Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
1–10 of 54 posts
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#2Used to be that people would wait ages for applications to get a "Dark mode", I find it funny how now we have to wait for "light mode" instead.
Even so, good to see that arriving. I've been experimenting recently and I've found podman very useful compared to my previous experiences trying to do containery stuff. ( Admittedly a very long time ago now which burned me and put me off trying again for a long time. )
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#3Podman Destop is surprisingly bad on MacOS.
It has a kind of proxy-like/userspace network driver.
That means your tcp connection shown in a host system through `netstat`.
ICPM is not implemented and always returns success. Try running `ping 66.0.0.0` or any other non-existing IP from the container and see.
At that moment I'll continue using, well, podman in a Linux VM running UTM.
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#4Used to be that people would wait ages for applications to get a "Dark mode", I find it funny how now we have to wait for "light mode" instead. Even so, good to see that arriving. I've been experimenting recently and I've found podman very useful compared to my previous experiences trying to do containery stuff. ( Admittedly a very long time ago now which burned me and put me off trying again for a long time. )
Like wayland, podman was one of those things that took a lot of "I'll give it another shot? Nope, not ready" before I could switch.
Lately the only real incompatibility I run in to with podman is that the handling of `RUN --mount=type=secret` in a Containerfile/Dockerfile is a bit broken (https://github.com/containers/buildah/issues/5282).
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#5I'm a fan of Rancher Desktop -- it has everything integrated and working out of the box, it can even provide the CLI tools like docker, kubectl or helm for you.
On the other hand, in Podman Desktop, you can't even use an image from Podman Desktop docker in Podman Desktop kubernetes without extra steps. I'd recommend it only if you want Podman specifically. If you just want to run docker and/or kubernetes, I'd go with Rancher Desktop.
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#6I'm a fan of Rancher Desktop -- it has everything integrated and working out of the box, it can even provide the CLI tools like docker, kubectl or helm for you. On the other hand, in Podman Desktop, you can't even use an image from Podman Desktop docker in Podman Desktop kubernetes without extra steps. I'd recommend it only if you want Podman specifically. If you just want to run docker and/or kubernetes, I'd go with…
If you want something more general purpose, Canonical Multipass has a good sample docker setup. Annoyingly, This is the only Canonical product I can recommend at this point.
I use it with MacOS. I assume WSL is a better choice for Windows laptops, and there’s no reason to add a VM to get docker on Linux.
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#7I'm a fan of Rancher Desktop -- it has everything integrated and working out of the box, it can even provide the CLI tools like docker, kubectl or helm for you. On the other hand, in Podman Desktop, you can't even use an image from Podman Desktop docker in Podman Desktop kubernetes without extra steps. I'd recommend it only if you want Podman specifically. If you just want to run docker and/or kubernetes, I'd go with…
The Rancher Desktop VM with k8s enabled has about 10% continuous cpu usage at idle on my 2019 MBP. I really wish there was something I could do to reduce that.
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#8Podman Destop is surprisingly bad on MacOS. It has a kind of proxy-like/userspace network driver. That means your tcp connection shown in a host system through `netstat`. ICPM is not implemented and always returns success. Try running `ping 66.0.0.0` or any other non-existing IP from the container and see. At that moment I'll continue using, well, podman in a Linux VM running UTM.
If you haven’t tried it yet, I can recommend OrbStack[1] for container things on macOS.
I don’t use it for anything more than spinning up dev DBs locally, but I know it supports Kubernetes in some form or another.
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#9Used to be that people would wait ages for applications to get a "Dark mode", I find it funny how now we have to wait for "light mode" instead. Even so, good to see that arriving. I've been experimenting recently and I've found podman very useful compared to my previous experiences trying to do containery stuff. ( Admittedly a very long time ago now which burned me and put me off trying again for a long time. )
Lol, I could not even guess that the "light mode" was the opposite of dark theme, not the term for being a "light" as opposed to "heavy". So I was so surprised to see only the description "that light mode is available now, and you can turn it on". What is light mode? Not a "mode", it is a "theme".
Re: Podman Desktop 1.11: Light mode, Kubernetes features, macOS improvements
#10Podman Destop is surprisingly bad on MacOS. It has a kind of proxy-like/userspace network driver. That means your tcp connection shown in a host system through `netstat`. ICPM is not implemented and always returns success. Try running `ping 66.0.0.0` or any other non-existing IP from the container and see. At that moment I'll continue using, well, podman in a Linux VM running UTM.
If you haven’t tried it yet, I can recommend OrbStack[1] for container things on macOS. I don’t use it for anything more than spinning up dev DBs locally, but I know it supports Kubernetes in some form or another. [1] https://orbstack.dev
I never used podman desktop but I LOVE OrbStack.
Compared to docker desktop it's night and day, it is so much more performant and I never had an issue with it, totally recommend.