this, I'm really happy to see this being done.
- ciupicri 13y ago
  What bloat? No one is forcing you to install anything, so your OS can be stripped down to a base level. From there on you can compile and install the application using whatever dependencies you like. The problem is that no one wants to do this step manually, so we're back to the issue of packaging which CoreOS doesn't seem to solve.
  - xradionut 13y ago
    So it's like Server Core for Windows Server 2012? Stripped down to the essentials?
    - ciupicri 13y ago
      Was that a question for me? Anyway, I'm not familiar with Server Core, but after reading some documentation [1], it looks to me like a Linux server without X11 and extra services which is quite the norm. [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh846323%28v=vs.85%29.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh84...
      - 0b1100110 13y ago
        I worked as a sysadmin, most of our machines were virtual machines that ran either Debian, or Ubuntu Server LTS. We also had a few CentOS machines as well. Ubuntu Server was bigger than Debian and CentOS,but only one of them had any kind of graphical interface. And that was only because my Boss insisted since he refused to learn to use a command line. It was normal for all of the machines to only have init, sshd (non-standard port, no password), iptables(it was a while ago, ok?), security measures such as fail2ban, monitoring scripts, and whatever service they were running. That was usually it. If I could strip any extraneous services that weren't needed, I did so and saved the image as a template for next time. My bosses loved me since when I started, most of the machines had 512Mb-1Gb of RAM allocated(mostly unused), and I managed to drop the necessary RAM down to about 128Mb for the services that didn't require more. Internal websites, DNS, etc. Since We had a couple huge machines running most of the VMs, I also set up a pretty large dedicated RAID0 for /tmp space, and set the VMs to aggressively page to disk. Our Giant Email server used to require 7+ Gigs of RAM for all of the work it did (We're talking massive amounts of email constantly here, at least 20 domains serving multiple businesses), but I dropped it down to 2Gb. No loss of reliability or noticeable speed, and it freed up lots of resources for other machines to use. tl;dr Linux Servers are usually as tiny as they can possibly be without affecting speed or reliability. Also due to the sheer amount of tweaking you can usually get the most bang for your buck with only a week or two of tweaking. MS Server needed at least 1Gb last I checked, but that was a while back. You can have literally 8 Linux servers for the same resources as one Windows Server.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
shykes 13y ago
For those of you familiar with Docker (http://docker.io http://docker.io): CoreOS is a linux distribution designed to get your machine from zero to Docker as quickly and reliably as possible. It is stripped down to the bare minimum, since its primary job is to run Docker, which itself has almost no dependencies. As a result CoreOS boots very quickly, and is hard to get in an inconsistent state because it has less moving parts. I think it's a great example of what becomes possible with the Separation of Concerns allowed by container-based deployment. With docker containers as the standard "glue", the components in your system can be less tightly coupled, and as a result they can be simpler and more reliable. And because each component can be chosen independently of the others, it's easier for new alternatives to be adopted, because you don't have to rip out the whole system to try them out. For example, in a docker-based system, you could easily try out CoreOS on a few machines alongside your existing Red Hat or Debian setup, because they can all run Docker. You could try StriderCI or Buildbot instead of Jenkins for continuous integration, because they can all build docker containers. You could try Nginx instead of Apache for some of your applications, because they can all be bundled into a docker container. And so on. TLDR: containers lead to better interop between tools, which leads to more innovation and competition on the tools, which leads to better tools, which leads to happier engineers! :)
Swannie 13y ago
It's taken me too long to realise that this really is just LXC or similar (OpenVZ), plus some nice directory service akin to JNDI. Analogy wise, a Linux version of a Java Application Server cluster? EAR or WAR files are not meant to contain their config, but look it up via JNDI lookups. They can be stopped/started/updated in place. They share common libs, and bring their own along with them. There are standard and vendor specific tools to monitor performance, provide messaging, manage resources, etc. etc. Edit: If that's what it is, I say HURRAH!!! because I've long felt that virtual machines were a failure in our ability to get the OS level design for dependency/config management "right".
read 13y ago
If you wanted to rebuild the Internet, which runs largely on Linux, you may want to rebuild Linux first. Or throw it out and start with something else. Why can't the Internet be just *one* machine?

138 points by smanuel 13y ago

hga 13y ago

Classic MSM: refer to an offsite item, in this case here, without linking to it (just the site): Show HN: CoreOS, a Linux distro for containers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6128700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6128700 Also this, which has some general discussion: CoreOS Vagrant Images: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6149638 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6149638

throwaway1979 13y ago
I'm a bit confused about containers. I know the ideas are quite old (keep hearing about the old Berkeley Jails and chroot). These days, I'm hearing about LXC containers, Warden, Docker, ... They way I'm seeing it is that various projects are making it easier to use containers and adding more function. Is this correct or am I missing something?
- nickstinemates 13y ago
  That's correct! LXC offers primitives for containerization with a bit of sugar which projects like Docker leverage to provide a much lower barrier to entry for most people. Today, you lose some flexibility due to lack of options, but it appears that should only be temporary. Depending on context, Docker containers can be thought of as a fat binary for your application. Meaning, as long as a Docker Host is running, your application can run without any additional dependencies. It's the exact same environment your application is running in no matter where you are. The cool part about the Docker internals is that pushing an update to another Docker Host is incremental. Very similar to a `git diff`.

theboywho 13y ago

I like what the CoreOS guys are doing and I don't mean to be mean, but this is clearly a sponsored post. No technical details, just plain dream-marketing bullshit.

yapcguy 13y ago
Yesterday Wired published a similar puff piece for App.net. Does anybody know how much it "costs" to have a sponsored article?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- nijiko 13y ago
  Cheap, especially if you know people.
hga 13y ago
Why not take that one more level: its also a guide to how to get such a piece published by a major player.
6cxs2hd6 13y ago
That is so cynical. The Jesus shot is sober photojournalism: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/CoreOS_272.jpg http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2013...
- pnathan 13y ago
  > Linux Hackers Rebuild Internet From Silicon Valley Garage That's clearly not trying to play on any biases whatsoever.
arjie 13y ago
Looks like you've spotted the submarine (CoreOS is in YC): http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
vidarh 13y ago
I think that's cynical, given that Wired has published these kind of articles since their inception. They love the "underdog geniuses are about to change the world with technology and a dream" angle. And technical details have never been common at Wired.

btipling 13y ago

Core OS is awesome. The problems it is solving (discussed previously on HN see links others have posted) are needed. This is the kind of idea that's really going to change deployment and managing distributed applications and services for the better. This is really important for where I work, because we want to be able to distribute our application to others, and I think we'll be able to do this with CoreOS. It is something we are still investigating seriously, because working with enterprise level companies we need some option that doesn't exist yet that works with our infrastructure. For many large companies, web based SAAS doesn't work with their security requirements. And really, this time around there are a great batch of companies featuring some of the Cloudkickers/Rackers who worked on CK (polvi, ifup) and Floobits (ggreer, kansface) who I know are dedicated to meaningful technology. You can't expect MSM to get into the nitty gritty, but I found this article to do a good job to import the benefits one can derive from CoreOS in a way that is more accessible to non-engineers.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

binarycrusader 13y ago

The article seems a bit hyperbolic with captions like this one: ...are building a new kind of computer operating system That's more than exaggerating slightly. If they were talking about a completely new OS architecture, I might accept that statement. So much fluff here and so little technical detail.

throwaway1979 13y ago

The article mentions someone giving a tutorial on linux drivers and someone building a USB thermometer(quite tangential to the story). I've been interested in this topic for quite a while but have found it a bit inaccessible.. can anyone point at a good book or simple project I can work with to develop my chops? I'm pretty handy with Arduino and RasberryPI. But I've never written any code in kernel space and want to satiate my curiosity. Thanks in advance if anyone replies.

philips 13y ago
LDD3 is good but slightly out of date. http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/ http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/ You can also find lots of skeleton code in the kernel that can help you learn: Filesystem, ramfs: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/ramfs/inode.c https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.... USB device driver, skeleton: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/usb/usb-skeleton.c https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.... PCI, probably UIO: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/uio https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.... Video, skeleton FB: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/video/skeletonfb.c https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux....
jnbiche 13y ago
kernelnewbies.org has some excellent information, including a good kernel howto and advice on intro Linux kernel projects: http://kernelnewbies.org/CompleteNewbiesClickHere http://kernelnewbies.org/CompleteNewbiesClickHere

peterwwillis 13y ago

Applications are like cogs in a giant piece of machinery. You can set up the machine to run a particular way, and even have parts of the machine independent of other parts. Eventually parts get old and break down, or a flaw is found. This part needs to either be replaced or upgraded. With slotted services (CoreOS), you can replace an individual part and only affect that part of the machine, as long as it's not integral to the entire machine. But the machine is complex. Sometimes you have to change how fast output shaft spins, or the gearing on a transmission. Or perhaps some other part of the machine's operation has to change, and that impacts this part because they connect to each other through more gears and pulleys. (comparison: API/ABI changes, database changes, network or protocol changes) All slotted services do is provide momentary independence. They do not reduce overall support, and they only ease maintenance for that particular service. All other complex facets of server and service maintenance remain the same. The features of CoreOS - service discovery, systemd, a minimal OS, integrated deployment, etc - can all be provided with traditional linux distributions. CoreOS doesn't do anything new or difficult. On top of that, by using such a specialized system to run your apps, you lose all the flexibility of having a full linux OS to troubleshoot and debug from. You now have to rely on them building on all the components that already exist in regular Linux world, like debuggers, tracers, sniffers, profilers, etc. You'll have to slip all that into your application deploy to troubleshoot a weird one-off bug. And forget about ever having a service contract that requires a supported OS like RHEL or Ubuntu. This is a product designed to make them money via service and support contracts. In that sense, they may be successful. But as a sysadmin I know there's nothing this provides that I can't get from existing open source tools. Rebuilding the internet? More like repackaging.

vishvananda 13y ago
This is an insightful post. Deploying production applications in containers with an auto-updating kernel underneath still has to be proven in the real world. I do want to quibble with one point, however: "On top of that, by using such a specialized system to run your apps, you lose all the flexibility of having a full linux OS to troubleshoot and debug from. You now have to rely on them building on all the components that already exist in regular Linux world, like debuggers, tracers, sniffers, profilers, etc. You'll have to slip all that into your application deploy to troubleshoot a weird one-off bug." CoreOS is a full fledged linux, and since applications are running in containers, there is no reason you couldn't use debugging tools on the host. Most production services have strict controls anyway, so it isn't like it is common practice to log in to a production database server and do apt-get/yum install gdb and start banging away.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

scarmig 13y ago

Is this just a re-implementation of SmartOS using the Linux kernel?

stass 13y ago
Yes, essentially. An attempt at.

oscargrouch 13y ago

im also forking chrome to create a new sort of browser (dont know if we can call it that way) , not from my garage, but from a room turned into a office :) I would definitely like to get in touch with this guys if possible, maybe to exchange some experience since we share the same codebase even if its for different purposes

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

bifrost 13y ago

I'd say the article is poorly titled, but what Polvi and crew are doing is pretty important. Linux has always had a big problem of bloat in the OS, when it reality the OS should be stripped down to a base level (the Core as it were) and then everything else should be managed as an addition. This is basically what most of the BSDs do, and PC-BSD has gone even further with it and basically "containerized" OS additions. Linux needs this, I'm really happy to see this being done.

ciupicri 13y ago
What bloat? No one is forcing you to install anything, so your OS can be stripped down to a base level. From there on you can compile and install the application using whatever dependencies you like. The problem is that no one wants to do this step manually, so we're back to the issue of packaging which CoreOS doesn't seem to solve.
- xradionut 13y ago
  So it's like Server Core for Windows Server 2012? Stripped down to the essentials?
  - ciupicri 13y ago
    Was that a question for me? Anyway, I'm not familiar with Server Core, but after reading some documentation [1], it looks to me like a Linux server without X11 and extra services which is quite the norm. [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh846323%28v=vs.85%29.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh84...
    - 0b1100110 13y ago
      I worked as a sysadmin, most of our machines were virtual machines that ran either Debian, or Ubuntu Server LTS. We also had a few CentOS machines as well. Ubuntu Server was bigger than Debian and CentOS,but only one of them had any kind of graphical interface. And that was only because my Boss insisted since he refused to learn to use a command line. It was normal for all of the machines to only have init, sshd (non-standard port, no password), iptables(it was a while ago, ok?), security measures such as fail2ban, monitoring scripts, and whatever service they were running. That was usually it. If I could strip any extraneous services that weren't needed, I did so and saved the image as a template for next time. My bosses loved me since when I started, most of the machines had 512Mb-1Gb of RAM allocated(mostly unused), and I managed to drop the necessary RAM down to about 128Mb for the services that didn't require more. Internal websites, DNS, etc. Since We had a couple huge machines running most of the VMs, I also set up a pretty large dedicated RAID0 for /tmp space, and set the VMs to aggressively page to disk. Our Giant Email server used to require 7+ Gigs of RAM for all of the work it did (We're talking massive amounts of email constantly here, at least 20 domains serving multiple businesses), but I dropped it down to 2Gb. No loss of reliability or noticeable speed, and it freed up lots of resources for other machines to use. tl;dr Linux Servers are usually as tiny as they can possibly be without affecting speed or reliability. Also due to the sheer amount of tweaking you can usually get the most bang for your buck with only a week or two of tweaking. MS Server needed at least 1Gb last I checked, but that was a while back. You can have literally 8 Linux servers for the same resources as one Windows Server.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

shykes 13y ago

For those of you familiar with Docker (http://docker.io http://docker.io): CoreOS is a linux distribution designed to get your machine from zero to Docker as quickly and reliably as possible. It is stripped down to the bare minimum, since its primary job is to run Docker, which itself has almost no dependencies. As a result CoreOS boots very quickly, and is hard to get in an inconsistent state because it has less moving parts. I think it's a great example of what becomes possible with the Separation of Concerns allowed by container-based deployment. With docker containers as the standard "glue", the components in your system can be less tightly coupled, and as a result they can be simpler and more reliable. And because each component can be chosen independently of the others, it's easier for new alternatives to be adopted, because you don't have to rip out the whole system to try them out. For example, in a docker-based system, you could easily try out CoreOS on a few machines alongside your existing Red Hat or Debian setup, because they can all run Docker. You could try StriderCI or Buildbot instead of Jenkins for continuous integration, because they can all build docker containers. You could try Nginx instead of Apache for some of your applications, because they can all be bundled into a docker container. And so on. TLDR: containers lead to better interop between tools, which leads to more innovation and competition on the tools, which leads to better tools, which leads to happier engineers! :)

Swannie 13y ago

It's taken me too long to realise that this really is just LXC or similar (OpenVZ), plus some nice directory service akin to JNDI. Analogy wise, a Linux version of a Java Application Server cluster? EAR or WAR files are not meant to contain their config, but look it up via JNDI lookups. They can be stopped/started/updated in place. They share common libs, and bring their own along with them. There are standard and vendor specific tools to monitor performance, provide messaging, manage resources, etc. etc. Edit: If that's what it is, I say HURRAH!!! because I've long felt that virtual machines were a failure in our ability to get the OS level design for dependency/config management "right".

read 13y ago

If you wanted to rebuild the Internet, which runs largely on Linux, you may want to rebuild Linux first. Or throw it out and start with something else. Why can't the Internet be just *one* machine?