On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 03:32:02PM +0100, Dejan Jocic wrote: > On 06-03-19, Reco wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 12:17:27PM +0100, Dejan Jocic wrote: > > > On 05-03-19, Reco wrote: > > > > > > > > Canonical's famous for their NIH too. Mir, Unity, LXD - it's a long > > > > list, although RedHat has longer one. > > > > > > > > Reco > > > > > > > > > Mir and Unity I can get, but why would you put LXD in that sentence about > > > NIH? > > > > Given the existence of LXC, why would anyone need LXD? > > You do realise that LXD is wrap around LXC, or rather libxlc, which > improves its functionality, while not taking anything from it?
Yep. And I see nothing that needs to be improved with LXC, security issues left aside. LXC has sane configuration format already, and, which is more important, sane semantics, compared to [1]. It has features, including the arbitrary network configuration (not that kind of abomination in LXD, or $DEITY forbid, systemd-nspawn or runc), and arbitrary storage configuration. What's more important, it's easily extensible. > Some of that functionality is live snapshot migration, CRIU is lightyears ahead here. > bit improved security, LOL. [2] says: [LXD] Containers can be managed over the network in a transparent way through a REST API. Every time you add a web interface to a good thing you diminish its security. No exceptions. > improved/easier to manage networking, Nothing comes easy once you start writing your own DSL for the network configuration. Besides, if one has trouble with LXC network configuration, one should consider a job change IMO. > overall better management. You forgot YMMV, so I'm adding it here. > Also, while Canonical is not only supporter of LXC, it is practically > major supporter, as far as I know ( but could be wrong about it ). ... and that's exactly why they could focus on fixing real issues such as [3], [4], and [5] (last one is a shameless plug) instead of trying to write yet another Openstack clone. Reco [1] https://lxd.readthedocs.io/en/latest/configuration/ [2] https://linuxcontainers.org/ [3] https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2019/q1/125 [4] https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2019/q1/119 [5] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=906805