Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:48:20 +0000 From: Grzegorz Junka <list1@gjunka.com> To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The status of docker Message-ID: <5c926314-adce-dba1-f5ce-2fda35e1aeba@gjunka.com> In-Reply-To: <CC0F6FB5-7939-4586-86DD-B5548E0043C3@punkt.de> References: <089e330d-2761-2440-3b7f-dd22e9088af5@gjunka.com> <9A01020A-7CC6-4893-A425-11A7BF736F4E@ultra-secure.de> <42f59b63-fdc7-306f-d836-83533741a86c@FreeBSD.org> <CAG=rPVfTZnYc6%2BDjtk0SjkqijJQh6uA1G9VWEBsYy4aDYvYEgQ@mail.gmail.com> <CC0F6FB5-7939-4586-86DD-B5548E0043C3@punkt.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 22/01/2019 08:28, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > Good morning, > >> Am 22.01.2019 um 03:57 schrieb Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@freebsd.org>: >> I hope I am wrong, but unfortunately I think getting Docker to work on >> natively on FreeBSD is ultimately a losing battle, >> unless you can get a team of several developers to work on it full time. > I have the same gut feeling, but unless somebody actually tries, we can’t > tell for sure, can we? ;-) > > Thanks for making the effort. > > Now what I wanted to throw in: possibly getting in touch with some of the > people at Joyent who implemented Docker support for Illumos/Solaris > zones might help: > > https://www.joyent.com/blog/triton-docker-and-the-best-of-all-worlds <https://www.joyent.com/blog/triton-docker-and-the-best-of-all-worlds>; I think the question is how much should be implemented by a freebsd port and how much should come from the native linux/docker implementation. There are two extremes: 1. Linux in bhyve, docker is running completely in Linux environment 2. A docker container in a jail with no native linux kernel, docker is running completely in FreeBSD environment 1 is the least convenient because it requires all the hurdles related to setting up a bhyve host, including proper network configuration for containers and pre-allocating disk space. But it also requires no implementation in freebsd-related docker ports apart from maybe adding support to docker tools, like docker-machine for example 2 would be most convenient but also most difficult as all smallest docker features would need to be ported natively to FreeBSD I believe docker and freebsd-docker ports were trying different approaches somewhere in between these extremes. Maybe the correct approach would be to start with 1 and make running docker in bhyve as convenient as possible, then slowly move to 2 as much as interest/resources allow? GrzegorzJ
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5c926314-adce-dba1-f5ce-2fda35e1aeba>