[malux85]

I love watching this in tech, the pendulum swings, this is static linking in another dress,

Soon everyone adopts this, and then someone complains “why is there 500 libc libraries on my machine” or “there was critical bug and I had to update 388 containers - and some maintainers didn’t update and it’s a giant mess!”

Then someone will invent dynamic underlying container sharing (tm) and the pendulum will swing the other way for a bit, and in 2032, one dev will paste your comment in a slightly different form - why muck up my mindvisor with a bunch of tiny apps? Isolated runtimes are built by the devs,

And so on, back and forward forever

[sunrunner]

> And so on, back and forward forever

My god, we've discovered a genuine perpetual motion machine.

> this is static linking in another dress

Although static linking usually seems to result in small binaries that just run on the target machine while this needs all the Docket machinary (and the image sizes can get horrendous)

[7bit]

It's worse, it's reverse perpetual motion. It takes an infinite amount of energy to achieve something you could achieve with a tiny finite amount!

[vrighter]

Noooo!!! Packaging all your dependencies by static linking is bad! Packaging all your dependencies as shared libraries into one tar file, separately for each app, is the way to go and needing another runtime just to be able to run your program (not for it to actually function.... just to run it). The final artefact is still only one file, but without the benefits of link-time-optimization!

[zoobab]

We need a static linux distro, because i prefer to have a portable app that works on all linux distros.

[phatskat]

Sounds like you need an APE