Hacker News Reader

Comment by n4bz0r | Hacker News Reader

Woah! Don't know if it can be used as a proper Docker replacement (probably not), but I sure do appreciate the project as an example of how to use all the tools to implement an isolated environment. And the fact that it actually works with Docker containers (well, why wouldn' it, but still) is just a cheery on top!

View on HN

> Don't know if it can be used as a proper Docker replacement

The readme says "I can make no guarantees that it won't trash your system", so yeah clearly not intended for real use.

Where does Docker guarantee that it won't trash your system?

See here: https://www.docker.com/legal/docker-terms-service/

Under EXCLUSION OF WARRANTIES and LIMITATION OF LIABILITY.

Here, Bocker is also a replacement for Docker in exactly the same sense: Bocker's simple statement "I can't guarantee it won't trash your system" is a concise alterantive to a wall of legalese.

To be fair one is for demonstration purposes and the other is intended to be used. They seek the same protections regardless. It's kind of like how a $1,000 water filtration system wants the same legal protection that a $15 Brita does or heck, I'd assume if you got scammed with a fraudulent water filter that used orgone energy and crystals, it too would also want those legal protections.

You'd probably want to tread cautiously if someone doesn't use disclaimers - that's probably a more dangerous product.

Sure, but in this case both Bocker and Docker just orchestrate features of Linux, which is where all the risks and complexity lies.

To verify that Bocker adds no additional issues is a smaller job than verifying Docker in the same way.

If there is some problem in the actual containerization, Bocker and Docker will be equally affected.

Isn't the argument presented here that just because two things have the same "no responsibility in event of failure"-clause does not mean likelihood of failure, robustness, battletesting, etc, are comparable? Or am I missing something

But.. it’s not a good alternative. This description is not as precise or as bounded as the “legalese” wording.

Well, I didn't read the legalese but read this short sentence. That makes it 1000% better for me right now, you can't abstract away the message channel. Maybe the best would be to have a short 10-line summary then the legally bounding legalese. (Edit: nonsense spelling error)

Most software says that in the license too (even commercial software!) so it’s nice to see it front and center for once.

that's why smart people always check this stuff out on spare machines and VMs.

Right?

... right?

I typically run stuff inside of docker

And now I'm curious whether this would work inside a container or not. I know dind is a thing, but I don't recall whether it needs special hacks that bocker lacks.

It requires nearly full root access for the inner container runtime, thus it can trash your system.

Should probably run it in a VM just to be safe

A cheer for the cheery!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com