I’d love to see an orchestrator that made switching between bare metal, vm and containers a simple configuration option. This is a step in that direction. Cool stuff!
Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
71–80 of 144 posts
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#72Why does everything in node have to have all the dependencies in the world? ``` @sindresorhus/is JSONStream ansi-regex ansi-styles archive-type argparse asn1 async balanced-match base64-js bcrypt-pbkdf bl bluebird brace-expansion buffer buffer-alloc buffer-alloc-unsafe buffer-crc32 buffer-fill buffer-from cacheable-request camelcase caw chalk chownr cliui clone-response color-convert color-name commander concat-map c…
Yesterday a friend of mine told me about how they got a Node.js application from a vendor that was about 3 MiB, and after running npm install, it was over 1 GiB. I half-jokingly said that Node apps are the new ZIP bombs.
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#73Recently on HN (I think) and related: - https://micromind.me/en/posts/from-docker-container-to-boota... - https://godarch.com/ Really like seeing these new usecases for containers -- would have never thought to mix the two technologies in this way.
They seem to do very little that SystemD cannot already do with services and overlayFS, with the added benefit of being already available on most systems.
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because I don't want to have to install the massive nodejs runtime just to glue things together.
I'm just curious what you feel about Java, .Net, Python and Ruby? Ruby is a hair smaller, but the others are actually bigger than the NodeJS runtime, with .Net and Java being significantly bigger. Or, do you only run software hand crafted in assembly?
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I avoid any desktop app that uses electron or similar. Electron is still a hog, and most things written in electron have alternatives. I don't use the slack desktop app for this reason, as an example.
So you use the browser app which uses approximately the same amount of memory / resources?
That browser instance alone can make quite a noticeable difference.
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#76Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yesterday a friend of mine told me about how they got a Node.js application from a vendor that was about 3 MiB, and after running npm install, it was over 1 GiB. I half-jokingly said that Node apps are the new ZIP bombs.
good luck to your friend with repeatable installations :P
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#78Why not just start with a tiny vm and call it a day?
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what you get when you combine a really easy to use package management ecosystem and the standard library is really bad. You don't see this in Python for example, because its not so easy (its getting better though) to create packages and because its standard library is massive.
Javascript's standard library isn't bad, it's perfectly adequate for its intended use case - acting as a lightweight scripting language for the web, within a browser. Javascript as a system or backend language was a mistake, but there's no putting that genie back into the bottle.
Re: Show HN: Slim – Build and run tiny VMs from Dockerfiles
#80I’d love to see an orchestrator that made switching between bare metal, vm and containers a simple configuration option. This is a step in that direction. Cool stuff!
[1] - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-container...