Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android container in Chrome OS

chromium.googlesource.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 140 posts

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#61

Post by cyphar »

lmm wrote: post #49
kenny_r wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you tell us exactly which part of Docker you think is "quite closed"? Docker (Moby) is licensed under Apache 2.0, and so is containerd, the default runtime.

The tight coupling to systemd which refuses to standardise any "internal" interfaces and insists on taking over the entirety of one's system. You can't run Docker if you're not running systemd, you can't run systemd if you're not running udevd and logd and so on, you can't run those if you're not running not just Linux but essentially only the "current" version of Linux, and if you ever implement a compatible replace…

None of what you said is true. Docker does not depend on systemd (there is only one piece of systemd-specific code in the entire project and it's inside runc -- that piece of code is not used by default and also has a non-systemd implementation that is more stable than the systemd one).

I have historically had many problems with Docker and how the project is governed. I'm also no fan of systemd. But there's no point in literally spreading lies.

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#62

Post by fauigerzigerk »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #53
reggieband wrote: post #26

I just had a vision of all major OS projects providing developer containers for their projects. Like, you could just pull the latest Firefox dev container and run a single command to have a running debuggable app. I know one of the major pains we have when on-boarding new people is the whole dance to get to that first working build / first meaningful change. I can imagine this being significantly more simple if a wor…

You know, there once was a time when we did everything in folders and didn't need the overhead of containerization just to keep well behaved things from stepping all over each other and breaking everything. Like all progress in computing we've reinvented the wheel, but now with a few additional layers of abstraction and the consequential performance degradation.

>there once was a time when we did everything in folders

Not on Unix though. "Stepping all over each other" sounds like the guiding design principle behind Unix's folder structure and dynamic library loading aproach.

Docker's isolation is far more than just isolation of files and folders. It's more like J2EE for Linux :)

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#63

Post by cyphar »

a1exanderjung wrote: post #2

Interesting to see Chrome OS adopt process compartmentalization techniques such as this, specifically adopting `cgroups'. Afaik, cgroups isn't enabled by default and requires customizing the kernel before you can enable it. At the very least, container tools such as Docker require symlinks too to invoke chroot-like filesystem isolation and this is also not available. It'll interesting to see where they'll go with thi…

> Afaik, cgroups isn't enabled by default and requires customizing the kernel before you can enable it.

cgroups are supported on every distribution's kernel I've ever touched in the past 5 years. Not to mention that they were originally developed (in part) by Google, though they had a different purpose back then. They're also a requirement for systemd to work properly, so any distribution that needs to run systemd will have them enabled in their kernels.

> At the very least, container tools such as Docker require symlinks too to invoke chroot-like filesystem isolation and this is also not available.

Docker (or rather runc) uses pivot_root and mount namespaces to implement filesystem isolation -- not symlinks (though I'm not sure what you mean here to be frank). These features have been in Linux for more than 10 years.

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#64

Post by sctb »

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #34
kuschku wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question was how to get it working on a non-ChromeOS device and system, and you provided instructions for ChromeOS. I don't believe they'll work, but hey, I can try it. On my self-built desktop, running Ubuntu 17.10, the following result happens: zsh: command not found: google-chrome-stable zsh: command not found: vmc So, again, how do I get any of this running on an actual desktop OS, on a usual computer? You ju…

With ChromeOS 67 you have gnu/Linux and Android in a container. But only on a pixel book at this point.

Personal insults like this will get your account banned. Please follow the guidelines instead.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#65

Post by krzyk »

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #11
quantumwoke wrote: post #4

I can't wait for the day that phone operating systems development environments are a docker pull away. It's encouraging to see Google approaching my ideal workflow using containerisation. Apple systems are great until you run into the garden walls and are forced to use closed-source single platform software like Xcode. Chrome OS and Android are a lot more open in many respects. Hopefully efforts like this continue wi…

You have it with ChromeOS 67. Docker without having to put in developer.

What do you mean by "developer" in that sentence? Mostly when I see "developer" it means a person that develops code - a programmer, but here it doesn't make sense in your sentence.

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#66

Post by krzyk »

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #15
lima wrote: post #5

I wonder how hard it would be to get this working on, say, Fedora... At the very least, one would need to replace what sounds like a surfaceflinger wayland proxy.

Very easy with ChromeOS 67. Just boot, launch a chrome window and type Ctrl alt t. Then type vmc start dev. Then you can use whatever distribution you want as you have full GNU/Linux. Only works on Pixelbooks but Google will extend and will share more at Google IO. You can even package up gnu/Linux applications. One click and they run in a container but on a second Linux kernel. So Android shares the ChromeOS kernel…

OK, but he was asking how to do it in Fedora, not ChromeOS.

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#67

Post by kuschku »

shkkmo wrote: post #54
kuschku wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question was how to get it working WITHOUT ChromeOS 67, on a normal desktop OS, such as fedora or ubuntu.

Well then the answer is that you can't. Edit: Why would you expect to be able to use a Chrome OS feature on other operating systems?

No one's expecting to be able to use it right away. But maybe a Chrome OS (which is a modified Gentoo, after all) feature can be ported to another Linux distro.

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#68

Post by devonbleak »

krzyk wrote: post #65
jacksmith21006 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it with ChromeOS 67. Docker without having to put in developer.

What do you mean by "developer" in that sentence? Mostly when I see "developer" it means a person that develops code - a programmer, but here it doesn't make sense in your sentence.

developer mode in ChromeOS

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#69

Post by jaredmosley »

krzyk wrote: post #65
jacksmith21006 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it with ChromeOS 67. Docker without having to put in developer.

What do you mean by "developer" in that sentence? Mostly when I see "developer" it means a person that develops code - a programmer, but here it doesn't make sense in your sentence.

I believe he's saying: without having to put the chromebook into developer mode. A mode that allows developers to do more on their chromebook, such as using a terminal, which is not accessible in regular mode.

Re: Android container in Chrome OS

#70

Post by terhechte »

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #48

By looking at the comments this article is creating confusion. So I thought I might provide an overview of the two things happening with ChromeOS. 1) Android apps have been enabled on many Chromebooks using a locked container that shares a Linux kernel with ChromeOS. You do NOT have access to the container mechanism that is being used. It ONLY supports a container locked by Google. It is NOT using Docker also. This i…

Hey! Thanks for the detailed reply. What I don't get is: ChromeOS is open source, so why do all these things only work on certain hardware? Isn't there a way to install ChromeOS on any laptop today and already use Anroid apps et al, without said machine being a Pixelbook?

I have a machine that is not an official ChromeBook and I'd love to install ChromeOS with Android support to try it out. But I've done quite some google-fu and could not figure out whether this is possible (and how I'd set that up).

Post reply on HN