Hacker News Clone new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | github repologin
Bocker: Docker implemented in around 100 lines of Bash (2015) (github.com)
48 points by emersonrsantos 2 hours ago | hide | past | web | 20 comments | favorite





I love these. Been a fan of minimal bash stuff. Here's a proof of concept for a intra-cluster load balancer in 40 lines of bash done during a hackathon I organized to promote distributed infra with Docker, Mesos, etc. about a decade ago https://github.com/cell-os/metal-cell/blob/master/discovery/...

I likely lost it, but I had a redundand and distributed reverse SSH tunnel based colo-to-cloud transfer tool.

Shell Fu and others have good collections of these https://www.shell-fu.org/


Very interesting. With how standard containerization has become, we sorely need an FOSS solution

Don’t we have them? I only casually use containers, but what about podman, runc, systemd-nspawn, LXC etc?

If Docker isn't open enough for you, check out Podman (now with extra CNCF).

Why not podman?

The fact how simple it is to re-implement a large part of Docker because all it fundamentally is a bit of glue code to the kernel is the biggest problem Docker-the-company faced and still faces.

Where Docker adds real value is not (just) Docker Hub but Docker for Windows and Mac. The integrations offer a vastly superior experience than messing around with VirtualBox and Vagrant by hand (been there, done that) to achieve running Docker on one's development machine.


Nah, they should have prioritized building some sort of PaaS solution like CloudRun, Render or Fly so they can sell that to enterprises for $$$. Instead they did half-baked docker swarm which never really worked reliably and then lost ground to k8s rapidly

Docker Desktop on Mac is a handicapped, underprivileged mess. Docker cli for Mac with Colima is still underprivileged, but at least you can skip the bs license and Docker's gui. On Windows you can at least use Docker on WSL which works great. Why use Docker Desktop is beyond me.

> Why use Docker Desktop is beyond me.

I lived through a failed attempt to migrate from Docker Desktop for Mac to an open source alternative (minikube+portainer, IIRC). A lot of test scripts developers relied on – to run parts of the integration test suite on their laptops for debugging – broke, because Docker Desktop for Mac went to a lot of effort to make macOS look like you were running Docker on Linux, whereas the open source replacement wasn't as seamless. Some of these test scripts contained Java code directly talking to the Docker daemon over its Unix domain socket, so need the same API implemented. Many other scripts made heavy use of the Docker CLI. After spending a lot of time on it, it was decided to just go back to Docker Desktop for Mac. The failed migration had resulted in highly paid engineers spending time pulling their hair out trying to get test scripts to work instead of actually fixing bugs and delivering new features.

Now, that was 2+ years ago now, and maybe the open source alternatives have caught up since, or maybe we picked the wrong one or made some other mistake. But I'm not rushing to try it again.


I would look at Orbstack. Yes it costs money but it is pretty great.

Your situation sounds very similar to the company I work for. Orbstack has been a drop in replacement except one issue. Any dev using IPv6 assignment on their home network has issues where pods try to hit external dns because it tries to use IPv6 and I don’t think the Orbstack k8s instance is dual stack.

There are hacks to get around it but if I could get Orbstack to address this issue, I couldn’t find one other issue.

Orbstack is crazy fast and way better than docker desktop overall


I've just use a Debian arm virtual machine and be done with it (M1). If I'm going to run a VM regardless, may as well go with a full fledged one.

Rancher desktop is also a viable option and free. Many including my work moved to it after Docker's new licensing kicked in.

IMO the real magic of Docker was the Docker/OCI image format. It's a brilliant way to perform caching and distribute container images, and it's really what still differentiates the workflow from "full" VM's.


My main dev machine is Linux so I use Rancher Desktop but I also have a MacBook Pro m1 machine. Orbstack is so much better than rancher and docker desktop. I know they are a small company but hell if their product isn’t significantly more efficient and better.

Completely agree. I moved from docker desktop to rancher after an update blew away my kubernetes cluster, and then from Rancher to Orbstack due to a number of bugs that were crashing the underlying VM. Orbstack has been rock solid (aside from one annoying networking issue), and it uses significantly less battery. They’ve done a fantastic job.

Only complaint is that my home network assigns IPv6 addresses and that fucks up external dns lookups for pods in Orbstack.

I just use colima on macos, its a far better experience. Much lighter weight

Docker for Mac is just unusable. They're not really adding any value there.

Have you tried out Orbstack?

But Rancher Desktop does the same too (and is also open source).

Docker for Windows and Mac are both bloated pieces of software, outperformed by Rancher Desktop and Orbstack.

Docker's only real innovation was the OCI format, which it had to give away for it to become an industry standard, and now doesn't own.




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

Search: