Docker: containers versus local installation

Question

After playing with Dockers for the first time over the weekend and seeing small images for everything from Irssi, little dogs, browsers, etc., I was wondering if the local Package Preferences make the way for dozens of containers instead of <? / P>

I see the advantage that the base system is very clean and all these containers are completely autonomous and can be easily moved to different desktops, even on Windows. Each one works with a tiny distribution such as Alpine, with an application, for example. irssi etc.

Is this where everything is heading, or am I missing a boat here?

Answer 1

.
" " , . .

Chrome:

$ docker run -it \
    --net host \ # may as well YOLO
    --cpuset-cpus 0 \ # control the cpu
    --memory 512mb \ # max memory it can use
    -v /tmp/.X11-unix:/tmp/.X11-unix \ # mount the X11 socket
    -e DISPLAY=unix$DISPLAY \ # pass the display
    -v $HOME/Downloads:/root/Downloads \ # optional, but nice
    -v $HOME/.config/google-chrome/:/data \ # if you want to save state
    --device /dev/snd \ # so we have sound
    --name chrome \
    jess/chrome

Docker , .

Answer 2

. Vagrant , , - , , . , , ( ).

, , - . , Vagrant , , , , ..

Docker . VonC, , script, , Chrome , .

, script, , Node.js eslint . eslint STDOUT, , .

# eslint, as seen by the editor
docker -v $(pwd):$(pwd) $OTHER_DOCKER_ARGS run $ESLINT_IMAGE $@

, , SSH, ? , , , ( ).