4 ms·

Virtual machines, then lean containers, now this... I predict that in a few years we will rediscover static binaries and we will finally find closure.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dig1 5y ago
After this, we will get back to shared libraries, because updating that libpng would require updating all those static binaries. This is already happening with many go and rust programs.
- guhidalg 5y ago
  No? Assuming all processes on a machine _want_ to use the same shared library is what leads to isolation mechanisms.
- ReptileMan 5y ago
  No need anymore. Both bandwidth and storage are dirt cheap. Linked libraries became obsolete the moment hard drives became huge.
  - still_grokking 5y ago
    Only if you don't care about security.
  - teknopaul 5y ago
    And became relevant again the moment people stopped using HDs in devices that run Linux ;)
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  And eventually maybe it'll all converge back to the rational way to do things: a base set of shared libraries provided by the OS that maintain strict ABI compatibility, and everything else static.
- snovv_crash 5y ago
  Right until you want to run more than one release on the same machine...
- hackeraccount 5y ago
  I think the end goal is what we all want - be able to do any of the options - single binary to external libraries and anything in between easily. Not with the one way going in fashion and the other out but both supported and accessible.
_448 5y ago
:) The cool thing would be multi-host static binaries i.e. binaries that host multiple "apps" and its dependencies and use commandline option to launch specific "app" from the binary(or without commandline option, provide a app list from which the user can select that app to run)
- still_grokking 5y ago
  So you want in the extreme to package a distribution as unikernel? Or add a binary launcher in front of a squashfs image of a live distro? Something like that could be done with AppImage I guess.
- cyberpunk 5y ago
  So… busybox?
- still_grokking 5y ago
  > The cool thing would be multi-host static binaries My first thought was someone is thinking about something like: https://ahgamut.github.io/c/2021/02/27/ape-cosmo/ https://ahgamut.github.io/c/2021/02/27/ape-cosmo/ There is also something similar that can make binaries that run even bare metal or as EFI apps. But I can't find at the moment. (Maybe someone else has the link?)
agumonkey 5y ago
alacarte staticity
zbentley 5y ago
I think not. The landscape of software packaging is too unpleasant and chaotic, the goals of its participants--users vs package collection (distro) maintainers vs. software authors--too misaligned. Instead, what I think (hope) will happen is a simultaneous increase in prevalence of two things: "effectively static" software releases (whether that's an actual static binary or a container/flatpak/exodus-bundled folder/whatever), and sandboxing/isolation tools at the OS level, to prevent the statically linked dependencies in installed programs from causing harm to the system. There will probably always be exceptions made for software that by necessity must be integrated tightly with the whole computer (window managers etc.), but I don't think people are going to rediscover dynamic linking en masse.
dv_dt 5y ago
The last discovery is to add all the container security boundaries to a super lightweight container called a process.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dig1 5y ago

After this, we will get back to shared libraries, because updating that libpng would require updating all those static binaries. This is already happening with many go and rust programs.

guhidalg 5y ago
No? Assuming all processes on a machine _want_ to use the same shared library is what leads to isolation mechanisms.
ReptileMan 5y ago
No need anymore. Both bandwidth and storage are dirt cheap. Linked libraries became obsolete the moment hard drives became huge.
- still_grokking 5y ago
  Only if you don't care about security.
- teknopaul 5y ago
  And became relevant again the moment people stopped using HDs in devices that run Linux ;)
AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
And eventually maybe it'll all converge back to the rational way to do things: a base set of shared libraries provided by the OS that maintain strict ABI compatibility, and everything else static.
snovv_crash 5y ago
Right until you want to run more than one release on the same machine...
hackeraccount 5y ago
I think the end goal is what we all want - be able to do any of the options - single binary to external libraries and anything in between easily. Not with the one way going in fashion and the other out but both supported and accessible.

_448 5y ago

:) The cool thing would be multi-host static binaries i.e. binaries that host multiple "apps" and its dependencies and use commandline option to launch specific "app" from the binary(or without commandline option, provide a app list from which the user can select that app to run)

still_grokking 5y ago
So you want in the extreme to package a distribution as unikernel? Or add a binary launcher in front of a squashfs image of a live distro? Something like that could be done with AppImage I guess.
cyberpunk 5y ago
So… busybox?
still_grokking 5y ago
> The cool thing would be multi-host static binaries My first thought was someone is thinking about something like: https://ahgamut.github.io/c/2021/02/27/ape-cosmo/ https://ahgamut.github.io/c/2021/02/27/ape-cosmo/ There is also something similar that can make binaries that run even bare metal or as EFI apps. But I can't find at the moment. (Maybe someone else has the link?)

agumonkey 5y ago

alacarte staticity

zbentley 5y ago

I think not. The landscape of software packaging is too unpleasant and chaotic, the goals of its participants--users vs package collection (distro) maintainers vs. software authors--too misaligned. Instead, what I think (hope) will happen is a simultaneous increase in prevalence of two things: "effectively static" software releases (whether that's an actual static binary or a container/flatpak/exodus-bundled folder/whatever), and sandboxing/isolation tools at the OS level, to prevent the statically linked dependencies in installed programs from causing harm to the system. There will probably always be exceptions made for software that by necessity must be integrated tightly with the whole computer (window managers etc.), but I don't think people are going to rediscover dynamic linking en masse.

dv_dt 5y ago

The last discovery is to add all the container security boundaries to a super lightweight container called a process.