MSGID: dont-email.me df294fc6   
   REPLY: news.chiark.greenend.org.uk 1caa0e02   
   TZUTC: 1000   
   CHRS: CP437 2   
   REPLYADDR: Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com   
   REPLYTO: 3:633/280.2@fidonet UUCP   
   PID: Mozilla Thunderbird   
   TID: MBSE-FIDO 1.1.2 (Linux-x86_64)   
   RFC-Message-ID: <109snd3$21u94$1@dont-email.me>   
   RFC-From: Pancho    
   RFC-References: <109h5bq$309ra$1@dont-email.me>       
   RFC-Organization: A noiseless patient Spider   
   RFC-Content-Type: text/plain;   
   RFC-Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit   
   RFC-Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 20:34:44 +0000 (UTC)   
   RFC-Cancel-Lock: sha1:YTp50QCzCHHXU/KOvfthWqlOqoY=   
   RFC-In-Reply-To:    
   RFC-Content-Language: en-GB   
   On 9/6/25 22:53, Theo wrote:   
   > Richard Kettlewell  wrote:   
   >> Jimmy Logan  writes:   
   >>> I'd like to create some kind of service container on rpi4b which I have,   
   >>> which would allow me to just install something in a normal way (not   
   >>> programming the whole installation process like dockerfiles), without   
   >>> changing anything on the current OS.   
   >>   
   >> You don’t need any Dockerfiles to use Docker. So, perhaps Docker will   
   >> meet your needs.   
   >    
   > Isn't the problem that Docker isn't persistent? Next time the container   
   > is started it loses the state from the previous time - so any changes you   
   > make, starting with installing any packages and then on, have to be done   
   > again?   
   >    
   > You can address that two ways.  One is to map volumes into the container so   
   > that they will keep the data on the host filesystem and it'll be there again   
   > when the container restarts.  Or you can make your changes then snapshot the   
   > container ('docker commit') and then launch the snapshot as a new container.   
   >    
      
   As Richard says, containers are persistent.   
      
   The confusion might be that some people, or at least me, don't rely on    
   this container persistence for standard application persistence. I like    
   volumes, they make it clearer what needs to be backed up.   
      
   The tear-down, reproducibility of a non-persistent container was one of    
   the things that appealed to me about Docker. But this was what I    
   regarded as good practice rather than enforced. My perspective is almost    
   certainly skewed by having been a software developer and the unit test    
   way of working. Plus a bitter history of supporting systems that were    
   problematic due to undocumented system changes to the host OS.   
      
   This view is ideal, I don't know about pragmatic real systems.   
      
      
      
      
   --- MBSE BBS v1.1.2 (Linux-x86_64)   
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (3:633/280.2@fidonet)   
   SEEN-BY: 19/38 105/81 106/201 128/187 129/14 305 153/7715 154/110   
   SEEN-BY: 218/700 226/30 227/114 229/110 111 200 206 275 300 317 400   
   SEEN-BY: 229/426 428 470 616 664 700 705 266/512 291/111 292/854 320/219   
   SEEN-BY: 322/757 342/200 396/45 460/58 633/280 281 418 420 509 2744   
   SEEN-BY: 712/848 770/1 902/26 2320/105 5020/400 5075/35   
   PATH: 633/280 229/426