Live data from Hacker News

Alpine Linux 3.15

alpinelinux.org

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#11
post #7

Is Python totally DIY? Can't find it in the package search.

The packages are either python3 or python2 for the language, and prefixed py2- or py3- for any of the packaged modules. https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/ does support wildcards so you should find the packages using "python?" or "py?-*".

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#12

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

I use it on a headless thin client serving as a NAS/ printer server / media box etc. Works very well. Keep in mind that Alpine actually predates containers by many years. It originally started as a light-weight distro targeted at embedded stuff. And the roots are still there. https://heap.ovh/alpine-linux-on-fujitsu-futro-s520s720.html

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#14

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

Powers my router, running on an APU2. The run-from-ram-with-overlays configuration makes upgrades relatively painless.

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#15
post #8

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

I use it as a daily driver on my Raspberry Pi. Since the community is small the package repositories are a bit small as well, and I occasionally have to build stuff by hand (painful on the Pi). Add musl to the ARM platform and most binaries in the wild won't run. However, musl and apk means the Alpine is a lot faster than, say, Raspbian or Arch.

I love Alpine on the Raspberry Pi Zero family. Not only does this create a durable and speedy ramdisk appliance, but experience configuring and minimizing the build size translates to containers as well.

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#16

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

I use it on my desktop:) It's a nice experience after a slight learning curve; I'm particularly fond of it supporting ZFS well without being Ubuntu. Musl libc is a potential pain point; I get most software from official repos or build from source, but ex. to run Steam I resorted to flatpak (which just shoves glibc in the container with the application).

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#17

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

I can't recommend it for desktop use, but it is possible to use it as such.

IMHO it really shines on dedicated, small VMs or for headless SBC use cases.

There's only 5 daemons running after the installation (provider in brackets, the installer asks which one for ssh and ntp): - init (OpenRC) - ssh (dropbear or OpenSSH) - ntp (chrony or busybox) - crond (busybox) - syslog (busybox)

The diskless mode it offers is ideal for SBC's or other use cases with SD-cards or such.

So it's niche seems to be with very lightweight or hardened servers.

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#18
post #4

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

I use it as a bare metal OS on my blog server and it's great in that scenario too. I've personally found the libc stuff makes it really inconvenient to use as a desktop OS, unfortunately. You have to jump through hoops to get something like VSCode to "just work".

Software like VS code is in direct conflict with the way alpine does things. Alpine on the desktop is certainly not for everyone, but for some use cases it works great.

Re: Alpine Linux 3.15

#20

I'm familiar with Alpine in container scenarios, but is there any mileage to using it as a day-to-day desktop distro?

I use it on my desktop:) It's a nice experience after a slight learning curve; I'm particularly fond of it supporting ZFS well without being Ubuntu. Musl libc is a potential pain point; I get most software from official repos or build from source, but ex. to run Steam I resorted to flatpak (which just shoves glibc in the container with the application).

For an average user, I'd guess they'd hit more issues with busybox than musl.
Post reply on HN