Voyager@psychedelia.ink to Linux@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 year agoLXD: Containers for Human Beingssecluded.siteexternal-linkmessage-square25fedilinkarrow-up167arrow-down12
arrow-up165arrow-down1external-linkLXD: Containers for Human Beingssecluded.siteVoyager@psychedelia.ink to Linux@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square25fedilink
minus-squarePossibly linux@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down4·1 year agoThey are not immutable. Might as well use a chroot at that point
minus-squareemile@tacobu.delinkfedilinkarrow-up4·edit-21 year agoNeither are Docker(-like) containers, at least by default. They are just not intended to keep their filesystem state outside of volumes or mounts
minus-squarePossibly linux@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoTrue but you can just blow away everything and start from scratch when something goes wrong. It also makes updates way easier
minus-squareSkull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nllinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoWhy would they need to be immutable? Containers provide tons of isolation and sandboxing capabilities that basic chroots don’t.
They are not immutable. Might as well use a chroot at that point
Neither are Docker(-like) containers, at least by default. They are just not intended to keep their filesystem state outside of volumes or mounts
True but you can just blow away everything and start from scratch when something goes wrong. It also makes updates way easier
Why would they need to be immutable? Containers provide tons of isolation and sandboxing capabilities that basic chroots don’t.