Re: Docker

So,let me understand : docker images aren't compatible with FreeBSD.
Imagine that the FreeBSD jails will be not compatible with Linux. Wow,this
is true interoperability.

On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 12:36 AM Paul Pathiakis <pathiaki2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Personally, I think jails are brilliant and their evolution has also been
> brilliant.
>
> Gee, a complete operating system contained as a process running under the
> parent process that behaves just like the parent OS.
> You can upgrade the OS, the pkgs, etc.
>
> I really don't think it would be hard to create a 'library' of jails.
>
> Here's a postfix jail
> Here's a DNS jail
> Here's a PostGreSQL jail
>
> You can run your jails via the "Master Jailer"
> You can create your/library of jails via "Jailer Key"
> You could put them in the "Jail Cell" of repositories
>
> I actually created this on my server when I was running my now defunct
> company.
>
> Literally, 40-50 jails that were running on my server that was a couple of
> Opteron chips on a SuperMicro system.  It never so much had a load on it of
> 2-3 and it was doing so much.
>
> It was so easy to upgrade the OS versions on the jails and the ports (had
> to run ports for bug fixes)
>
> I had some serious 'white hat' friends that offered to do pen testing....
> (I was running PF with redirects to the ports in the jails and nothing else
> was open on them)... I got so many beers when they gave up. :)
>
> Truly, believe podman and containerd are going to be a serious
> improvement/change.  However, at home, on my machines, FreeBSD 13.1 and
> 13.2 will be this weekend.
>
> My gf and her 85 y.o mom are running GhostBSD right now.  THEY HAVE LOVED
> IT for the last 5 years.
>
> Paul
>
> On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 03:12:56 PM PDT, infoomatic <
> infoomatic@gmx.at> wrote:
>
>
> I think docker is a good example of how to NOT do things. There is a
> reason why it is dying, lots of bad things have happened in docker land.
>
> However, let me post my opinion. We can distinguish between two
> different types of containerizations: system level containers and
> applications level containers. Linux LXC and FreeBSD jails fall into the
> former category.
>
> OCI containers fall into the application level container category and
> are moving away from the awkward Docker stack to sane solutions: podman,
> containerd, cri-o etc.
> The basic idea is: I have a repository which provides signed images for
> the users to pull and use as a running container. For software vendors,
> I can create an image which is basically a tar with the files and
> layered filesystems that can be pushed to the repository. Just like a
> jail, all the needed software, libraries are contained in one image, but
> easier accessible for users. The container consists of filesystem layers
> identified by a hash, which can be referenced to by other containers
> (e.g. a Debian Linux container in its minimal edition might be the base
> for the Kali Linux penetration testing container). Files that should
> persist are mounted via mount_nullfs into the container. The cool thing
> about that is: the images are created using a declarative manner, a yaml
> file.
>
> FreeBSD already provides lots of the technology necessary to build that
> (I am not talking about running Linux containers, but FreeBSD
> application level containers), however, it just lacks some glue like a
> system for defining a config file from which such a container is built,
> a repo, and I have no idea about how stable/performant unionfs is.
> Unfortunately I have not yet had time to look at the proposed projects
> of this thread.
>
> A few use cases come to mind (well, actually much more since I have
> worked with OCI/"Docker" since the beginning): "I want to host a simple
> public jitsi server, do not want to go through all the config. Someone
> made such a setup already and pushed that container to some repo, oh
> nice, let's just pull it and run it", or maybe: "oh, I do want to use
> keepass as password manager, but do not want it to be able to make
> network connections. Fine, just download the container and forbid
> network access." I am a lazy guy, I prefer spending my time on creating
> stuff and pushing it to a repository instead of fumbling around with
> ansible scripts to deploy that stuff when pushing and pulling an upgrade
> is so much easier via providing self-contained images.
>
> So, yes, I would absolutely love to see application level containers, or
> such a slick framework built around the great jail solution we already
> have. Passing around containers as a single binary package for FreeBSD -
> one may dream ;-)
>
> Regards,
> Robert
>
>
> On 13.04.23 17:43, Mario Marietto wrote:
> > For sure not everything,but something that is very requested and that it
> > has given a solid proof to be a valid and robust tool. I think Docker
> > has all these requisites.
> >
>
>
>

-- 
Mario.