SirGiggles
Joined 5 years ago
Karma
145
Submissions
102
Member since
Mar 27
Recent submissions
Comment · 2 months ago
The market is smaller (maybe, I'm not sure what the statistics are) but it would be interesting to see how Xen stacks up; also stuff like gVisor or libkrun. The latter is probably implicitly the same as Firecracker given the ancestry of the libraries used.
Comment · 5 months ago
I think it's pretty likely they are since they gave a talk at Code BEAM Europe 2025: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC435RGwRCI
Comment · 11 months ago
> https://github.com/zabbly/incus/issues/89#issuecomment-30764...
> I mean sure, it's the UI component only, and not on the lxc repo but the Zabbly one, and maybe they treat things widely differently depending.
This one is fair since Incus and Zabbly have had no desire to reimplement a web UI, they've instead opted to leave that to the community resulting in LXConsole for example.
Zabbly, for additional context, is Stephane Graber's company that he set up as a consultant service for Linux and Linux Container (both in terms of the Linux Container organization and the LXC project)
As a whole, the project has left the choice of web interface up to the user: https://discuss.linuxcontainers.org/t/incus-6-7-has-been-rel...
> But it's the same developer for both, and I'm willing to bet it's a similar mindset for projects.
This is getting dangerously close to a mischaracterization of events surrounding the Linux Containers and Canonical split.
See: https://stgraber.org/2023/12/12/lxd-now-re-licensed-and-unde... in addition to: https://linuxcontainers.org/incus/announcement/
EDIT: I read this part to suggest that former LXD team members that are now on the Incus team potentially have the same mindset, if this is wrong, please correct me.
> And I swear I had a similar experience with regards to some other incus issues where there was a similar response about changes.
So far from my two years of interaction (both as a lurker and commenter) on the forums and purveyor on the issue tracker, I've yet to see anything that resembles treating Canonical LXD as any form of upstream especially since the split.
Comment · 11 months ago
Can you substantiate this?
The only time this held, vaguely to my recollection, true was prior to Incus 0.4 where both were cherry picking from each other but neither were upstream of each other
Comment · 11 months ago
There is .NET support for FreeBSD but it is relatively recent; FreshPorts lists it as added in January 2024. See:
- https://www.freshports.org/lang/dotnet/ - https://wiki.freebsd.org/.NET - https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/issues/14537
Currently it looks like it's currently just 9.0.10
Comment · 1 year ago
This is deliberate misinformation.
You can easily see that versions prior to Beta 1.8 were obfuscated just by downloading the .jar for the older versions on minecraft.wiki.
You can even view some of the old MCP mappings here: https://archive.org/details/minecraftcoderpack
Comment · 1 year ago
According to another message chain, this is also in part related to/influenced by Dockyard no longer funding Elixir projects [1].
Also that the next evolution of "LVN" is likely not going to be Elixir based going by [2]
Comment · 1 year ago
This looks more like a wrapper over Qemu/KVM
Comment · 1 year ago
I think things are swinging back the other way if I have understood the more recent PVHv2 stuff correctly.
Comment · 1 year ago
This has been one personal pet peeve with the documentation surrounding Incus.
As a stack, Incus has been exceptional, it has largely replaced Proxmox and Podman Quadlets for me. For context, I homelab so I cannot generalize my claim to SMB or enterprise.
But the documentation has been very end user oriented, information regarding specifics like seccomp as you mentioned are only discoverable with the search bar and that leads to various disparate locations; and that also isn't taking into account that some of the more nitty gritty information isn't on the Incus portion of linuxcontainers.org, see the LXC Security page for example: https://linuxcontainers.org/lxc/security/
Comment · 1 year ago
Linux Containers, or LXC, came before Docker and OCI standardization.
As the others have mentioned, Incus is the community fork led by former members of the LXD team.
Comment · 1 year ago
I think you could also add Xen to that list. IIRC, the old Xen PV mode was purely paravirtualized without using any hardware extensions.
Comment · 1 year ago
In the context of Incus, they are the same.
Incus and LXC internally use umoci to manipulate the OCI tarball to conform to how LXC runs containers.
See: - https://umo.ci/ - https://github.com/lxc/lxc/blob/lxc-4.0.2/templates/lxc-oci....
Comment · 1 year ago
No worries on that front, I expect that fun fact to be just a minor setback but I'm still pretty dead set on making my personal infrastructure declarative, reproducible, and anti-hysteresis.
Comment · 1 year ago
I wasn't aware NixOS prunes EOL kernels, thanks for letting me know; this throws a bit of wrench/damper in my personal machine plans.