However, if Red Hat developed and depended on their own container runtime, vendor lock-in was attainable. Using a tool like docker wouldn't give them that lock-in. Next, IBM had to score a bit of vendor lock-in. To do that, IBM needed Red Hat, so they purchased the company. IBM was desperate to gain serious traction within the cloud. Understand this is pure conjecture here and I have zero facts to back these claims up. Here's where my tinfoil hat comes into play. There was also Red Hat's issue with "no big fat daemons." If that's the case, how do they justify their stance on systemd? Sure, I could easily draw the conclusion that Red Hat had grown tired of the security issues surrounding Docker and wanted to take matters in their own hands. When trying to ascertain why Red Hat split with Docker, nothing came clear. The company decided - seemingly out of the blue - to drop support for the docker runtime engine. It's easy to install and use, and many of the technologies I write about depend upon this software," writes TechRepublic/ contributor Jack Wallen. This is pretty much what I neededįor testing and it is a good and flexible use case for the container."I've grown quite fond of the docker container runtime. That, for good measure, sets up a reasonable Ruby and Python developmentĮnvironment under a standard user account. To make this process repeatable, these were wrapped up in a GitHub project Unfortunately, this simply doesn’t work as expected in AWS.Īfter a bit of experimentation, I determined the correct combination ofĪrtifacts from the base OS that would allow the docker container to function Supposed to inherit the subscription aspects of the underlying host. The reason that I originally thought to do this is that docker in RHEL is To spin up a small instance in AWS and, for easy and quick repeatability, fire The easiest and cheapest method for testing on RHEL is I recently needed to run some tests on a RHEL 7 system but needed a
0 kommentar(er)
