Oasis – a small, statically-linked Linux system

Post by Shorel » Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 4:44 PM UTC

lnxg33k1 wrote: post #34

Shorel wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a world where Docker and Kubernetes exist, where whole copies of operating systems are added to each running service... This seems a weird thing to complain about =)

Yeah but there I can still update vulnerable libraries independently, to be a statically linked system just means that if there is a bug in libpng then I have to recompile everything?

Post by enriquto » Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 4:48 PM UTC

nightowl_games wrote: post #8

Can someone explain a couple use cases for something like this?

Post by volemo » Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 4:58 PM UTC

bzzzt wrote: post #50

kentonv wrote: post #20

Doesn't linking everything statically imply that the base image -- and memory, at runtime -- will be bloated by many copies of libc and other common libraries? I do like the simplicity of static linking but it sort of seems to go against the idea of avoiding "bloat".

I know lots of compilers/linkers don't optimize for it but it should be possible to 'tree shake' libraries so only the parts that are used by an application are included. That would shake off a lot of the 'bloat'.

Post by Gabrys1 » Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

kentonv wrote: post #33

Shorel wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a world where Docker and Kubernetes exist, where whole copies of operating systems are added to each running service... This seems a weird thing to complain about =)

I mean, if you ran every single executable on your desktop in a separate container I think you'd see problems. There are a pretty large number of programs running on most desktops, plus all the programs that get called by shell scripts, etc. Running a handful of containers representing major applications is more reasonable and the memory wastage may be worth it to avoid dependency conflicts.

Post by fullspectrumdev » Fri, Jan 26, 2024, 5:15 PM UTC

znpy wrote: post #15

sluongng wrote: post #9

What is the comparison between using musl and traditional glibc? Is there performance differences between the two? I have been seeing musl used more and more in both Rust and Zig ecosystems lately.

> What is the comparison between using musl and traditional glibc? you get weird bugs and failures that don't happen with glibc (like the incomplete dns resolving routines that would fail under some conditions) but you can brag about saving 30-40 mb of disk space. this project seems to be compromising on quality overall, in the name of having smaller size. Even BearSSL, by their own website is beta-quality: "Current…