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

111–118 of 118 posts

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

#111

Post by hks0 »

mst wrote: post #105
hks0 wrote: post #56

I did something (slightly) similar via proot, called Bag [1], which I must have not described as a docker alternative: It has nothing to do with cgroups, and the cli deviates from that of docker's. The backstory: To bypass internet censorship and deep packet inspection, I had written a proxy chain solution masquerading itself as plain html traffic. I needed it constantly running everywhere I went, but I didn't want t…

I managed to coax my 8" tablet turned horizontal to give me about 80x22 at a size I could actually read. Combine that with a ~10" bluetooth keyboard that fits comfortably in my leather jacket's inside pockets and I get to leave the house without carrying a bag and still sit and write code in the back corner of a handy beer garden. Turns out to be surprisingly productive as well, probably because there's just enough e…

True! A tablet and an ext-keyboard do a much better job (Although I wrote bag.sh out of boredom while stuck in a beer-less airport waiting for a delayed flight; I hope I won't have to actively plan for this setup again)

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

#112

Post by skissane »

nucleardog wrote: post #110
skissane wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why use Docker Desktop is beyond me. I lived through a failed attempt to migrate from Docker Desktop for Mac to an open source alternative (minikube+portainer, IIRC). A lot of test scripts developers relied on – to run parts of the integration test suite on their laptops for debugging – broke, because Docker Desktop for Mac went to a lot of effort to make macOS look like you were running Docker on Linux, whereas th…

The reason Docker Desktop for Mac looks like you're running Docker on Linux is because... you are. It's running docker in a linux VM for you. Similar issues in our environment, and I managed to swap everything over to Rancher Desktop fairly seamlessly as it does the exact same thing. It runs a Linux VM and if you select the "dockerd (moby)" container engine it runs a copy of docker inside of it. So you get a socket w…

> The reason Docker Desktop for Mac looks like you're running Docker on Linux is because... you are. It's running docker in a linux VM for you.

Yes, but that wasn't what I was talking about. Docker Desktop for Mac goes to a lot of trouble to hide the fact that there are two different virtual filesystems involved (Linux vs macOS) and two different networking stacks too. That means scripts which run on Docker for Linux and do stuff involving filesystem/network integration between the host and the container will often work without change on Docker Desktop for Mac. In my past experience, open source alternatives don't offer as seamless integration, they don't do as good a job of hiding the fact that there are two different virtual filesystems and networking stacks, so those kinds of scripts are less likely to work.

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

#113

Post by gosub100 »

Asaf51 wrote: post #86
gosub100 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm bringing overlayfs to people at my company to save time on a lenghty CI process, and they are in awe at the speedup. But after demo-ing it to a few people I realized they could just use / (I could have brought them) docker.

How overlayfs speeds up CI processes?

Huge (32gb) git repo full of junk and small files. No power to change it. Created a cron job that updates and rebuilds every 24hrs. Clients can clone it instantly with overlay instead of a 30m checkout and build each time. Not to mention disk space savings

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

#114

Post by taskforcegemini »

random3 wrote: post #19

I love these. Been a fan of minimal bash stuff. Here's a proof of concept for a intra-cluster load balancer in 40 lines of bash done during a hackathon I organized to promote distributed infra with Docker, Mesos, etc. about a decade ago https://github.com/cell-os/metal-cell/blob/master/discovery/... I likely lost it, but I had a redundand and distributed reverse SSH tunnel based colo-to-cloud transfer tool. Shell Fu…

shell-fu.org is great, would like to see comments of other users though

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

#115

Post by mst »

hks0 wrote: post #111
mst wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I managed to coax my 8" tablet turned horizontal to give me about 80x22 at a size I could actually read. Combine that with a ~10" bluetooth keyboard that fits comfortably in my leather jacket's inside pockets and I get to leave the house without carrying a bag and still sit and write code in the back corner of a handy beer garden. Turns out to be surprisingly productive as well, probably because there's just enough e…

True! A tablet and an ext-keyboard do a much better job (Although I wrote bag.sh out of boredom while stuck in a beer-less airport waiting for a delayed flight; I hope I won't have to actively plan for this setup again)

I have a stack of Thinkpad Tablet 2 bluetooth keyboards (though it's getting a bit low, will have to find somebody on ebay or whatever that still has some again soonish) - they're capable of being paired to more than one device (I also use them with the tablet half of my Helix 2) and have a built-in stand which takes my 8" tablet just as well as it did the Tablet 2 itself back when I was using that.

So had I ended up in the same situation as you I would probably have done similar, but with an added undercurrent of "Matt, you idiot, how did you manage to forget to put the keyboard in your pocket before you left?!"

(still a neat hack on your part, mind, no question there, but I'm very much glad I've optimised by standard "leaving the house" loadout so inflicting the same thing on myself is at least *less* likely ;)

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

#117

Post by nucleardog »

skissane wrote: post #112
nucleardog wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason Docker Desktop for Mac looks like you're running Docker on Linux is because... you are. It's running docker in a linux VM for you. Similar issues in our environment, and I managed to swap everything over to Rancher Desktop fairly seamlessly as it does the exact same thing. It runs a Linux VM and if you select the "dockerd (moby)" container engine it runs a copy of docker inside of it. So you get a socket w…

> The reason Docker Desktop for Mac looks like you're running Docker on Linux is because... you are. It's running docker in a linux VM for you. Yes, but that wasn't what I was talking about. Docker Desktop for Mac goes to a lot of trouble to hide the fact that there are two different virtual filesystems involved (Linux vs macOS) and two different networking stacks too. That means scripts which run on Docker for Linux…

Don't know your use case that precisely so can't say if it does a "good job" versus just "a job", and it's been a while since I've used Docker Desktop or macos (though about half of our dev team is using Rancher Desktop on macos right now), but as far as I'm aware it's essentially identical.

FS: Rancher mounts your `/Users/$USER` folder in the VM that Docker is running in. It supports virtiofs on macos (not sure if it's used by default though). As far as I can tell, this replicates the default Docker Desktop setup.

Networking Container -> Host: Connecting to `host.docker.internal` works as expected. On the host I can listen on a port on my host (`nc -l -p 1234`) and connect from a container (`docker run -it --rm alpine nc host.docker.internal 1234`).

Networking Host -> Container: Exposed ports work as I would expect. I can run a container with an exposed port (`docker run -it --rm -p 1234:1234 alpine nc -l -p 1234`) and connect from my host (`telnet localhost 1234`). I can't connect directly onto the docker network bridge (though I'm not sure if that was ever supported on OSX?).

No skin in the game either way here, just with a bunch of people suggesting buying OrbStack (which is OSX only), figured I'd throw Rancher Desktop out as a potentially viable cross-platform alternative that's also free and OSS.

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

#118

Post by notnmeyer »

jml78 wrote: post #11
skissane wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why use Docker Desktop is beyond me. I lived through a failed attempt to migrate from Docker Desktop for Mac to an open source alternative (minikube+portainer, IIRC). A lot of test scripts developers relied on – to run parts of the integration test suite on their laptops for debugging – broke, because Docker Desktop for Mac went to a lot of effort to make macOS look like you were running Docker on Linux, whereas th…

I would look at Orbstack. Yes it costs money but it is pretty great. Your situation sounds very similar to the company I work for. Orbstack has been a drop in replacement except one issue. Any dev using IPv6 assignment on their home network has issues where pods try to hit external dns because it tries to use IPv6 and I don’t think the Orbstack k8s instance is dual stack. There are hacks to get around it but if I cou…

i pay for orbstack. makes life better.
Post reply on HN