Slashdot Mirror
Docker Images To Be Based On Alpine Linux (brianchristner.io)
New submitter Tenebrousedge writes: Docker container sizes continue a race to the bottom with a couple of environments weighing in at less than 10MB. Following on the heels of this week's story regarding small images based on Alpine Linux, it appears that the official Docker images will be moving from Debian/Ubuntu to Alpine Linux in the near future. How low will they go?
Isn't the whole point of Docker that you can get everything up and running by just apt-getting an old unsupported version of whatever package you need directly in the Dockerfile and then never ever upgrade it?
Obvious troll comment is obvious.
SystemD is a system daemon, it's different by being unnecessary and getting in the way and becoming mandatory, and anything that doesn't have it is a good thing.
a.out and static binaries, go with linux 0.12. everything since has been bloated crap.
You could run in a Jail on BSD, and ship pretty much no OS at all. Thats the future of containers (and 20 year old tech too...)
Fk Systemd. (Alpine doesn't use it)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Say no to the SJW cancer that is systemd, gtk3, etc
Systemd is a new init system whose primary advantage is that it promises to unify the behavior of services running on different linux distros. The problem that a lot of people (including myself) have with it is that since it unifies behavior, you lose choice in how you configure that behavior. In my organisation we've been using Debian for _years_ and upgrading our servers to the latest version has only ever involved minor tweaks to our config scripts. With Debian 8's systemd, we pretty much have to rewrite it all from scratch, which is going to be a huge, dangerous project. Of course, the trend of history is toward automation and standardization, but I think that systemd is too ambitious and too early. Only time will tell though.
I hadn't heard of Alpine Linux before today, being an old Debian guy. Besides the whole systemd thing, I've had the sense that Debian was loosing its way for a while and have been looking around for something to replace it when Debian7 reaches EOL. As a grey beard I want something light-weight and without systemd, but as a practical grey beard I want something stable, that I'll be able to run for another decade. So far, CentOS seemed to be the way of the future for my organization, although it makes me vomit in the back of my throat a little to go closer to the root of the systemd tree.
Make no mistake, though, Docker is the way of the future and will put a lot of people in this forum out of a job. If Alpine has the backing of Docker, it might be the linux distro of the future. It has some really interesting features, like the ability to save all of your system configuration into a package that you can install on other systems via the package manager. That's really cool, and a neat alternative to puppet. I'm not very happy that it isn't binary compatible with stuff built using glibc (which means that commercial software will be limited), and AFAICT it doesn't have some of the dev tools I like to use, but I think this will be a major contender soon.
I'll be watching it. It might
DockerSlim shrinks standard Ubuntu containers by 30X.
Sample images (built with the standard Ubuntu 14.04 base image):
nodejs app container: 431.7 MB => 14.22 MB
python app container: 433.1 MB => 15.97 MB
ruby app container: 406.2 MB => 13.66 MB
java app container: 743.6 MB => 100.3 MB (yes, it's a bit bigger than others :-))
Calling You an SJW is without merit, as Your post has nothing to do with social justice.
Instead, I shall call You an assbandit for calling my system to be a "nothing" without systemd. And a total idiot for claiming that GNU is nothing without Linux. And that Linux is nothing without GNU. In short, fuck off and educate Yourself.
There are plenty of Linux systems that do without either GNU or systemd, just as there are a number of systems that have GNU but do without Linux.
So, WTF is docker? I thought docker was some Apple UI concept, but I have no idea what it is in Linux.
I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
Whined that there are too many white males in tech. Took the side of the sarah cunt. Does not believe that Hans Reiser did the correct thing and should be a free man.
>In the United States, as late as the 1880s most States set the minimum age at 10-12, (in Delaware it was 7 in 1895).[8] Inspired by the "Maiden Tribute" female reformers in the US initiated their own campaign[9] which petitioned legislators to raise the legal minimum age to at least 16, with the ultimate goal to raise the age to 18. The campaign was successful, with almost all states raising the minimum age to 16-18 years by 1920.
>Also: see: Deuteronomy chapter 22 verses 28-29, hebrew allows men to rape girl children and keep them: thus man + girl is obviously fine. Feminists are commanded to be killed as anyone enticing others to follow another ruler/judge/god is to be killed as-per Deuteronomy. It is wonderful when this happens from time to time: celebrate)
I suspect docker is the only real contender to the total systemd domination. I liked systemd until I realized how much fragility it brings to the system with all those supposedly nice dependencies between services. The problem is that when one of the dependencies fails, the rest stops starting/shutting down/working when in fact the failure can be very much transient. So I started to like how docker resists supporting full-featured container dependencies. It essentially requires for containers to deal with connection failures when talking to other containers making the whole setup much more robust. As a bonus it becomes much easier to move containers to other machines making the setup scalable.
The move to Alpine is nice in that respect as it it ensures that the packages to build containers on do not have explicit or implicit dependencies on the presence of systemd and so is much more suitable for docker.
The unification with systemd is so that you as a daemon developer only have to write one single unit file that then will work across all different distributions that use systemd, it has nothing to do with limiting your choice in configuration. There should be no less choice in configuration of systemd for you as an administrator than what you already have with SysVInit. You can run what ever scripts from the unit files that you want. I would very much like to hear why you think that systemd lessens your configurability.
Again, what the fuck is Docker?
How so when the daemons have different names across distributions httpd Apache2 store the preferences in different locations and the configuration in a different location. Standardizing those things have nothing to do with systemd
Can you name one distro with gnu?
WE WUZ KANGZ
Daemons do not have different names across distributions, the Apache2 daemon is httpd regardless of distribution. However as you point out configuration locations can and will vary and also package names (but package names has nothing to do with systemd). If we look at the systemd unit file for Apache2 from RHEL7 there is these two lines:
EnvironmentFile=/etc/sysconfig/httpd
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/httpd $OPTIONS -DFOREGROUND
So what happens here is that the unit file is the same regardless of distribution and then the distribution sets it's configuration locations into the /etc/sysconfig/httpd file by setting $OPTIONS. This way there can be a unified unit file but still differences between distributions. Because to have unified unit files is one of the goals of systemd, the thought is to have a central shared repository of unit files from which the various distributions then simply can sync whenever they update systemd (or when the feel like updating their unit files) without putting the burden on each maintainer/developer to create a distribution specific init script which is the case with SysV.
Debian GNU/HURD
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
If it stopped at that, many would not mind.
but when you have user space programs that depend specifically on on a certain binary sitting as pid1, then people balk.
If systemd was about providing a defined unit file format, and that was it. No problem.
but systemd the project is now systemd-the-binary, logind, networkd, a dhcp client, a dns client (now with DNSSEC support that is likely to be insecure), a cron replacement, inetd replacement, and the list keeps growing.
And if one of your daemons depends on any of those, you also have to perform a init-ectomy on your install.
The only people that could be enthralled by all this are those that are humping Amazons AWS leg 24/7, and think that uptime just depend on them spinning up new instances fast enough.
As long as one cannot print out the image as a QR code ;)
RancherOS appears to be what people want since it uses Docker itself to boot.
As far as the future Microservices is were everything appears to be headed.
Make no mistake, though, Docker is the way of the future and will put a lot of people in this forum out of a job.
Yea, you're not really a grey beard if you make stupid statements like that.
Adding another layer of virtualization to our existing stack with several layers already in it isn't going to magically make things better.
In the last 10 years I've seen the same web server go from running on bare metal to running under 4 layers of hypervisor by the time you get to the docker container ... and you know what ... now that server farm takes 3 times as many people to run because you still need the apache guys ... and you still need the linux guys ... but now you need the docker guys, the vmware guys, and somebody who can coordinate the whole fucking mess.
So lets look at this we went from:
Hardware -> Linux -> AppVM running Apache (1 layer of address translation, the AppVM/Linux kernel boundary)
to
Hardware -> Linux -> KVM -> Linux -> Docker -> Linux -> AppVM running Apache (thats 5 layers of translation ... Yes, thats REALLY what most people using Docker will do)
Yea, thats definitely going to put people out of work ... its easy to understand.
Docker is another example of people doing something because they figured out how to do it, not because they actually should do it. Worse still, Docker is a solution to the fact that Linux is a mess from a file system perspective where everyone just dumps all their bins, system or 3rd party all in the same directories, all together. And then they make fun of Windows like System32 is different than /usr/lib on any given Linux box. System or app config files ... ALL of them are in /etc ... WTF? You know theres this /usr/local idea right? You know that you can put libs in the same directory as the application and then you don't have to run a VM to get the same sort of separation right? I mean seriously, you can't call yourself a grey beard and say Docker is good at the same time, you just admit you have no fucking clue how to be an admin or how docker works.
And you're conflating it with systemd? Do you not have any idea what either one of them are?
Yea, I'm ranting. People who think Docker is good are idiots, typically developers trying to be sys admins, or 'DevOps' as they call it ... and they're clueless and don't understand wtf they are doing. Its not Dockers fault. 'Zones' are something Solaris has had for years, and they weren't new when Solaris did it. Mainframes have had the concept since the 70s. The problem devs who don't know when and where to use them are just throwing them all over the place
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Docker applications are slower than natively-running code.
Yes they do. Your example is perfect: httpd in Debian is called apache2.
Wow, dude, you completely mis-read the GP. Take a pill and read it again.
So it seams, looks like I spoke too soon. Has this been changed because I remember (but of course that memory can be false) that apache2 was /usr/sbin/httpd in Debian back in the day (it's several years since I used either Debian nor Apache). Either way, sorry for speaking while uninformed.
Which user space applications depends on a specific binary being pid 1? And for the other utilities in the systemd suite, why is it seen as a major problem that you get more choices for which software to run? Did you get just as upset when lighttpd or nginx where created since Apache should be the only piece of software that we need?
Apart from your choice over whether to have systemd (and its whole tribe of dependencies) in the first place.
To use the potential of docker, you need to use prebuild images, otherwise it doesn't speed anything up. Prebuild images are just like "okay, somebody uploaded something, i execute it and feed my important data to it". No need to say, it's a bad idea.
What to use instead?
Use plain LXC. LXC works great, you can easily generate a template with debootstrap (it brings a script, which does that) from official debian packages.
Then use ansible to install your stuff. An ansible file just looks like a Dockerfile, only that it has a reasonable function list like "apt: name=apache2 state=installed", which does not rely on writing your own commands "apt-get install apache2", so you avoid many pitfalls (for example quoting stuff with spaces and so on) and it uses jinja2 for templates. Read the docs yourself, it's a great tool to build environments or manage existing ones.
So why was it no problem that most distributions forced SysV on you, or that Ubuntu forced upstart on you? In fact there are tons of software that are forced on me by a distribution, be it grub, libc, or which version of gcc they used to compile the binaries with (not to mention which cflags they used). That it comes as default does not meant that you cannot use another init system if you want, all SysV scripts are still there.
GDM > logind > systemd-pid1.
I think apache version 1 was either httpd or was a direct link. Apache version 2 was immediately called apache2 because it wanted to be installed on the same computer as apache version 1.
Think you are right, must have been since apache 1 I remember this, I switched to lighttpd when it came and never looked back :)
That is not a dependency on a specific pid 1 binary, that is a dependency on a functionality. How else do you think that they solved GDM on BSD, Solaris et al?
Alpine doesn't have systemd
Go well
and again alpine doesn't have systemd
no gnome yeah
Go well
Thanks F.Ultra
Alpine is poorly configured and you need to fiddle with those lovely script files to get some parts firing.
You would be absolutely lost with systemd.
Not every distro works exactly the same, that's why we have init scripts.
Go well
Why would you be lost with very simple unit files as compared with lengthy and complex init scripts? There is no need to do distribution specific unit files since there is no difference there between distributions, file locations might differ but that is handled by configuration files and not by unit files. That each distribution needs their own init scripts is the problem, not the solution.