1 |
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:55 PM, R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
>>> |
5 |
>>> Because containers are awesome and are way easier to use. |
6 |
>>> |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> I think you missed my point: Why are they easier to use? |
9 |
>> |
10 |
> |
11 |
> I suspect that he was equating "containers" with "Docker," which both |
12 |
> runs containers and also is an image management solution (one that I |
13 |
> don't particularly like, but probably because I don't have heavy needs |
14 |
> so I find myself fighting it more than anything else - it doesn't hurt |
15 |
> that for the life of me I can't get it to connect containers to my |
16 |
> bridge, and it seems like it is completely opposed to just using DHCP |
17 |
> to obtain IPs). |
18 |
> |
19 |
> But, if you're using Docker, sure, you can run whatever the command is |
20 |
> to download an image of a container with some software pre-installed |
21 |
> and run it. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> If you're using something other than Docker to manage your containers |
24 |
> then you still have to get the software you want to use installed in |
25 |
> your container image. |
26 |
> |
27 |
|
28 |
I think I was equating containers to Docker as well. My point was |
29 |
instead of trying to manage dependencies, containers allow people to |
30 |
shove everything into an empty root with no conflicts. The |
31 |
enthusiastic blog post seems to restate this. |