4 ms·

"distroless" is just Debian packages. Their self-description is fairly annoyingly misleading, since they don't mention that they are just using packages from De

• yegle 7y ago
  Why is that a bad thing? Binaries are binaries, whether you copied from a deb package or completely built from source code (assuming reproducible build, which Debian supports), they are the same.
  • catern 7y ago
    It's absolutely not a bad thing, indeed I think it's a good thing to use binaries from Debian. I just think the name of the project is strongly misleading. "distroless" is built from the Debian distribution, not something new made from scratch.
    • hobofan 7y ago
      Not sure how widespread that view is, but that's never the association I would have made. "Xless" is just a different way of saying "without X". "fearless" = "without fear"; "serverless" = "without a server" (yes, I know, not really); so "distroless" = "(comes) without a distribution" So in my opinon the name correctly suggests that it's "just the package" and comes "without a distro", and not "was built without the help of a distribution".
  • geezerjay 7y ago
    > Binaries are binaries, whether you copied from a deb package or completely built from source code No, they are not. Debian packages are deployable packages, which are built around packages and services and conventions adopted and provided by the target distribution.
• collinmanderson 7y ago
  it should probably be called "package-manager-less" because there's no package manager in the final build, but there's also no ls, etc, so distroless kinda makes sense. Maybe systemless?