Why do boomers and autists hate this shit so much?

>Becuase it's unnecessary.
It runs closer to metal than a full blown VM. And it therefore saves your org $$$ on system resources.
Retard.

It's a shitty jail reimplementation.

It's a shitty package manager.

Noboddy knows how to use it right.

K8s is a google botnet.

You don't understand how Docker works.

>ragefits
sure buddy

> meme arrows
Now that's a sound argument, bud.

Fuck off retard
If you use windows, you can't use docker on your machine at my work

and thats a good thing

docker.com
CoC developer

Attached: CoC-developer.png (296x412, 68K)

Is docker any use to hobbyists and people with home servers?

>hurrdurr i'm outraged at SJWs
how long before people learn this isn't an argument?

No it's not. It means you're speaking out your ass.

Probably because they have some autistic way of doing something similar but in a non-standard way with a lot more effort.
Or they just don't have to manage many servers and don't see the value in immutable infrastructure.

Hurr durr i'm a burr

Same reason Jow Forums was convinced to hate systemd despite knowing very little about operating systems: a very vocal but small group of autists convinced a greater mass of le enlightened contrarians to dislike it.

Fuck you. Try putting a Spark installation up onto a cluster and see what happens without Docker.

because its fucking stupid

Try Ansible.

there are many good reasons to hate systemd

boomers?
You mean "adults"?

This

Is docker just the lazy mans virtual machine?

*containers
And not really, for some reason Docker is about containerizing processes.

>FROM niggerbuntu:nigger_edition
>RUN curl hackme.io/fuck_file_hashes_and_security_and_shit.sh | bash

>docker exec -it hackme -v ./company_secrets:/please_steal_this -e DATABASE_PASSWORD=14m4n1gg3rpl34s3st34l4llmyd4t4

They are completely unable to deal with change and wish we'd still use the original UNIX with typewriters today.

It is only hated by people who like to make things in the hard way for no reason. When git started, everyone thought it was bullshit, now look where we are. People are just afraid of change.

I just don't like a crippled OS, emulation, simulation and libs baked into an abomination.

Why do we have this thread every day? If anyone hates it, it's because it's hipster-quality software, not because they think "containers are chaing or jobs" or some shit because we've been doing those for decades now.

> because we've been doing those for decades now.
This, but it was a mystery to programmers and now, when they could run it on their MacOS, they're sure it's the only way.

Except when you start looking into git's internals you find a powerful underlying branch model, and when you start looking into docker's internals you find shit and insecurity.

Forced to use it for work with some components that do not exist in any other form. Where on the computer are the comtainers stored, and how do I look inside of them?

What is Docker?

Why does the future upset you user?

So are containers just less secure jails?

because he wouldn't have a job if you dockerize

I'm not some old man. I've used Docker and I know its weaknesses. Docker is not the future. Some containerization technology will come along that's more secure and does not have shitty architecture and is more performant and docker will be a footnote. Don't make assumptions based on nothing.

Other than OpenShift are there competitors?

I don't particularly like docker either

A container is a jail that cannot be trusted because at some level it was built without any auditing and was probably made from a bash script executed as root downloaded via HTTP with no file hash confirmation.

Fuck retarded.
Docker allow you to wrap a setup completely on a distributable container

I do docking on windows. These days I can pretty much run almost as same Linux dev tools inside windows with a broken desktop

>Is docker any use to hobbyists and people with home servers?
It is if you're a developer.
Like if you want to fuck around with a new database or create a Hadoop cluster to experiment with, you can do it in a reproducible way. It's 1000x easier and faster than something like Vagrant for those purposes.

>use docker-compose to automate container building and setup
>caches builds at each step
>practically reproducible builds
>write once, deploy wherever the fuck you want
>instant startup and shutdown, tiny overhead
>no need to preallocate resources such as memory
>no need to fuck with buggy interfaces like the shared folders and clipboards in vms
God bless containers. I can't imagine the nightmare I would go through to move my VPS setup to another server if I wouldn't have built it with docker. I only have to copy the data over, git pull my repo, docker-compose up -d and that's it.

Why do zoomers need Docker and Kubernacles and hundreds of 0.2.8 version shit packages they found on github to run a fucking CRUD website where a single server running some Java or C++ code and PostgreSQL would have worked fine.

It's a fucking kludge.
Mention mainframes to a zoomer and they'll laugh at you with your grandpa technology, while working so hard to replicate mainframe functionality through open source software and Javascript code.

docker is pretty good for managing my stuff hosted at home. for real stuff its just better to go with s e r v e r l e s s solution from Google, AWS , Azure etc. docker becomes less useful in those solutions since youre usually just uploading a jar.

the company i work for has invested a ton into our internal infrastructure for this kind of thing. everything is so deeply integrated its super easy to set things up. its depressing having to use all this disjointed weird tooling when i work on my personal stuff

It's helpful when you need to install that crud app on multiple machines and making sure they are all configured the same.

I'd rather spend time writing code then making sure tomcat has everything right in the /conf folder all day.

I mean, we could build an entire list, like people doing distributed analytics for something that could be computed on their laptop with SQLite.

"But we've got gigabytes of data to process!"
>My fucking Android phone could process that

cutesy logos are a preety good litmyus test for shit honestly

You can use Ansible etc. for that. Because realistically they won't all be configured the same. Sometimes you'll want to patch a set of servers before the others, etc.

I think boomers hate anything that organises things, because it puts them out of job security, a lot of them are hired because "they're the one that knows how X, Y, Z systems work so we can't fire them!"

However with docker, all you need is a config file. There are plenty of stories about huge companies that would have entire weeks to deploy things and have to call up old employees to figure out how to re-deploy their app, with docker this is just a non-issue.

a container is an isolated environment that is rebuild from scratch every time you modify it. I'm not familiar with ansible but I know puppet. if you install a package with puppet and later make some modifications to your design such that you don't need that package anymore and you remove it from your puppet files puppet won't remove the already installed package. you have to explicitly add a declaration in puppet to ensure that the package is absent. so, over time, either your system accumulates bloat or your puppet file accumulates bloat. containers don't have this problem.

It's helpful when your company has a large amount of services that are constantly at different levels of usage. Having the ability to quickly scale up a service when it comes under load means you use your infra significantly more efficiently.

Also given the size of each container and how easy they are to stand up, deploying applications to them is as easy as destroying one and standing up another.

The list goes on and on, but at the very base of it they are much smaller because they only need the bare essentials for each container to work (ie not each container needs its own driver stack).

As for kubernetes, you'd really have to use it in an enterprise environment to see the benefit of it, but for a tldr it just makes automating all the processes I just mentioned way easier once you get the hang of it.

Can one create a personal docker image using custom software?

Yes, that's the whole point.

Openshift is a platform for docker and kubernetes.

If you're talking about alternative orchestration tools: terraform, puppet, salt, ansible, azure containers, and aws ecs

In terms of different (and usually worse) container engines a few I can think of: Vmware containers, mesos, singularity.

I've been interested in Docker for a while but don't understand it.
Is Docker basically like Flatpak for server apps?

Openshift and openstack are different?
How does lxc compares to docker? Can it be orchestrated?

Ok but do you have to write a stupid Dockerfile or can you just customize from the shell?

Docker is too much voodoo for me.

90% of a docker file are shell commands
First a couple docker specifics
Then a bunch of shell commands to install and configure crap from the os package manager

Do you have to use the package manager though?

does anyone here recall User Mode Linux?

>Reading about containers because I've never heard of this before
So, it's basically a package with all of its dependencies included? Aren't the dependencies installed alongside the packages anyways?

It's shell, you can do whatever the fuck you want

You just do a RUN command like apt-get update && apt-get install nodejs && ...etc.
For most popular things you can find a Dockerfile that will have it all done for you anyway, and you can just use theirs and customise a few lines to your liking. That has been my experience with it so far.

No, you can have global dependencies, dev dependencies, and locally installed/included things which are on the local PC but NOT on the server that can all give the impression things work, but when you actually deploy they don't.

Openshift and Openstack are hard to compare, but somewhat broadly speaking Openstack is more of a fully functioning environment with many different services. Openshift is really just a platform for k8s and docker based applications.

blog.openshift.com/openshift-origin-vs-openstack/

As for lxc, I don't have enough experience with it to be able to talk much about it. From what I understand it's really just docker with less support, more needless complexity, and should primarily just be used for namespace separation of environments. Docker is pretty much superior on every metric here to my knowledge.

you can add your own files to the container, you can mount local paths or create and attach volumes, you can setup networking between containers. containers are somewhere between chroot and virtual machines.

What level of "trust" is present in jails? I mean, you think with the name it would imply that absolutely in no circumstances would the software running in the jail would ever be trusted, but apparently not.

Please advise, I don't know shit about FreeBSD

Based and redpilled

Can I do simply learn most of docker, then call myself a consultant making 200K?

>putting a setup in a container

use compose unless you need to customize the base images directly

I have several compose setups using official images that "just work" via env vars and such.

boomers are 60+ - they didn't grew up with internet like gen-x did

> As for lxc, I don't have enough experience with it to be able to talk much about it. From what I understand it's really just docker with less support
REEEEEEE.

As a freelancer, docker is absolutely crucial because it lets me very rapidly recreate whatever environment my client is running software in. I can then save a clean state and roll back to that whenever I need to, without all the overhead of a full virtual machine (which is what I used to do, and is still my last resort)

+1

Its good for multiple reasons.
Easy to setup
Less resources used than VM
Easy to share
Same env for all users.

Although it's pushed pretty hard by a lot of onions boys who trend jump, which just gets annoying hearing them talk about it.

There's nothing lazier about it.
Docker containers are more work to setup originally, but less work to reuse.

If you want the oppposite then you're a pleb.