Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 150 posts

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#131

Post by ajross »

riquito wrote: post #63
ajross wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it feels like being pedantic and missing the joke, but "just give me the EXE" is a terrible bug, not a feature request. Distributing unauthenticated, untraced OS-level binaries is just dangerous in the modern world. Safe app distribution requires either elaborate sandboxed runtimes (browsers) or carefully curated and maintained lists of known-safe binaries (app stores, distro package repositories). We can't be…

If you're considering "just give me the exe" as multiple sharing between people, I wholeheartedly agree that it's a mistake, but the context here is of a person wanting to download the binary from the author themselves.

How does an average user authenticate "the author themselves"? Again, you or I understand how github projects work and can figure out within a minute or two whether or not this is the right group or a legitimate project.

But if you're just a "GIVE ME THE .EXE" person, how do you know the binary you're looking at is a legitimate network scanner or keyboard mapper or game cheat or whatever? You don't. You can't. You just followed a link from someone else who thought it was.

The basic point is that software in the modern world is too complicated to require regular users to validate. They can't do it. And so we need to have trusted authorities like distros and app stores to do it for them, even (especially) when they demand we JUST GIVE ME THE .EXE.

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#132

Post by diego_sandoval »

citizenpaul wrote: post #125
diego_sandoval wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they don't want people to find their social media profiles, then they shouldn't have social media profiles.

I know, she was asking for it right? Nice victim blame.

"Victim", as understood by most people, implies that someone did something wrong to them. There's nothing wrong with seeing someone's profile online, so your analogy doesn't apply.

Thought exercise: Am I being a "victim" of you, because you posted a comment disagreeing with me?

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#133

Post by maliker »

chaxor wrote: post #77

This is really great. I have been trying to get my docker to be more distributable. Right now it's just a simple python script in a python env inside a docker container inside a QEMU container to automate a click and then netcat something. Pretty sweet. It's only like 20GB, so pretty lightweight by modern standards.

So, someone else mentioned this could be sarcasm, but I've got a real application that could use this. It's a complex multi-domain modeling tool incorporating multiple C binaries, python and julia code. We currently deploy with Docker, but there are too many parameters user could set incorrectly in the Docker Desktop interface. We'd love to ship a static binary of this behemoth to cut down on the user/sysadmin deployment error.

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#134

Post by throawayonthe »

diego_sandoval wrote: post #132
citizenpaul wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, she was asking for it right? Nice victim blame.

"Victim", as understood by most people, implies that someone did something wrong to them. There's nothing wrong with seeing someone's profile online, so your analogy doesn't apply. Thought exercise: Am I being a "victim" of you, because you posted a comment disagreeing with me?

[dead]

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#135

Post by chaxor »

maliker wrote: post #133
chaxor wrote: post #77

This is really great. I have been trying to get my docker to be more distributable. Right now it's just a simple python script in a python env inside a docker container inside a QEMU container to automate a click and then netcat something. Pretty sweet. It's only like 20GB, so pretty lightweight by modern standards.

So, someone else mentioned this could be sarcasm, but I've got a real application that could use this. It's a complex multi-domain modeling tool incorporating multiple C binaries, python and julia code. We currently deploy with Docker, but there are too many parameters user could set incorrectly in the Docker Desktop interface. We'd love to ship a static binary of this behemoth to cut down on the user/sysadmin deploy…

Yeah it was/is a mix of sarcasm and genuine use case. I do have a thing (almost) like this, but use it because I want the isolation of network, filesystem, and so on. I definitely hate that it requires so much (not 20G, but still big) for so little. There's probably a way to do the thing and get a 1Kb binary in some Go with namespaces solution or something, which would be much better, but I don't trust myself to implement it correctly even if I spent the time to learn it. So I'm stuck with a horrible solution of a several GB Debian docker because musl/Alpine doesn't cut it

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#136

Post by monfresh »

Alifatisk wrote: post #10

So what does this mean? That I can finally ship portable Ruby executable without requiring the end user to install Ruby?

You can already do this with these forks of ruby-packer and traveling-ruby:

https://github.com/ericbeland/ruby-packer https://github.com/YOU54F/traveling-ruby

ruby-packer is what I use to distribute a paid CLI, although on macOS only because my product is specifically for customers on macOS.

The advantage of ruby-packer is that it is much simpler, but you need to have access to each OS where you want to distribute your executable. OTOH, with traveling-ruby, you can build executables for all OSes from the same machine.

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#137

Post by up2isomorphism »

Ahhh, this is one of those situation where "you can does not mean you should". One does this likely because he want to distribute the binary, but turning whatever inside a docker container in a gigantic blob can gives more trouble down the road.

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#138

Post by Alifatisk »

monfresh wrote: post #136
Alifatisk wrote: post #10

So what does this mean? That I can finally ship portable Ruby executable without requiring the end user to install Ruby?

You can already do this with these forks of ruby-packer and traveling-ruby: https://github.com/ericbeland/ruby-packer https://github.com/YOU54F/traveling-ruby ruby-packer is what I use to distribute a paid CLI, although on macOS only because my product is specifically for customers on macOS. The advantage of ruby-packer is that it is much simpler, but you need to have access to each OS where you want to distribute yo…

Had no idea about the actively maintained fork, thanks!

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#139

Post by maliker »

chaxor wrote: post #135
maliker wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, someone else mentioned this could be sarcasm, but I've got a real application that could use this. It's a complex multi-domain modeling tool incorporating multiple C binaries, python and julia code. We currently deploy with Docker, but there are too many parameters user could set incorrectly in the Docker Desktop interface. We'd love to ship a static binary of this behemoth to cut down on the user/sysadmin deploy…

Yeah it was/is a mix of sarcasm and genuine use case. I do have a thing (almost) like this, but use it because I want the isolation of network, filesystem, and so on. I definitely hate that it requires so much (not 20G, but still big) for so little. There's probably a way to do the thing and get a 1Kb binary in some Go with namespaces solution or something, which would be much better, but I don't trust myself to impl…

Oh yeah, we feel this pain point as well re: large and unwieldy containers. The best approach we've been able to come up with is ship a reliable if large container image and slowly factor out or reduce our heaviest and least reliable dependencies. But it's a looooong process.

Re: Show HN: dockerc – Docker image to static executable "compiler"

#140

Post by tacone »

chaxor wrote: post #135
maliker wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, someone else mentioned this could be sarcasm, but I've got a real application that could use this. It's a complex multi-domain modeling tool incorporating multiple C binaries, python and julia code. We currently deploy with Docker, but there are too many parameters user could set incorrectly in the Docker Desktop interface. We'd love to ship a static binary of this behemoth to cut down on the user/sysadmin deploy…

Yeah it was/is a mix of sarcasm and genuine use case. I do have a thing (almost) like this, but use it because I want the isolation of network, filesystem, and so on. I definitely hate that it requires so much (not 20G, but still big) for so little. There's probably a way to do the thing and get a 1Kb binary in some Go with namespaces solution or something, which would be much better, but I don't trust myself to impl…

Debian slim should be around 60mb. Looks like there's something else wrong.
Post reply on HN