bocker VS linux

A (joke?) one-liner I came up with while thinking about solutions to centralized container management across multiple SSH hosts. Shame on me.

The name is inspired by bocker [0], albeit this doesn't re-implement docker-compose in bash, I found it to be fitting enough.

I'd love to see someone come up with a smarter and/or shorter way to do this.

[0] https://github.com/p8952/bocker

When I did a talk about docker I also wanted to show a bit of what it does under the hood without going through all the layers and without too much details. This ~120 lines of shell script is really good in providing just an intro into what's needed for containers: https://github.com/p8952/bocker/blob/master/bocker

i tried it and like the concnpt, but until it can be launched via a systemd userspace service (without previously manually booting it) among other problems i will keep using docker (or bocker)

> But you couldn't reimplement podman in a few hundred lines of code.

You don't even need a few hundred: https://github.com/p8952/bocker

And then there's 'dokku' which IIRC, started as a bash version of Heroku.

> Not all ideas have the same quality.

They really do. I've heard all kinds of things in my career, but almost none I would want to dedicate a portion of my life building. Not because they are bad ideas or won't work, but because of the person with the idea or it just didn't interest me. Those people went on to be moderately successful (like hundreds of millions worth) but I'm glad I wasn't on that ride.

Bocker is in this same category...docker clone in bash that's helpful in seeing what's really happening underneath with nsenter, namespaces, network bridging, cgroups, etc.

https://github.com/p8952/bocker

Docker implemented in around 100 lines of bash: https://github.com/p8952/bocker

This is the most mindblowing example for enterprise security teams that think Docker is a new threat on a single tenant Linux host.

No, buddies, all this stuff is already there. If you were fine with your visibility before*, you're still fine. Go find a real problem while we play with our developer dopamine.

* NARRATOR: They shouldn't have been.

Bocker[1] does a reasonably good job of showing the value of Docker was mostly in Docker hub.

[1] https://github.com/p8952/bocker

There is a cool project I've seen called "bocker" (https://github.com/p8952/bocker) which is something of a proof of concept of implementing Docker with bash, which speaks a bit to how Docker is indeed in many ways an amalgam of lower level primitives (such as chroot as you mentioned). Pretty neat!

These are a bit easier to see what's going on:

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d5cf50dafc9dd5faa1e...

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/d5cf50dafc9dd5faa1e61...

Unfortunately Github doesn't have a way to render symbols for whitespace, but you can tell by selecting the spaces that the previous version had leading tabs. Linus changed it so that the tokens `default` and the number e.g. `12` are also separated by a tab. This is tricky, because the token "default" is seven characters, it will always give this added tab a width of 1 char which makes it always layout the same as if it were a space no matter if you use tab widths of 1, 2, 4, or 8.

There was also a Gentoo effort to run atop FreeBSD[0]. The challenge of course is that afaik none of the BSD kernel ABIs are considered stable. The stable interface is the BSD libc. That said, with binfmt_misc, I don't see a reason you couldn't just run (at least some) FreeBSD binaries on Linux with a thin syscall translation layer (rather something like qemu-system) and then your layer hooked via binfmt_misc. I'm not aware of anyone who has done this for FreeBSD, but prior efforts existed as alternate binfmts for SysVr4/5 ELF binaries[2]. Either way would take some elbow grease, but you *might* even be able just reuse binfmt_elf and just have a new interpreter for FreeBSD elf.

[0] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_FreeBSD

[1] https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/binfmt-misc.html

[2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_elf....

> The original less-than check was deemed incorrect

It was only deemed incorrect because of an information leak. Not because it's a valid use-case for user space to copy smaller portions of *hwrpb into user space. https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/21c5977a836e399fc71...

Correct. And the combined work needs to carry the MIT license text and copyright attributions for the MIT software authors. With binary distribution it must also be overt, not hidden in some source code drop, but directly accompanying the binary.

Many people who talk about relicensing never credit the MIT developers or distribute the MIT license text. "Because it's GPL now."

I don't think that you believe that, but many developers do.

Some don't see the need for source code scans for Open Source compliance, because the license.txt says GPL, so it's GPL. Prime example is the Linux kernel. There is code under different licenses in there, but people don't even read https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/COPYING till the end ("In addition, other licenses may also apply.") and conclude it's simply GPL 2 and nothing else.

Also be aware that sublicensing is not the same as relicensing.

> Does he have something against it?

He notoriously hates GNU Emacs, yes.

https://marc.info/?m=122955159617722

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/...

So If we would only count code and not comments, it is only 9489 LoC Rust. Which would be about 0.03% and if we take all lines and not only LoC it would be around 0.05%

[0] https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b401b621758e46812da...

AIUI fsync is built on futex_waitv which has been upstreamed. So this has to be more than that.

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/a0eb2da92b715d0c97b...

git clone --no-checkout --depth 1 https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git $dir