On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:16 PM, TuxRaiderPen <tuxraider...@wpascanner.com>wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 06, 2014 04:49:06 Dirk Geschke wrote: > > Any views, opinions, comments in re that LXC might be better, worse, even > v. a > VM??? Just curious, as I probably am going the LXC route, as it gives me > another test use case. I found the LXC containers for LAMP dev/testing to > be > quite a hit with my group v. a VM setup for them. > > The first line your original mail says "I am in a situation where I am looking to possibly use LXC as a way to run ONE specific program that needs an X desktop". Thus the recommendations about various ways to use lxc and X. First line has a big impact :) Anyway, back to your real question. I'm not sure what kind of response you'd expect here. Any particular aspect you're particulary concerned with? ease of use, resource usage, etc? You already said you're used to LXC with LAMP, which means you already experience the better resource utilization. Using lxc for a single program (with X forwarding) would pretty much yield the same result: lxc is much more resource-efficient compared to a full-virtualization vm. Something that is even MORE resource-efficient (though probably not by much) is to simply use chroot, but you'd probably end up with a messier setup security-wise (compared to the unprivileged container example in stephane's blog linked by Dirk earlier). -- Fajar
_______________________________________________ lxc-users mailing list lxc-users@lists.linuxcontainers.org http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users