> lmctfy runs best when it owns all containers in a machine so it is not recommended to run lmctfy alongside LXC or another container system (although given some configuration, it can be made to work).
At first I thought this might be Docker-esque, but it's a completely different stack solving the same problems.
This actually looks like a nice potential execution backend for docker. Currently docker shells out to lxc-start with a generated configuration - I would rather bind to a small low-level library which just handles the namespacing and cgroup work. It looks like lmctfy could be that library.
People naturally compare this to Docker but given that Google is a heavy-weight in that domain, and things like App Engine are here for ages.. this probably will be very a good container library and tool with time..
Comments
Can anyone comment on how this compares to LXC? Why should we prefer or use this when LXC already exists and is stable?
From the readme:
At first I thought this might be Docker-esque, but it's a completely different stack solving the same problems.
Sounds like a poor man's docker?
[1] http://docker.io
This actually looks like a nice potential execution backend for docker. Currently docker shells out to lxc-start with a generated configuration - I would rather bind to a small low-level library which just handles the namespacing and cgroup work. It looks like lmctfy could be that library.
Also this can be very handy as a C library, so you can embed it:
https://github.com/google/lmctfy/blob/master/include/lmctfy....
People naturally compare this to Docker but given that Google is a heavy-weight in that domain, and things like App Engine are here for ages.. this probably will be very a good container library and tool with time..