Live data from Hacker News

LXD is now under Canonical

linuxcontainers.org

41–50 of 224 posts

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#41

LXD is really great software. The majority of the contributions already come from canonical, so I doubt this will make much difference in the trajectory of the project. I will say that I prefer running LXD on NixOS hosts where it isn't packaged as a snap. Hopefully canonical doesn't somehow break that.

Why LXD over podman? I've found podman to be a pretty great docker lite.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#42

Very soon Microsoft will acquire Canonical for at least $40 billion. The reasons: * Ubuntu powers the overwhelming majority of Azure workloads (both customer and internal) * Nearly all Linux applications and tooling target Ubuntu first (or at the very least) * Github, VSCode. The missing piece is the actual runtime operating system. Ubuntu. * Canonical employs nearly all the remaining core enterprise open-source deve…

Unless Microsoft has an Activision-sized amount of cash burning a hole in its pocket, that feels unlikely. Seems far easier/likelier to make a Microsoft branded Debian than to go all-in-on Ubuntu. Maybe I could take the aqui-hire angle, but how many Ubuntu devs would want to stay with Microsoft?

I'm not hip to all the big names in open source development, but I know Lennart Pottering and Guido van Rossum both ended up at Microsoft, so they might be able keep a few other engineers around.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moved completely off ubuntu after snaps were introduced. Sticking with gentoo now because it’s one of a few distros that doesn’t try to control what software you have to use.

Me too. Turns out alpine is better for server vms for my use case and cachyos is better for desktop for my use case as wrll (at least possibly until i figure out nixos)

I recently transitioned on the desktop from Debian then-testing to Alpine edge. I switched for a newer kernel (4.9 to 6.1 for recent fixes to busted microcode -- little annoyances around charging and the touchpad) but I like a lot of things about it: quick install, up-to-date repos, easy-to-understand init, battery lasts longer...

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#44
post #39

Very soon Microsoft will acquire Canonical for at least $40 billion. The reasons: * Ubuntu powers the overwhelming majority of Azure workloads (both customer and internal) * Nearly all Linux applications and tooling target Ubuntu first (or at the very least) * Github, VSCode. The missing piece is the actual runtime operating system. Ubuntu. * Canonical employs nearly all the remaining core enterprise open-source deve…

Lena Khan wouldn't let Microsoft acquire a paperclip manufacturing plant right now, do you think this merger would ever be allowed?

For anyone else confused, I think the parent comment means Lina Khan. I was struggling to see what a film director had to do with this.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#45

Very soon Microsoft will acquire Canonical for at least $40 billion. The reasons: * Ubuntu powers the overwhelming majority of Azure workloads (both customer and internal) * Nearly all Linux applications and tooling target Ubuntu first (or at the very least) * Github, VSCode. The missing piece is the actual runtime operating system. Ubuntu. * Canonical employs nearly all the remaining core enterprise open-source deve…

That sounds considerably more expensive than Microsoft's usual "embrace, extend, extinguish".

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#46
post #28

Stéphane Graber's work is fantastic and LXD had a lot of potential. But Canonical managed to drive me away from it with that abomination called Snap and its auto updates that could bring down a cluster without warning.

Yeah I'm setting up a Debian 12 Bookworm machine right now after ~13 years of being an Ubuntu user So far it's very snappy! My Ubuntu 18.04 machine somehow "rotted" in ways that previous installs didn't -- everything became slow and janky, sorta like Windows And I specifically installed 18.04 in 2021, to avoid Snaps But now it looks like Debian will work great

As a stepping stone out of Ubuntu, Pop_OS! has been pleasant and snap-free.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless Microsoft has an Activision-sized amount of cash burning a hole in its pocket, that feels unlikely. Seems far easier/likelier to make a Microsoft branded Debian than to go all-in-on Ubuntu. Maybe I could take the aqui-hire angle, but how many Ubuntu devs would want to stay with Microsoft?

I'm not hip to all the big names in open source development, but I know Lennart Pottering and Guido van Rossum both ended up at Microsoft, so they might be able keep a few other engineers around.

What is Lennart doing at Microsoft?

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#48
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> does this mean LXD is fucked It is either way. Docker / kubernetes is eating it up. There aren't as many LXD users as they'd hope. Oh and he does work for Canonical.

> Docker / kubernetes is eating it up Is LXD's purpose the same as Docker/Kubernetes? I use both LXD and Docker and to me they are tools that use the same technology (containerzation) but for different purposes. Docker is for stateless containers, used to containerize services. LXD is for stateful containers, used to containerize operating systems. LXD can also run VMs while Docker can't. I think about LXD as a sort…

> Is LXD's purpose the same as Docker/Kubernetes?

It did occupy the same space including Proxmox.

Back then KVM, Proxmox, VMWare, OpenVZ, LXD, etc were all ways of virtualization.

Whilst it's not exactly the same purpose most companies have or have been shifting to docker and kubernetes and in the cloud vs running their own VM infrastructure.

> Docker is for stateless containers

Tell that to people that run databases with docker and kubernetes. It is a thing and even commercial products are built that way.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#49
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Docker / kubernetes is eating it up Is LXD's purpose the same as Docker/Kubernetes? I use both LXD and Docker and to me they are tools that use the same technology (containerzation) but for different purposes. Docker is for stateless containers, used to containerize services. LXD is for stateful containers, used to containerize operating systems. LXD can also run VMs while Docker can't. I think about LXD as a sort…

> Is LXD's purpose the same as Docker/Kubernetes? It did occupy the same space including Proxmox. Back then KVM, Proxmox, VMWare, OpenVZ, LXD, etc were all ways of virtualization. Whilst it's not exactly the same purpose most companies have or have been shifting to docker and kubernetes and in the cloud vs running their own VM infrastructure. > Docker is for stateless containers Tell that to people that run databases…

> Tell that to people that run databases with docker and kubernetes

To be honest my original message wasn't clear enough: What I wanted to mean is that I like using Docker when I have a container image ready to run, "stateless" in the meaning that the image itself is unmodifiable and any changes to the image will be lost after a restart. (This doesn't include bind mounts, and stuff like that)

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moved completely off ubuntu after snaps were introduced. Sticking with gentoo now because it’s one of a few distros that doesn’t try to control what software you have to use.

Me too. Turns out alpine is better for server vms for my use case and cachyos is better for desktop for my use case as wrll (at least possibly until i figure out nixos)

Do you use alpine for the host os as well as the vms? Been concerned that musl would prove a handicap.

Also, can confirm void is amazing on the desktop.

Post reply on HN