|
|
|
|
|
by galangalalgol
944 days ago
|
|
An alpine docker container doesn't have the kernel, so all that hardware support, and the kernel itself are still on top of that ~8MB GUI-less image. Part of it is elf header size vs hulk. Part of it is that no one bothers stripping symbols. But the reason for both of those reasons is simply that memory isn't scarce so we are lazy/efficient. |
|
Only if you run it on Linux through para virtualization; in which case it's using the host's kernel. Potato/potato.
The fact that it supports virtualizing an entire other OS in a safe and privileged manner should just further reinforce why the kernel is larger. But ok, got me.
> 8MB GUI-less image
Sure, and you can see all of the contents of that here:
https://github.com/linuxserver/docker-baseimage-alpine/blob/...
Let's just pick a few things from that:
Can you point to a base install of workbench being able to do all of that? About the only thing in the alpine base layout that it is directly comparable to is BusyBox+bash.> Part of it is elf header size vs hulk. Part of it is that no one bothers stripping symbols. But the reason for both of those reasons is simply that memory isn't scarce so we are lazy/efficient.
This is just some old guy "bah humbug" rant/conspiracy. Your Amiga with workbench is nowhere comparable to modern hardware+OSes. It can do somethings similarly, if you squint appropriately. At a much degraded image fidelity, color quality, insecure, primitively multitasking and non-networked manner with heavy RAM and CPU constraints.
I fully acknowledged software bloat is a thing. But we're not comparing some half-ass coded Electron app to some sleek handcoded C/C++/Rust desktop app. You're comparing base software built by decently-well educated engineers that does inordinately more than the comparison set, by so much moreso that it's ridiculous on its face. And then going on a rant about debug symbols and ELF headers (which brings a ton of benefits itself).