3 ms·

The article doesn't seem to do much... in the 'why'. I'm inundated with how, though. I've been on both sides of this argument, and I really think it's a case-

The article doesn't seem to do much... in the 'why'. I'm inundated with how, though. I've been on both sides of this argument, and I really think it's a case-by-case thing. A highly compliant environment? As minimal as possible. A hobbyist/developer that wants to debug? Go as big of an image as you want. It shouldn't be an expensive operation to update your image base and deploy a new one, regardless of size. Network/resource constraints (should) be becoming less of an issue. In a lot of cases, a local registry cache is all you need. I worry partly about how much time is spent on this quest, or secondary effects. Has the situation with name resolution been dealt with in musl? For example, something like /etc/hosts overrides not taking proper precedence (or working at all). To be sure, that's not a great thing to use - but it does, and leads to a lot of head scratching

3np 5y ago
I mean on one hand, yeah, but comparing Debian (124 MB) with Ubuntu (73 MB) shows that with some effort you can eat your cake and have it too.
- bravetraveler 5y ago
  Definitely - I guess my biggest takeaway with my post is... keep size in mind (in terms of vuln surface area) - but don't let it become a time sink. In the quest of the smallest image possible, one can bring about many unwarranted problems.
yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
> A highly compliant environment? As minimal as possible. A hobbyist/developer that wants to debug? Go as big of an image as you want. Hah, I go the other way; at work hardware is cheap and the company wants me to ship yesterday, so sure I'll ship the big image now and hope to optimize later. At home, I'm on a slow internet connection and old hardware and I have no deadlines, so I'm going to carefully cut down what I pull and what I build.
- bravetraveler 5y ago
  Haha, definitely understandable! The constraints one operates in always differ, so that's why I really try to stay flexible (or forgiving) in this situation. Our development teams at work have a lot of [vulnerability scanning] trouble from bundling things they don't need. In that light, I suggest keeping things small - but that's the 'later' part you alluded towards :)

3np 5y ago

I mean on one hand, yeah, but comparing Debian (124 MB) with Ubuntu (73 MB) shows that with some effort you can eat your cake and have it too.

bravetraveler 5y ago
Definitely - I guess my biggest takeaway with my post is... keep size in mind (in terms of vuln surface area) - but don't let it become a time sink. In the quest of the smallest image possible, one can bring about many unwarranted problems.

yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago

> A highly compliant environment? As minimal as possible. A hobbyist/developer that wants to debug? Go as big of an image as you want. Hah, I go the other way; at work hardware is cheap and the company wants me to ship yesterday, so sure I'll ship the big image now and hope to optimize later. At home, I'm on a slow internet connection and old hardware and I have no deadlines, so I'm going to carefully cut down what I pull and what I build.

bravetraveler 5y ago
Haha, definitely understandable! The constraints one operates in always differ, so that's why I really try to stay flexible (or forgiving) in this situation. Our development teams at work have a lot of [vulnerability scanning] trouble from bundling things they don't need. In that light, I suggest keeping things small - but that's the 'later' part you alluded towards :)