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).
LXD is now under Canonical
121–130 of 224 posts
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why LXD over podman? I've found podman to be a pretty great docker lite.
LXD isn't an alternative to podman. Podman is meant to run 'application containers', where each container has just one running process. LXD is meant to run 'system containers' where each container is a full Linux distribution with an init system and (possibly) multiple daemons. LXD containers are like light-weight VMs. Unlike VMs, LXD containers share the host kernel. You could run podman or other OCI containers insi…
I briefly used LXD once when I needed a full system inside a container.
But podman also supports systemd inside a container and along with macvlan networking you can pretty much build an "independent" container acting almost as a VM.
Would LXD provide any other advantages/differences to that?
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you pick "pip" instead of a specific Linux distro it gives you instructions without a snap.
I'm afraid that this is only a wrapper around the snap. I quote from that page > If you have any Certbot packages installed using an OS package manager like apt, dnf, or yum, you should remove them before installing the Certbot snap to ensure that when you run the command certbot the snap is used rather than the installation from your OS package manager.
That doesn't mean the other means wrap snap. It just means in order to truly install via snap, you should remove the same package installed via other means before
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#124Earlier 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.
Add a couple from Java side as well, after all the drama, Microsoft is now an OpenJDK contributor and has their own distribution, after acquiring jClarity.
And a couple from Rust side, after the Mozilla layoffs.
And a couple of ISO C++ members.
And their own Azure Linux distribution went out of preview at BUILD 2023.
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it gets us closer to being able to run native Office and Directx apps on Linux I'm all for it. Snap enforcement already scared me away from Ubuntu for the most part anyway.
Were I Microsoft, a custom Linux would be exclusively for server side benefits. Better/more integrated Azure tooling, native VS Code Remote Development containers, improved telemetry, native account/security provisioning, etc. No reason to tempt fate with better cross platform desktop efforts.
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#126Stéphane 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.
It is really sad that more people aren't aware of LXD, because it is a really good solution of a number of projects and it's really well done. On Snap... Even if you like Snaps packages, I can't imagine that you'd feel like it's a good choice for LXD. For a browser or email client, sure it's a solution, I suppose, but for thing like LXD it just adds an entire level over complexity that doesn't help. I'd go so far at…
`snap refresh --hold` will hold updates indefinitely
https://snapcraft.io/docs/keeping-snaps-up-to-date#heading--...
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is really sad that more people aren't aware of LXD, because it is a really good solution of a number of projects and it's really well done. On Snap... Even if you like Snaps packages, I can't imagine that you'd feel like it's a good choice for LXD. For a browser or email client, sure it's a solution, I suppose, but for thing like LXD it just adds an entire level over complexity that doesn't help. I'd go so far at…
`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
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#128I 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).
lxc was not replaced by lxd. they are separate projects, neither of which require ubuntu.
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#129Stéphane 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
I'm in literally the same boat, on Debian now because of snaps. Their other homegrown stuff were mostly out of the way, like Unity or upstart, but snap was just really annoying with how it's integrated into the system.
Re: LXD is now under Canonical
#130Does that mean that lxd is dead?
I think this is the correct question to ask. Or perhaps, does it mean Canonical is reducing its support for the lxd project?