8 ms·

Say what you want about docker compose, but when I see the amount of scaffolding necessary for this, with so many catch words like butane or ignition, I’m happy

by xgbi 3y ago

Say what you want about docker compose, but when I see the amount of scaffolding necessary for this, with so many catch words like butane or ignition, I’m happy with my good ol’ docker composé file where everything is neatly organized. In one glance I can see what is deployed, depends on what and what net / volume is used. For simple projects, it’s hard to beat

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
overbytecode 3y ago
Butane/ignition is the configuration to set up CoreOS (similar to configuration.nix in NixOS) it has nothing to do with Quadlets.
hansihe 3y ago
I was confused by this article in the beginning, it does a pretty bad job at drawing a distinction between the pure quadlet example at the start and the example of using CoreOS to build and launch a VM that starts containers. The basic usage of podman quadlets is putting an `app.container` in `/etc/containers/systemd/` containing something like the first snippet and then starting the unit. For someone familiar with systemd, this seems very very nice to work with.
- imiric 3y ago
  I'm still not clear whether quadlets are a feature of Podman or systemd... The reliance on systemd is an issue on its own. Much has been said about its intrusion in all aspects of Linux, and I still prefer using distros without it. How can I use this on, say, Void Linux? Standalone Podman does work there, but I'm not familiar if there were some hacks needed to make it work with runit, and if more would be needed for this quadlet feature.
  - gigatexal 3y ago
    I mean the best part about open source and Linux is that you have choice. Do you want to run an OS devoid of SystemD? Fine. Will you be going against the tide and leaving a large part of the ecosystem behind? Yup. I’ve chosen to embrace systemd and learn it as it is the defacto standard it seems rather than fight what I think is a futile war against it. That being said. I won’t force you to use it if you don’t. But I do not see quadlets using systemd as a failing.
    - hexo 3y ago
      systemd is extremely intrusive. anything dependent on it is a failure.
      - memefrog 3y ago
        [dead]
      - voidnap 3y ago
        This is such a bizarre comment. I run systemd a number of Linux machines currently but does that mean they are failing? Is taking advantage of systemd's features a failure? They run and do their function so in what sense are they failing or what does failure mean?
      - figmert 3y ago
        By my calculations, considering much of the world runs on RH/Ubuntu/Debian, all of which use systemd, things depending on systemd are far from being a failure, cos they'll run on the majority of systems.
        hexo 3y ago
        systemd is a festival of power centralization and bad design. quite opposite of what linux should be.
        hexo 3y ago
        https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/25376 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/25376
  - yrro 3y ago
    "quadlets" are podman using systemd's extension mechanism [systemd.generator(7)] to create systemd services that invoke podman to run containers, based on the files you drop into /etc/containers/systemd.
worksonmine 3y ago
I also miss the simplicity of compose, but for me running rootless is worth the tradeoff. It also forced me to rethink how I used containers and I realized many times a simple podman_run.sh is enough. It also helped me understand containers better because there was less magic going on, sometimes limitations can be good.
- jacooper 3y ago
  Docker has native rootless support. But networking is a joke like podman.
  - misnome 3y ago
    FWIW podman 4's netavark has solved most of the pain points I encountered with podman's rootless networking. Containers can actually find each other now.
    - jacooper 3y ago
      Does it propagate source IPs now? Both IPv4 and IPv6
- rewmie 3y ago
  > I also miss the simplicity of compose, but for me running rootless is worth the tradeoff. To setup/tear down software dev environments deployed locally, the root/rootless discussion isn't really relevant. Ease of deployment and ease of use are critical though, and Docker is above all a development experience victory.
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    Relevant to who? The damage done with container escape is bigger on my machine than any production server I have access to. And there are a lot more packages running in my dev environment than on production servers. When it comes to security or convenience I always choose the first but I know most people wont. Podman-compose isn't as good as docker but it exists, and you can run docker-compose with podman as the runtime. I don't need it as my environments are simple and even wrapping the commands in shell scripts would be overkill. But the option is there.
fbdab103 3y ago
It is not entirely obvious - can I use quadlets in an ad-hoc fashion to spin up a project? The example makes it seem like it is exclusively for long running services.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
TheFragenTaken 3y ago
Yes! Can we talk about projects consistently deciding to invent new nomenclature for their entities or products. Is it an effort to lock you in to their system? Just call things what they are.

by xgbi 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

overbytecode 3y ago

Butane/ignition is the configuration to set up CoreOS (similar to configuration.nix in NixOS) it has nothing to do with Quadlets.

hansihe 3y ago

I was confused by this article in the beginning, it does a pretty bad job at drawing a distinction between the pure quadlet example at the start and the example of using CoreOS to build and launch a VM that starts containers. The basic usage of podman quadlets is putting an `app.container` in `/etc/containers/systemd/` containing something like the first snippet and then starting the unit. For someone familiar with systemd, this seems very very nice to work with.

imiric 3y ago
I'm still not clear whether quadlets are a feature of Podman or systemd... The reliance on systemd is an issue on its own. Much has been said about its intrusion in all aspects of Linux, and I still prefer using distros without it. How can I use this on, say, Void Linux? Standalone Podman does work there, but I'm not familiar if there were some hacks needed to make it work with runit, and if more would be needed for this quadlet feature.
- gigatexal 3y ago
  I mean the best part about open source and Linux is that you have choice. Do you want to run an OS devoid of SystemD? Fine. Will you be going against the tide and leaving a large part of the ecosystem behind? Yup. I’ve chosen to embrace systemd and learn it as it is the defacto standard it seems rather than fight what I think is a futile war against it. That being said. I won’t force you to use it if you don’t. But I do not see quadlets using systemd as a failing.
  - hexo 3y ago
    systemd is extremely intrusive. anything dependent on it is a failure.
    - memefrog 3y ago
      [dead]
    - voidnap 3y ago
      This is such a bizarre comment. I run systemd a number of Linux machines currently but does that mean they are failing? Is taking advantage of systemd's features a failure? They run and do their function so in what sense are they failing or what does failure mean?
    - figmert 3y ago
      By my calculations, considering much of the world runs on RH/Ubuntu/Debian, all of which use systemd, things depending on systemd are far from being a failure, cos they'll run on the majority of systems.
      - hexo 3y ago
        systemd is a festival of power centralization and bad design. quite opposite of what linux should be.
      - hexo 3y ago
        https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/25376 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/25376
- yrro 3y ago
  "quadlets" are podman using systemd's extension mechanism [systemd.generator(7)] to create systemd services that invoke podman to run containers, based on the files you drop into /etc/containers/systemd.

worksonmine 3y ago

I also miss the simplicity of compose, but for me running rootless is worth the tradeoff. It also forced me to rethink how I used containers and I realized many times a simple podman_run.sh is enough. It also helped me understand containers better because there was less magic going on, sometimes limitations can be good.

jacooper 3y ago
Docker has native rootless support. But networking is a joke like podman.
- misnome 3y ago
  FWIW podman 4's netavark has solved most of the pain points I encountered with podman's rootless networking. Containers can actually find each other now.
  - jacooper 3y ago
    Does it propagate source IPs now? Both IPv4 and IPv6
rewmie 3y ago
> I also miss the simplicity of compose, but for me running rootless is worth the tradeoff. To setup/tear down software dev environments deployed locally, the root/rootless discussion isn't really relevant. Ease of deployment and ease of use are critical though, and Docker is above all a development experience victory.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  Relevant to who? The damage done with container escape is bigger on my machine than any production server I have access to. And there are a lot more packages running in my dev environment than on production servers. When it comes to security or convenience I always choose the first but I know most people wont. Podman-compose isn't as good as docker but it exists, and you can run docker-compose with podman as the runtime. I don't need it as my environments are simple and even wrapping the commands in shell scripts would be overkill. But the option is there.

fbdab103 3y ago

It is not entirely obvious - can I use quadlets in an ad-hoc fashion to spin up a project? The example makes it seem like it is exclusively for long running services.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

TheFragenTaken 3y ago

Yes! Can we talk about projects consistently deciding to invent new nomenclature for their entities or products. Is it an effort to lock you in to their system? Just call things what they are.