3 ms·

> One of Debian's (many) advantages vs. Ubuntu is that there isn't an ecosystem of poorly maintained but easily found packages around the core. Context: I'm a

> One of Debian's (many) advantages vs. Ubuntu is that there isn't an ecosystem of poorly maintained but easily found packages around the core. Context: I'm a full-time Debian user. I firmly believe that the future is not around packaging as we've been conceiving of it for the last decade or so, but around packaging in the form of containers[0]. As a Debian user, I'd be really happy to see Debian keep an eye towards containerization as a a first-class citizen of the distribution, the way apt(itude) and dpkg are now. PPAs can either fit into this model or work against it, depending on how you look at it. They can either enable the creation of containers by virtue of being more flexible and more easily used inside container builds, or they can serve as a crutch for low-quality packaging standards. So, I'd be excited for PPAs in Debian, but I'd like to see them adopted as a tool to facilitate first-class containerization in Debian, rather than the way they are used in Ubuntu more as a place to hold unsupported or less-supported packages. [0] Not necessarily Docker or even Docker-like containers, but containers nonetheless.

dharma1 11y ago
what do you think of https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/tutorials/build-snaps/ https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/tutorials/build-snaps...
- chris_wot 11y ago
  That's the tutorial - o you have a more detailed link?
  - dharma1 11y ago
    For an explanation of Snappy - or how to get/run/use it? Here is a couple of links for the former http://thenewstack.io/snappy-ubuntu-a-new-cloud-os-with-support-for-docker-in-a-post-shellshock-era/ http://thenewstack.io/snappy-ubuntu-a-new-cloud-os-with-supp... http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1434 http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1434
vezzy-fnord 11y ago
packaging in the form of containers I don't really see that. Containers have mostly ingrained themselves into application deployment, but the trends in GNU/Linux packaging seem to be heading toward compressed bundles (combined with some form of access control like AppArmor or POSIX caps to get some form of sandboxing and resource isolation). At least that's what Ubuntu Snappy seems to be. This is similar to Klik, Autopackage, 0install, OS X bundles and even the Windows way of stuffing your DLLs into a single directory namespace (though with a common format and infrastructure). Nix and Guix are in leagues of their own that have nothing to do with containers specifically. Everyone else is sticking to the same conventional system package managers and I don't see that changing. The systemd developers are proposing their own odd scheme based on btrfs volumes that is still in its very early stages.
vacri 11y ago
Having used Docker mostly as a packaging format for the past 6 months at my day job, I think it's a terrible format for packaging. I'm about to strip it out and go back to .debs. The current love of containers is a fad - they have their uses, but it is the new hammer for which every problem has been redefined as a nail. Docker solves some problems, but packaging isn't one of them - and it brings lots of it's own issues along for the ride as well. Admittedly, I haven't played around with other forms of containers more than a 'hello world', but my experience of container-as-packaging has been woeful so far.
xai3luGi 11y ago
I'd prefer regular Debian packaging plus containerisation via systemd-nspawn or just the various systemd security features that use the same Linux namespacing features as Docker. http://0pointer.net/public/systemd-nluug-2014.pdf http://0pointer.net/public/systemd-nluug-2014.pdf http://ftp.nluug.nl/video/nluug/2014-11-20_nj14/zaal-2/5_Lennart_Poettering_-_Systemd.webm http://ftp.nluug.nl/video/nluug/2014-11-20_nj14/zaal-2/5_Len...

dharma1 11y ago

what do you think of https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/tutorials/build-snaps/ https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/tutorials/build-snaps...

chris_wot 11y ago
That's the tutorial - o you have a more detailed link?
- dharma1 11y ago
  For an explanation of Snappy - or how to get/run/use it? Here is a couple of links for the former http://thenewstack.io/snappy-ubuntu-a-new-cloud-os-with-support-for-docker-in-a-post-shellshock-era/ http://thenewstack.io/snappy-ubuntu-a-new-cloud-os-with-supp... http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1434 http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1434

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

packaging in the form of containers I don't really see that. Containers have mostly ingrained themselves into application deployment, but the trends in GNU/Linux packaging seem to be heading toward compressed bundles (combined with some form of access control like AppArmor or POSIX caps to get some form of sandboxing and resource isolation). At least that's what Ubuntu Snappy seems to be. This is similar to Klik, Autopackage, 0install, OS X bundles and even the Windows way of stuffing your DLLs into a single directory namespace (though with a common format and infrastructure). Nix and Guix are in leagues of their own that have nothing to do with containers specifically. Everyone else is sticking to the same conventional system package managers and I don't see that changing. The systemd developers are proposing their own odd scheme based on btrfs volumes that is still in its very early stages.

vacri 11y ago

Having used Docker mostly as a packaging format for the past 6 months at my day job, I think it's a terrible format for packaging. I'm about to strip it out and go back to .debs. The current love of containers is a fad - they have their uses, but it is the new hammer for which every problem has been redefined as a nail. Docker solves some problems, but packaging isn't one of them - and it brings lots of it's own issues along for the ride as well. Admittedly, I haven't played around with other forms of containers more than a 'hello world', but my experience of container-as-packaging has been woeful so far.

xai3luGi 11y ago

I'd prefer regular Debian packaging plus containerisation via systemd-nspawn or just the various systemd security features that use the same Linux namespacing features as Docker. http://0pointer.net/public/systemd-nluug-2014.pdf http://0pointer.net/public/systemd-nluug-2014.pdf http://ftp.nluug.nl/video/nluug/2014-11-20_nj14/zaal-2/5_Lennart_Poettering_-_Systemd.webm http://ftp.nluug.nl/video/nluug/2014-11-20_nj14/zaal-2/5_Len...