Could a Docker application be put inside a DBP? Seems like the best of both worlds. The author of the DBP package could then decide whether to use Docker or not. I imagine in some cases using Docker might be worth it while in other it might just be unnecessary overhead.
Docker vs DBP
- Thread starter WizardStan
- Start date
txus
Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
- Messages
- 115
Just occured to me: there was some talk some time ago about allowing dbps to depend on distro packages, so... Is the DBP system tied to debian or dpkg/apt, or is it completely self-contained? Docker should be distro agnostic, so that's also something to consider. I, for one, welcome a Pyra-tailored solution, as there will probably be many very optimized packages for instance which won't run just like that on other platforms, but it would be very useful if DBP wasn't tied to something distro-specific, as some people WILL try to get Slack or Arch running on the Pyra.
That's just a suggestion, some "food for thought"
That's just a suggestion, some "food for thought"
slaeshjag
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It is loosely tied to it. Checking installed dependencies is tied to a distro. But if the dpkg database isn't available it'll just assume everything is there. If someone really wants it to intergrate better with another distro, some form of glue code would be needed on a per-distro family basis.
Apart from that dependency checking, there isn't really anything debian specific in it. For those that for religious reasons want to avoid systemd, there's an init script in repo that should work in place of the systemd service file, etc.
Apart from that dependency checking, there isn't really anything debian specific in it. For those that for religious reasons want to avoid systemd, there's an init script in repo that should work in place of the systemd service file, etc.
txus
Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
- Messages
- 115
Nice! Have you thought about PackageKit? Maybe that would be a good compromise. It seems it already has backends for most of the common package management systems (apt, alpm, whatever fedora uses now, ...) and is available on most distros. I'd take a look at it myself if I had the time and knowledge to do so...
And regarding systemd, I've been using it for quite some time and have grown to like it a lot, but thanks for the effort on considering those using traditional init systems!
And regarding systemd, I've been using it for quite some time and have grown to like it a lot, but thanks for the effort on considering those using traditional init systems!
slaeshjag
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I can't remember which of the package-kit like systems aTc put on the image, but the intention is to use it for installation of dependencies. It will still have the problems that package names in one distro don't match the package names in another.
WizardStan
Mega GP Mania
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 16,731
I'll get to the docker tests this week.
One thing that occurred to me is that it may be a way of running PNDs: have a "Pandora" container with basically the entire Angstrom OS and then PNDs just run inside that. It's practically a full chroot at that point though, not sure it'd be any easier one way or the other.
One thing that occurred to me is that it may be a way of running PNDs: have a "Pandora" container with basically the entire Angstrom OS and then PNDs just run inside that. It's practically a full chroot at that point though, not sure it'd be any easier one way or the other.
