3 ms·
> Today, with containers becoming increasingly the de facto means of deploying software I think that's something of an exaggeration. Yes, containers are popul
by GordonS 7y ago
> Today, with containers becoming increasingly the de facto means of deploying software
I think that's something of an exaggeration.
Yes, containers are popular for server software, but even then it's a huge stretch to claim they are becoming de facto.
- mikepurvis 7y agoApp bundles on MacOS and iOS are basically big containers, though there is some limited external linking through Apple's frameworks scheme. And obviously video game distribution has looked like this since basically forever as well.
- saagarjha 7y ago> App bundles on MacOS and iOS are basically big containers, though there is some limited external linking through Apple's frameworks scheme. There's a file hundreds of megabytes large containing all the dynamically-linked system libraries on iOS to make your apps work.
- jfkebwjsbx 7y agoVideo games do not run on/as containers. Quite the opposite, in fact.
- pjmlp 7y agoKind of. They do on XBox, Swift, iOS, Android sandboxes.
- yellowapple 7y agoIn addition to pjmlp's list, Steam is pushing toward this for Linux games (and one could argue that Steam has been this for as long as it's been available on Linux, given that it maintains its own runtime specifically so that games don't have to take distro-specific quirks into account). Beyond containers / isolated runtime environments, the parent comment is correct about games (specifically of the console variety) being historically nearly-always statically-linked never-updated monoliths (which is how I interpreted that comment). "Patching" a game after-the-fact was effectively unheard of until around the time of the PS3 / Xbox 360 / Wii (when Internet connectivity became more of a norm for game consoles), with the sole exception of perhaps releasing a new edition of it entirely (which would have little to no impact on the copies already sold).