> If docker Linux containers could run a-la macOS, via hypervisor, would be a huge boost in FreeBSD adoption
Hypervisor-based Linux is going to be more compatible with the bleeding edge of Linux kernels, but using a system call compatibility library seems more elegant, so I'm happy to see this, and I'd like to see a version for macOS as well.
How do you figure that? I thought this space was covered by FreeBSD jails, except Docker is 3rd party, jails are baked in to FreeBSD, and Docker is only able to run containers, while jails run FreeBSD and Linux programs. Maybe Docker can run in a jail on FreeBSD? idk. But it just seems like you're making a declarative statement from the perspective that "Linux is everything that matters" without being aware of jails and BHyVe, but then again, I am replying without much knowledge of Docker and not any understanding why young devs think it is the Second Coming.
You can already run Docker on Linux running as a guest on FreeBSD's own bhyve hypervisor. Pick a small Linux distro and go for it if you're prepared to accept the overhead.
I guess this depends very much on what the container image does. Doing basic Unix/Posix stuff in an application container shouldn't be that much work. But until systemd or something else very Linux-specific runs in a system container sounds like a huge amount of work.
From my experience there are few examples of software that’s both Linux-specific and actually useful. As for systemd - which container mechanisms depend on it?
Okay, so what? The reason for missing support for those mechanisms is mostly the lack of need. And this goes deep in the Linux land, for example the Linux-specific signalfd(2) system call is pretty much completely unused - except for systemd.
