Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The docker 0% thing is misleading. There's literally nothing stopping you from building a full OS in a container. I've built containers that you could SSH into and never know you were in a container. Docker folks push the single process thing hard but it's not the only way and most people who deal with a lot of containers know that.

I'm interested in jails because I have a BSD need, so this is timely but starting with misinformation puts off.



I think it means there is 0% Docker involved, but I am not sure...claiming to be 100% secure is more suspect to me.


From my archaic (and by no means first hand) understanding of jails they are basically a docker alternative (long) long before Docker. They have been tried and tested probably arent 100% secure but damn near enough to be worthwhile. Jails is the main concept that interested me in BSD. I just dont want to deal with drivers. If I pop in an ISO I want things to work period. So I stick with Linux instead.


What kind of drivers? Pop an iso of what, where? I hardly can think of anything one could do with FreeBSD and Jails that would involve any 'drivers' - mind elaborating a bit?


I should of stepped back and explained, I'm on about installing the OS itself. If the road of entry is a nogo for me, I wont be able to try jails.


You may be right. Its in the "Jails Contain All The Things!" section so maybe I read it wrong. The 100% security thing makes more sense your way. But the no 12-factor app statement and then Docker 0% is confusing.

Not a great layout. Not the fault if jails though.


> There's literally nothing stopping you from building a full OS in a container.

In fact LXC/LXD containers in Ubuntu are exactly this by default.


As well as systemd-nspawn




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: