[Freedombox-discuss] Virtual Machine Scripting and Tiny Tiny RSS
nick at internetmachines.co.uk
Mon May 20 11:45:47 UTC 2013
Do you have a rundown yet of how to
* stick exmachina (http://gitorious.org/exmachina) at the back,
* proxy (http://www.privoxy.org, https://github.com/jvasile/freedombox-privoxy) in front, and
* various apps into LXC?
On 20 May 2013, at 12:07, Sean Alexandre <sean at alexan.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 12:39:16PM +0200, Anders Jackson wrote:
>> I like the idea, a lot. Make the Freedombox a router in front of all
>> services, manage the network connections for all services to Internet and
>> the local network.
>> As Freedombox are targeted at low powered devices, virtual machines might
>> be to heavy though. You might look into containers instead. LCX might be a
>> better solution for this. Faster and lighter to set up, run and tear down.
>> And I know it works on more targets, like in ARM machines.
> Thanks for the link. So I see his approach lets you choose. The sandbox can run
> with either LXC or KVM. I like that. I'm going to come back to this and dig deeper.
> His approach seems like it probably has some of the scripting I'm looking for too, or
> something like it.
> At a very high level it seems the tradeoff between KVM and LXC is KVM gives better
> isolation/protection because it's full virtualization, while LXC performs better.
> LXC is probably a better approach for hardware such as the DreamPlug, while KVM
> seems better for more powerful platforms.
> More powerful platforms should become more common over time, given Moore's Law.
> Also, KVM runs on some ARM CPUs today. There was this earlier thread with some links:
> Debian Wheezy, and LXC
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
More information about the Freedombox-discuss