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

81–90 of 118 posts

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

#81

Post by Brian_K_White »

Neywiny wrote: post #46

I like when repos say "not implemented yet" or "to-do" or "working on" and the last commit was years ago. Makes me feel better about not going back to my to-dos I drop through my code. (Not meaning to throw shade on this author, just finding it comforting)

I think it's good. I guess it's possible for something to be simply done, and you don't always have to have a bunch of next ideas, but I generally always have next ideas.

If there is always some next ideas then by definition you must always have todos that never get done. It should actually be the normal state of every single project.

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

#82

Post by WanderPanda »

notpushkin wrote: post #51
WanderPanda wrote: post #44

Makes me wonder why docker still didn't make it to the ubuntu/debian repositories. Would be such an easy net benefit

What do you mean? It's been there for years: https://packages.debian.org/docker.io It’s an old version, and I think it isn’t supported by Docker Inc (for the reasons mentioned in the sibling comment), but it’s there.

Damn good to know! Have been gaslit by the ever-changing docker install instructions. Of course it would be a lagging version, but I think the docker feature-set has converged years ago, why would I care any more about the docker version than e.g. about the version of grep?

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

#83

Post by thanatos519 »

Neywiny wrote: post #46

I like when repos say "not implemented yet" or "to-do" or "working on" and the last commit was years ago. Makes me feel better about not going back to my to-dos I drop through my code. (Not meaning to throw shade on this author, just finding it comforting)

Totall ok! As soon as the program does what I want, and my task is complete, I stop developing. Software is not my hobby.

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

#86

Post by Asaf51 »

gosub100 wrote: post #80
darkwater wrote: post #71

I wonder why Bocker makes the frontpage so often. Is Docker still that controversial even in 2024? Why people don't recognize that it actually brought something useful (mainly, software distribution and easy of "run everywhere") to the table?

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?

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

#88

Post by noufalibrahim »

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 guess a lot of us had stories like this. I needed to package a bunch of things into a single environment where a VM was unsuitable. I cooked up something using chroot, deb-bootstrap and make an installer using makeself. It created a mini debian inside /opt which held the software and all the dependencies I needed (mysql etc.). Worked pretty well and the company I made this for used it till they got acquired in 2016 or so.

More generally though, implementing a crude version of a larger application is one of the best ways of learning how things work inside it. I'm a big fan of the approach.

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

#89

Post by pmarreck »

skissane wrote: post #9
magic_hamster wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker Desktop on Mac is a handicapped, underprivileged mess. Docker cli for Mac with Colima is still underprivileged, but at least you can skip the bs license and Docker's gui. On Windows you can at least use Docker on WSL which works great. Why use Docker Desktop is beyond me.

> 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've heard from someone who would know that you should be using Orbstack.

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

#90

Post by juped »

oncallthrow wrote: post #79
darkwater wrote: post #71

I wonder why Bocker makes the frontpage so often. Is Docker still that controversial even in 2024? Why people don't recognize that it actually brought something useful (mainly, software distribution and easy of "run everywhere") to the table?

It hits the frontpage often because people assume that Docker is this super complex thing, but (at its most fundamental), it's actually quite elegant and understandable, which is interesting - a perfect HN story, in fact.

It is kinda complex, but all the complexity is in Linux, ~none is in 'Docker'.
Post reply on HN