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

LXD is now under Canonical

linuxcontainers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 224 posts

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#141

Post by egberts1 »

3np wrote: post #102
generalizations wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Can confirm alpine works fine as a libvirtd/kvm/qemu hypervisor, fwiw. The one gotcha to be aware of here is that libvirtd as of now has two ways to be operated: Either run just the monolithic libvirtd service, or individual subsystems like virtstoraged. Trying to do both at the same time will cause issues. Due to the limitations of OpenRC compared to systemd for interdependent and interoperating system services like…

Oh yeah, I hated that when systemd would kill (restart) my libvirtd daemon (and my various VMs/containers whenever I adjusted my systemd-controlled nftable.

Monolithic libvirtd (which is disabling the systemd libvirt) is the way to go.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#142

Post by stephenr »

npteljes wrote: post #131
yrro wrote: post #121

I really liked lxc but then one day it turned out that it was replaced by lxd and you had to install Ubuntu to use it and I switched to docker (now on podman).

Do you really have to use Ubuntu for LXC? My (Debian-based) Proxmox has LXC capability, and it's easy to find instructions to other Linuxes, like so: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LXC . Is there something I'm missing?

I think they're referring to the Linux Containers project focussing more heavily on LXD and pushing it as a better "front end" to LXC - but LXD has not been available directly on Debian until Bookworm was released .. a month ago.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#143

Post by kramerger »

Not surprising as the LXD team was the only part of Linux containers community that actually achieved something. Stéphane Graber presented a exciting new functionality every month or so on his YT channel.

With that said, LXD currently builds from source and can install on Debian without needing snap. Canonical's VM counterpart "multipass" while on github cannot (easily) be built from source code and requires snap to install.

I very much hope LXD does not go that route.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#144

Post by mekster »

hkt wrote: post #127
sdeziel wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

`snap refresh --hold` will hold updates indefinitely https://snapcraft.io/docs/keeping-snaps-up-to-date#heading--...

I suspect the thing people find offensive is that this is not the default

If the reason of snapping is that their preference isn't the default, life must be quite tough for them.

If there's an option, live with it and change it.

I can't see what's so destructive about snaps. It's probably another echo chamber when people find a common target to yell at.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#145

Post by mekster »

Freeaqingme wrote: post #138
botanical wrote: post #88

Ubuntu is already the major contributor to LXD. What's peoples aversion to snaps in the thread? For me it makes for a stable system that allows me to run the latest version of apps in a confined space, it's actually perfect

Have you ever used it in a production / server environment? One of the problems I have with Snap is that it does auto-updates. So you can't control when updates are performed. Furthermore, you can only use Canonical's repository. So if you want to use a custom build of some sort, you can't - unless you pay big bucks to Canonical.

It's funny because I found a way to disable auto update for snaps in 2 minutes by Googling and half of the angry voices in gere are because of auto updates. What is going on?

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#146

Post by hospitalJail »

rpcope1 wrote: post #72

Kind of sucks to see LXD get pulled from Linux Containers. Stéphane's (and the rest of the Linux Containers team) work has been incredible, and honestly it gets slept on way too much. LXC containers have been incredibly powerful and useful for me, though I never bothered to learn LXD. I have this bizzare intuition that Canonical is watching Red Hat, and that there's a non-zero possibility of them aping the whole pay…

It was like 15 years ago, but I though Canonical threw some red flags when they had that terrible ubuntu GUI update to have a ribbon.

Completely unnecessary, 100% visual, and made everything worse.

I bailed from them shortly after that, even with the option to use other GUIs. As Linux desktop has matured, it hasnt been necessary to go back to Ubuntu.

I imagine most of Canonical's power comes from users who don't try new things, or corporations who are too big to change anything.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#147

Post by lproven »

phs wrote: post #46
chubot wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have tried it, and reviewed it.

I kinda like the window tiling, but it's still GNOME and GNOME is still a pain.

As a cleaned-up Ubuntu, I like Zinc.

https://teejeetech.com/2022/05/07/zinc-22-04/

Ubuntu, with the smallest cleanest but richest desktop on Linux -- Xfce -- and neither Snap nor Flatpak. Instead, `deb-get` which finds and installs native DEB packages, configures the repos for you, manages updates and so on.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#148

Post by hospitalJail »

severino wrote: post #112
botanical wrote: post #88

Ubuntu is already the major contributor to LXD. What's peoples aversion to snaps in the thread? For me it makes for a stable system that allows me to run the latest version of apps in a confined space, it's actually perfect

> What's peoples aversion to snaps in the thread? In my case, because it's being forced and replacing applications that worked out of the box with applications with issues. Firefox, for example. After it became a snap, you'll see a message telling you to close Firefox so it could update itself (?) but simply closing it is not enough and, last time I checked, it looked like you had to run some command line to solve it…

Eh Firefox probably isnt the best example due to security being so important.

Something like an IDE is a better example since its not much of an attack vector.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#149

Post by sherr »

n3storm wrote: post #87
zuhsetaqi wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think this is great?

It never worked on Debian. If you search for info on LXC site and was confusing which docs and commands are for LXC and which ones are for LXD.

LXD is now supported in the latest Debian stable release "bookworm". There should be no confusion on LXD vs LXC commands.

Re: LXD is now under Canonical

#150

Post by lproven »

hospitalJail wrote: post #146
rpcope1 wrote: post #72

Kind of sucks to see LXD get pulled from Linux Containers. Stéphane's (and the rest of the Linux Containers team) work has been incredible, and honestly it gets slept on way too much. LXC containers have been incredibly powerful and useful for me, though I never bothered to learn LXD. I have this bizzare intuition that Canonical is watching Red Hat, and that there's a non-zero possibility of them aping the whole pay…

It was like 15 years ago, but I though Canonical threw some red flags when they had that terrible ubuntu GUI update to have a ribbon. Completely unnecessary, 100% visual, and made everything worse. I bailed from them shortly after that, even with the option to use other GUIs. As Linux desktop has matured, it hasnt been necessary to go back to Ubuntu. I imagine most of Canonical's power comes from users who don't try…

> that terrible ubuntu GUI update to have a ribbon.

Which one was that?

No version of Ubuntu I've ever seen has ribbons. This is one of the reasons I like it.

Do you mean when they switched from Unity to GNOME?

Post reply on HN