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

Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 122 posts

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#111

Post by seanhunter »

bgribble wrote: post #97

My team is being hit with really extreme pricing changes for Docker Desktop. I have never been clear on why we even wanted DD (I guess right now it’s the easiest path to getting x86 containers running on M1 Macs?). Alternatives like Podman or even a more extreme solution like this one are becoming more and more attractive.

On an M1 Mac I believe that rancher desktop (mentioned in a sibling thread) is the way to go if you are going the kubernetes route. Because I only have a really simple usecase and want something just like docker I've been using lima[1] which you can just install with homebrew and set up an alias and then pretend you're using docker. I have had some problems where in long-running processes with a lot of network usage in the container after a while I get some network timeouts. I'm not sure whether that's a problem with lima or qemu or what else might actually be causing it. But basically as a dev experience it works fine even on a pretty underpowered laptop (which is what I'm using it on in this case).

[1] https://medium.com/nttlabs/containerd-and-lima-39e0b64d2a59

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#112

Post by mumblemumble »

renonce wrote: post #70
mumblemumble wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only a few lines later we have the first paragraph of the GNU GPL, which includes the sentence "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed." IANAL, but I would guess that that implies that the author is in violation of the GPL for adding that restriction?

Adding such a restrction does not have to change GPL itself, it’s just another sentence applied as part of the license by the author.

The lines were added to the top of the license. Changes don't need to go into the middle of the file to count as a modification.

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#113

Post by raydiatian »

robertlagrant wrote: post #110
raydiatian wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This a bazillion times. It’s not great but it’s good enough, next problem. If only JavaScript devs could take a lesson from this and stop making new frameworks

Here's my reply to someone else saying this listing the relatively few frameworks over the decades: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32995128

> Do you really consider this an endless stream of new JS frameworks popping up every day?

“Everyday” in the case of js frameworks has always been hyperbolic to me, but I think something that perhaps isn’t unfair is “once you’ve mastered a given framework, there’s a new one you have to learn.”

It certainly seems to be more development than in other languages. Seems. Seems. Seems. I could be wrong about that though.

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#114

Post by oaththrowaway »

Arnavion wrote: post #73
oaththrowaway wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see no mention of the word racist on that page. Can you point it out?

I don't know if it's its "most prominent" usage, but it gets used to replace the two g's in the N-word.

Censoring the N word is racist?

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#115

Post by gexla »

interactivecode wrote: post #100
gexla wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, because there could be a security vulnerability in any one of those 100 lines of the Bash script. ;)

People here usually flip out about security when there is a 1 line bash install script. The world is a scary place when you don’t trust anyone

I think the issue is mainly with the principle of asking someone to run a shell script to do an installation. People who are security-minded, will check the script first. Those same people know that most won't do that.

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#118

Post by robertlagrant »

raydiatian wrote: post #113
robertlagrant wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's my reply to someone else saying this listing the relatively few frameworks over the decades: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32995128

> Do you really consider this an endless stream of new JS frameworks popping up every day? “Everyday” in the case of js frameworks has always been hyperbolic to me, but I think something that perhaps isn’t unfair is “once you’ve mastered a given framework, there’s a new one you have to learn.” It certainly seems to be more development than in other languages. Seems. Seems. Seems. I could be wrong about that though.

I would say that "running a process in the cloud" is a little more egregious :) [0].

[0] https://landscape.cncf.io/?project=hosted,member,no

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#119

Post by pnt12 »

bgribble wrote: post #97

My team is being hit with really extreme pricing changes for Docker Desktop. I have never been clear on why we even wanted DD (I guess right now it’s the easiest path to getting x86 containers running on M1 Macs?). Alternatives like Podman or even a more extreme solution like this one are becoming more and more attractive.

The basic license is 5 dollars a month. I think that's a low price, if you consider the time cost of exploring alternatives.

Additionally, it's a shame that the docker company struggles to profit from their revolutionary technology: operations, devops and infra looks completely different than 10 years ago and they played a big role in it.

Re: Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015)

#120

Post by dev_0 »

pnt12 wrote: post #119
bgribble wrote: post #97

My team is being hit with really extreme pricing changes for Docker Desktop. I have never been clear on why we even wanted DD (I guess right now it’s the easiest path to getting x86 containers running on M1 Macs?). Alternatives like Podman or even a more extreme solution like this one are becoming more and more attractive.

The basic license is 5 dollars a month. I think that's a low price, if you consider the time cost of exploring alternatives. Additionally, it's a shame that the docker company struggles to profit from their revolutionary technology: operations, devops and infra looks completely different than 10 years ago and they played a big role in it.

Docker is successful because it's free....they provide the common benefits...
Post reply on HN