[Reprozip-users] Reprozip vs CDE?
remirampin at gmail.com
Fri Oct 28 11:43:43 EDT 2016
2016-10-26 10:33 EDT, Jonas Wagner <jonas.wagner at epfl.ch>:
> I was curious how Reprozip compares with CDE by Philip Guo. From what I
> understand, both tools aim to solve the dependency hell problem, and both
> use system call interposition to capture a set of files that the
> application depends on.
> On the other hand, CDE comes from a time when Docker was not invented yet.
> This is at least one major difference I spotted... how does Reprozip use
> What other differences are there between these tools?
We are aware of CDE, which is indeed similar to ReproZip. However CDE was
written as a hack on top of the strace source code, and is not actively
maintained (last commit was 2013).
A big advantage of reprounzip is the pluggable unpackers, which allows one
to re-run the package in a variety of ways, on different operating systems
and with better isolation from the host system. Re-running the program is
also automatic, no need to navigate the package and type in the original
We believe ReproZip to be more usable and portable than CDE. It is true
that we are missing the ptrace-based reproduction method from cde-exec,
however we are working on adding it as an unpacker (#155
<https://github.com/ViDA-NYU/reprozip/issues/155>). It is less portable and
less secure than the current unpackers, but we believe it to be useful in
some environments like HPC where Docker is not available.
Please let us know if you have further questions.
NYU Tandon School of Engineering
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Reprozip-users