singularity VS Moby

rkt (and many other container solutions) was introduced after docker was released and became popular... they even mentioned docker's shortcomings as a motivation for the project creation [0]. It had all the same problems as other replacement software: there were plenty of bugs and missing features, documentation was limited, and there are no community to help you (the announcement explicitly mentions "prototype quality release"). None of those would be fatal if it was significantly better than docker, but it was not -- it was basically the same functionality. So almost no one made the switch. It is closed now [1]

And why "rkt"? There were much better alternative container runtimes. For example Sylabs Singularity [2] -- container-as-a-file, instant mounting, etc... I wish more people knew about it.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20141201181834/https://coreos.co...

[1] https://github.com/rkt/rkt#warning-end-of-project-warning

[2] https://github.com/sylabs/singularity#singularityce

Docker (and the current generation of OCI runtimes) is rather shitty at host OS isolation too. It may have started well, but over time more capabilities were added for the convenience of developers and at the cost of maintainers. I would personally love if the ecosystem were to shift to more isolated workloads with better HPC support. Singualrity looks promising but still maintains OCI compatibility.

Having been featured in our February 2023, and January 2024 Release Radars, Moby is the original Linux Container runtime. This new version adds a bunch of changes to the Docker CLI and Moby itself with additional features. There's bug fixes and enhancements, with the main thing for users to be on the look out for containers that were created using Docker Engine 25.0.0. These containers might have duplicate MAC addresses, and thus must be recreated. The same goes for those containers created with Moby 25.0+ and with user defined MAC addresses. Read up on all these changes in the release notes.

Formlabs does this as well for their 3d printers, my earliest encounter of this was when Docker started getting popular: https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/pkg/namesgenerator/...

Try to use moby instead since that is the engine in Docker.

https://github.com/moby/moby

> Podman is designed to help with this by providing stronger default security settings compared to Docker. Features like rootless containers, user namespaces, and seccomp profiles, while available in Docker, aren't enabled by default and often require extra setup.

Seccomp has been enabled by default since 2015: https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/18780

It is true that Rootless isn't enabled by default but its "extra setup" can be done with a single command (`dockerd-rootless-setuptool.sh install`)

Perhaps.

Thing is, https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/670bc0a46c4ca03b75f1e72f73... is using https://github.com/mistifyio/go-zfs which features code like `out, err := zfsOutput("get", "-H", key, d.Name)` (Source: https://github.com/mistifyio/go-zfs/blob/master/zfs.go#L315) to get a single zfs property.

Somebody chose to use a library as abstraction that looks good but is implemented as a MVP (nothing wrong with that). "In the future, we hope to work directly with libzfs" should have raised an alarm somewhere, though.

AppArmor can restrict /proc and this is even used by docker: https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/contrib/apparmor/te...