shykes

79 ms·

871.
by shykes 13y ago
No, Docker is not becoming red hat - specific. From a technical standpoint this announcement means two things: 1) Docker 0.7 will run on vanilla kernels out of the box. This means virtually all distros will be supported. It also means wider
872.
by shykes 13y ago
> Complex systems require complex interaction, and Docker images do not allow for that Unless you compose a complex system by composing multiple containers - which is the whole point of containers. > they are monolithic, all-or-not
873.
by shykes 13y ago
That's not accurate. The syntax is irrelevant - if you compare it to a shell script you are missing the purpose of the dockerfile. The purpose is to make an otherwise inert source checkout runnable . Point me to a shell script that do
874.
by shykes 13y ago
> Docker images create a bigger burden on your deployment as you have these large images to distribute, modify, manage Compared to what, though? Of course if your environment is homogenous enough that you can express your application a
875.
by shykes 13y ago
> This universal container system goes out the window the first minute you have to start modifying everything to fit edge cases, which is always going to happen. This is why the Dockerfile is so important. I would never use an opaque b
876.
by shykes 13y ago
I haven't tested docker on Ubuntu 10.04. But you can probably expect the following: 1) You will need to boot a 3.8+ kernel, which is definitely possible but probably not available as a 10.04 package (unless someone has backported it).
877.
by shykes 13y ago
Docker maintainer here. That's basically it. There's no specific danger that we're worried about - just engineering best practices. As long as we're not comfortable operating Docker at large scale ourselves (we run qui
878.
by shykes 13y ago
If you're interested in cool projects built on top of Docker, take a look at http://github.com/dockerforge , it has a nice list.
879.
by shykes 13y ago
There are no official images for Ubuntu 10.04, but you can create your own with: debootstrap lucid ./rootfs && tar -C ./rootfs -c . | docker import nl/ubuntu-lucid You can then run 10.04 containers with:
880.
by shykes 13y ago
Yes you can. Docker doesn't care about the underlying distro, as long as it can run on it. You can build a container on a Red Hat host machine, and transfer it to an Ubuntu host machine - it will run just fine on both.
881.
by shykes 13y ago
> I really don't like giving up the isolation of modern hypervisors You don't have to! Think of docker as a unit of software delivery, rather than resource allocation. It's very common to use Docker to either a) deploy o
882.
by shykes 13y ago
Actually the typical start time of a docker container is in the 10-100ms range :)
883.
by shykes 13y ago
Here's another Stack Overflow question which addresses that exact question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17989306/what-does-docker...
884.
by shykes 13y ago
We're moving to device-mapper, which is the underlying block-level facility used by LVM.
885.
by shykes 13y ago
There is superficial overlap between Docker and traditional process supervisors - both will fork/exec your application, monitor its status, collect logs etc. And indeed in a simple test/development setting, you can use Docker with
886.
by shykes 13y ago
Hi everyone, I'm the guy featured in this article. Now that the dust is settling I thought I might answer a few of the most frequent questions. > So what does Docker actually do? Thanks for asking! From the project homepage: Dock
887.
by shykes 13y ago
That's exactly what Dockerfiles are for: to specify a unique, non-ambiguous way to build your code. Regardless of language, distro or compiler, "docker build" is all I need to produce a self-contained, runnable artifact not u
888.
by shykes 13y ago
Just to confirm that we're planning to remove the dependency on aufs for the 0.7 release (late September). As a result docker will run on vanilla linux kernels. aufs will probably come back as a plugin in a future version. aufs is grea
889.
by shykes 13y ago
Note that future versions of Docker will let you ship and manipulate a group of containers as a single object. Currently this is scheduled for 0.8 (October release).
890.
by shykes 13y ago
> I do applaud the Docker OpenStack team as getting a new hypervisor driver into OpenStack is no small feat! Docker author here. The credit goes to Sam Alba (shad42 on hn) who lead this integration beginning to end - in addition to his
891.
by shykes 13y ago
> There are lots of deployment solutions out there. What there isn't is a handy way to manage and track the assembling and customization of your various things-to-be-deployed, independent of the platform. Have you actually tried D
892.
by shykes 13y ago
I will add one more difference between Docker vs. traditional package managers: Docker is a tool developers enjoy using. I have yet to meet a developer who enjoys building his application as an rpm or deb. The shorter the development/d
893.
by shykes 13y ago
> How does Docker mesh with something like continuous deployment? Very well. Because any source repository with a Dockerfile can be built into a container with no other out-of-band information, it is very easy to compose your ideal del
894.
by shykes 13y ago
> if docker makes the assumption that, say, 'ubuntu-12.04' on 5 cloud providers is equivalent, then sooner or later it's going to encounter problems. You misunderstand how docker works. 'ubuntu:12.04' refers to
895.
by shykes 13y ago
I can't speak for this particular project, but Docker (on which this project is based) is already open-source, and you can absolutely deploy it on your own hardware. See http://docker.io for details.
896.
by shykes 13y ago
> you can easily just systemd-nspawn /ostree/deploy/debian/90cd266 and boot the same OS as a container Perhaps we should be looking at integrating ostree and docker then? :) > I'd like to push hard to integ
897.
by shykes 13y ago
Docker applies similar concepts (change management at the file and directory level, a chrootable filesystem as the unit of delivery, atomic and revertable deployments), except it applies them 1 level higher in the stack. Instead of rebootin
898.
by shykes 13y ago
> Docker added metadata to describe how to build images; if you want to change the components (AFAICT) the "right" way is to change the metadata and then do a full rebuild. Correct. And Docker implements caching of build laye
899.
by shykes 13y ago
btrfs is one of the alternatives we plan on supporting. In fact there is already an experimental branch with btrfs support. However, wearing my user / operator hat, if I had to choose I would stick to aufs in production. If I had to sw
900.
by shykes 13y ago
Speaking as a dotCloud employee: yes, it's also our opinion that aufs is still the most viable option in a production setting. Finding a permanent solution to the clusterfuck of union filesystems in linux seems as likely as peace in th

More ›