linuxkit VS nanos

Another project that aims to deliver this is Linuxkit (https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit). All the components they ship are written in memory safe languages (usually Go) and run as containers under containerd. You can build a custom image very easily, fully defined as a YAML file.

docker-the-company maintained https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit when I worked there. I have no idea who maintains it now, but it looks like it is still active (presumably still docker-the-company, since their adopters list [1] lists docker desktop).

[1]: https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit/blob/master/ADOPTERS.md

LF-Edge EVE project leverages Linuxkit to create custom OSs for Edge Devices which in turn leverages Containers as Lego Blocks

LinuxKit - Docker

Behind the scenes Docker Desktop for Mac spawns a linuxkit VM with a bit of extra stuff like NFS to enable mounting Mac paths into containers. In the Docker Desktop settings you'll find the current resource assignment for that VM. That is pretty much reserved for docker so that it does not have to compete with MacOS processes for available resources.

That said... you might want to check out linuxkit

The definition of what a unikernel is needs to be narrowed down, a lot of these projects in the space (not all the ones listed above) have material differences that are not clear:

- some run only one language

- some require recompilation

- some essentially swap out libraries, others do something closer to dropping your already mostly static binary in a minimal disk image

- some build pid1 processes, others VMs images

Anyway, here are some additional entries in the space:

- https://ssrg-vt.github.io/hermitux/

- https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit (more embedded/minimal VM than unikernel)

- https://nabla-containers.github.io/ (runs on Solo5)

I am going through using Linuxkit to build AMIs for cloud providers now. I wouldn’t necessarily class linuxkit as a universal project because it doesn’t have the hallmark blurring of user and kernel space or kernel-as-a-library but you can customize the kernel so it’s an adjacent idea, and I think it’s the one most likely to be in actual use at non-hyperscalers.

I believe there is growing interest in providing leaner, "trimmed" runtimes for services deployed to the cloud. Today, this is seen largely by specializing the Linux kernel for, for example, container services[0] or in general[1], as much as that is possible (the paper above covers this problem in greater detail). But, Unikernels in themselves are not yet widely adopted. This is the space Unikraft is aiming to enter, providing the ultimate level of specialization for a target application.

It's clear that bigger players, such as Red Hat[2] are interested in the topic of unikernels, and that cloud providers are preparing for this future too [3].

[0]: https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit

I am a bit confused, there are three sites:

* https://nanos.org/

* https://nanovms.com/

* https://ops.city/

And I am not sure what "thing" I am using. Is there some disambiguation? I know is OPS is the orchestration CLI, but I am confused at the difference between Nanos and NanoVMs. What should I call the section of my README that deals with this tech? Currently gone with Nanos/OPS but I am confused.

I work with https://nanos.org && https://ops.city - we can run thousands of these on commodity hardware.

Unik was just a build tool that utilized other projects like Rump, Mirage, IncludeOS, etc. It's now dead since Solo pivoted a very long time ago to service mesh/api gateways.

The GoRump port they use was from us and then we realized we needed to code our own from the ground up for many reasons so we wrote https://nanos.org (runs as a go unikernel in GCP).

A couple unikernel projects that caught my eye in the past may be of interest to you. I have no experience with them, so I can't speak to their quality though.

https://unikraft.org/

https://github.com/nanovms/nanos

Definitely agree with the top part, however, I should note that, ops, the tool's, whole existence is to create disk images and upload them to any cloud, any hypervisor.

In particular, both https://ops.city && https://nanos.org are Go unikernels running on GCP and their deploys take just a few seconds to push out. AWS can be even faster cause we skip the s3 upload part. We also have lots of people using Azure which would be utilizing vhdx.

I'm with that organization that works on https://nanos.org and https://ops.city . If you aren't a software engineer but still would like to use unikernels you're in luck - we also have a package repository at https://repo.ops.city/ (running as a go unikernel on GCP) that will allow you to run and deploy pre-made applications. If you don't see something that you'd like to us there's also a way of importing docker containers into unikernels via ops which works for most (but not all) applications.

I think Unikernels like NanoVMs (https://nanos.org/) will become more important. They are more efficient and more secure than than full operating systems. Right now, I think there are no good monitoring solutions available (or at least I am not aware of any). You can't just ssh to your server, so if something goes wrong, it can be hard to debug. And they are certainly not integrated into bigger monitoring solutions like Dynatrace. But once the infrastructure is available, I would expect a large percentage of Linux servers to be replaced with unikernels.