[lxc-users] basic understanding - clarification sought

[gunnar.wagner]

hi Sean,

thanks for your feedback. That was exactly what I was hoping for (not in 
my wildest dreams maybe but nevertheless hoping)



On 4/8/2017 11:19 AM, Sean McNamara wrote:
> LXD and LXC are basically separate, from a user's point of view. the
> `lxc` command is actually LXD. `lxc` followed by a dash, like `lxc-ls`
> is LXC. These are sometimes referred to (e.g. in Ubuntu packaging) as
> lxc-1.0 (lxc-ls, etc.) and lxc-2.0 (LXD).
>
> LXC containers are not too different from Docker; Docker used to use
> liblxc as its base.
>
> LXD containers are designed to feel more like a VM, yes. They _can_ be
> slightly larger in size, depending, because they run an entire guest
> OS minus the kernel, starting from the init daemon, all libraries,
> etc.  But the difference in size isn't terrible if you have a
> deduplicating filesystem, FS-level compression, or a small number of
> containers (or just a huge amount of disk space). A few gigs per
> container base image, at most.
>
> I don't foresee any LXD _code_ ever being locked under a proprietary
> license. Canonical doesn't really do that. They do have enterprise
> support that you can pay for, but in that case, you are paying them
> for services (technical advice and possibly individualized patches or
> builds), not for source code or software licenses. The software itself
> should remain free and open source, though any company (even a company
> other than Canonical) could develop proprietary extensions or
> integrations at any time if they wanted to. The license won't prevent
> them from doing so. I just think it's unlikely in practice.
>
> Sean
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:47 PM, gunnar.wagner
> <gunnar.wagner at netcologne.de> wrote:
>> hi everybody,
>>
>> I am a novice to LXC/LXD and am trying to get a basic understanding
>> together. I have grasped some things which I am not sure about whether I got
>> them wrong or write.
>> Maybe this groups is able and willing to confirm or set things straight for
>> me
>>
>> if you run LXD the lxc commands used are different from the lxc commands
>> used when running 'bare' lxc (for example 'lxc list'   vs   'lxc-ls
>> --fancy')?
>>
>> LXD runs on the Apache License 2.0 (same as Docker engine) so it could
>> happen the same thing to lxd (being divided into Community vc Enterprise
>> Edition) any time (legally speaking. Who would be the force to decide on
>> such a move? Canonical? Is there any intention to make such a move at any
>> point in time?
>>
>> an LXC container behaves more like a VM then a docker or rkt container does
>> (machine- vs app-container), correct? Is it also larger in size?
>>
>> thanks for clarifying
>>
>> Gunnar
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lxc-users mailing list
>> lxc-users at lists.linuxcontainers.org
>> http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
> _______________________________________________
> lxc-users mailing list
> lxc-users at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users

-- 
Gunnar Wagner | Yongfeng Village Group 12 #5, Pujiang Town, Minhang 
District, 201112 Shanghai, P.R. CHINA
mob +86.159.0094.1702 | skype: professorgunrad | wechat: 15900941702
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-users/attachments/20170408/c3f5872f/attachment.html>