4 ms·
So they could have called it "minimalist", "barebone", "stripped". I share parent's view that it's marketed with the most provocative term to attract attention
by makeitdouble 2y ago
So they could have called it "minimalist", "barebone", "stripped".
I share parent's view that it's marketed with the most provocative term to attract attention, where an appropriate name wouldn't have stirred enough controversy to their taste ?
- iam-TJ 2y agoI'm quite surprised by this descriptive term also; in fact I've always (for years) called this type an "application container" since it only contains the files required by the primary process and doesn't have a standard init system (usually it is expected to handle PID 1 responsibilities in its primary executable or use a stub init (as when using e.g: systemd-nspawn --as-pid2 ... ). In contrast a "system container" has a regular init system and likely also package management (although that is optional) but was created using a package manager so the miscellaneous package-installed files are usually in there.
- hifromwork 2y agoThey could, but "distroless" is already an estabilished name, I think pioneered by Google[1]. As someone close to this field, I immediately know what "distroless" means in this context, and it's unclear what "minimalist" mean (does it mean it's based on Ubuntu Minimal? Alpine? Distroless?). [1]https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/distroless https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/distroless
- arccy 2y agothose terms have already been used in various distro installers for installations that contain very little, but still all the setup for you to expand it into a full blown distro with the package manager. The distroless images specifically don't give you a package manager, only specific packages needed for you to run.