Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2023 23:30:50 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Miguel C <miguelmclara@gmail.com> Cc: Mario Marietto <marietto2008@gmail.com>, Alejandro Imass <aimass@yabarana.com>, Paul Pathiakis <pathiaki2@yahoo.com>, "Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steve@sohara.org>, Tim Preston <tim@timpreston.net>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Docker Message-ID: <20230413233050.2f0046c3.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <CADGo8CXsCYCOi%2Bwk2ED7zpJdFQDhynzD0u1qFDUFS3RveS8wOg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20230329053443.6ADA6B6AFED5@dhcp-8e64.meeting.ietf.org> <CA%2B1FSij9j922Nvv1Vhn43HznwpyGT99UZsU674G9hHWzR=UhvQ@mail.gmail.com> <06be3a1e-9319-1a21-88b9-4f87328ee127@timpreston.net> <CA%2B1FSijc%2B-OLNsyFNdR=jP3VzMi4zUE92i5iv9Pfg6AryDy_KQ@mail.gmail.com> <34b4b76e-1c41-4cfb-9e86-856f01e8abc9@app.fastmail.com> <CA%2B1FSihVrJ8cZ4ZU6mMr0sKJsZ98V4fh2vpDLugw7MGj-%2BEBPg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2B1FSijL50mQ-HveBA4HZeNkSoaORv=aty-15nNLzn9amzY_nw@mail.gmail.com> <6002f636-310b-a9fd-b82f-346618976983@timpreston.net> <CA%2B1FSigV_pPwVW%2BDd8WZYGcNQVt7%2BYOcsnJFoRhS6jL5A636pg@mail.gmail.com> <20230412150350.12f97eb2c9dd566b8c8702d2@sohara.org> <CA%2B1FSihVPCQ6tp8u=aqnLyyOPpCMrnhYGcC8bCUgRbFHTdY5sA@mail.gmail.com> <1535315680.2770963.1681309684072@mail.yahoo.com> <CAHieY7RFe0P85twcs1NiiAvTTr4oGPJEtXEkufsXswQt3ECGvg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2B1FSiiCG-iugAbSoNC2r5WXCJvgi6pj3jG74jCwukhNtb_XGA@mail.gmail.com> <CADGo8CXsCYCOi%2Bwk2ED7zpJdFQDhynzD0u1qFDUFS3RveS8wOg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 13:58:51 +0100, Miguel C wrote: > I also don't get why is that so complicated, is it just cause FreeBSD's > maintainers/community don't want to even consider docker on FreeBSD? The core "problem" - in fact, it's not actually a problem, it's just the consequences of a design decision - is that Docker hooks deeply into Linux kernel functioalities which the FreeBSD kernel simply does not have. Docker therefore is Linux-centric and Linux-specific, because the focus of development is pointed at Linux. Cross-OS interoperability is not a primary goal here. You could ask: Why does Linux Firefox not run on macOS? Why does the Mac App Store not run on "Windows"? It is not because someone is lazy or stupid, it's just because it is not designed to do that. > Couldn't we just run docker on bhyve? The word "just" is the key here: It is not a _simple_ thing. "Could we just run FreeBSD binaries on Android?" ;-) > I'm sure it would serve the "just > want to test this image purpose" but I suspect there will be some issues > with Filesytem/network, not issues per say, but more like it likely takes > some work to get this to run in easy manner, but I think I've seen mentions > of using sshfs or zvols to make this part easier. It looks like it is technically possible, after (!) investing time and work into getting it done. It is not a trivial effort. > MacOS and Windows use virtualization anyway, sure Docker "DESKTOP" is > supported but docker, but they are still using a VM at the end of the day > and handle the filesystem/network stuff for the user. You could likewise use a VM to run an instance of Linux and then run Docker inside that VM... > I've never tried this my self [...] Sorry, not a good prefix for a broad statement. :-) > [...] but I don't think it should be that super > complicated unless you plan to run docker on prod envs, I think here, the > argument that "right tool for the job" is very valid.... I use docker on my > macOS but I'm not going to run things in prod in macbooks ofc, I will still > use Linux, K8s etc. It's probably _quite_ complicated, or else someone would already have done it as there are lots of users and administrators who would probably love to run Docker natively on FreeBSD. I'm not involved in the Docker development, so I can only guess (or conclude from Linux development): It is a moving target and, as mentioned above, combined with Linux-centricity. "I've never built a house, but how hard can it be? There are lots of houses over there!" Sorry... ;-) > Perhaps the FreeBSD foundation could invest a bit in getting a tool to easy > the way of running docker through bhyve, I do believe this would be good > for user adoption, but probably there are other priorities. The FreeBSD foundation is responsible primarily for the FreeBSD operating system. Docker is a 3rd party software (like the stuff in the ports collection), so it's a bit out of scope of the FreeBSD foundation. But writing a polite message to them and asking is never a bad idea. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20230413233050.2f0046c3.freebsd>