Re: subhurd vs docker

[Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>]

Hi :)

Quoting ha (2014-12-16 12:15:32)
>  From Hurd FAQ:
> 
> One major problem might be that the architectural benefits are generally 
> perceived as very abstract, with little practical benefit. We currently 
> don't have many tools that are actually making use of all the possibilities.
> 
> Question:
> 
> Please compare subhurd to the Docker, since it should have at least some 
> of its abilities. Perhaps this can be perceived as not-so-abstract benefit?

Yes.  Virtualization is a strong point of multiserver systems like the
Hurd.  Because on such systems it doesn't really matter where a
service is implemented, be it in kernel or userspace.  So to
virtualize a resource, one simply provides an alternative
implementation.  In fact, on Debian we have two sets of network
drivers, one in the kernel, and one in userspace.

I'm interested in subhurds as well.  I want to be able to start them
as unprivileged user.  I have a prototype, and some of the
functionality has been merged recently.  But it is blocked by a
scheduler bug in gnumach :/

Justus