Convert Figma logo to code with AI

alpinelinux logodocker-alpine

Official Alpine Linux Docker image. Win at minimalism!

1,075
262
1,075
172
View on GitHub

Top Related Projects

gliderlabs's avatar

docker-alpine

5,710

Alpine Linux Docker image. Win at minimalism!

microsoft's avatar

vscode-dev-containers

4,712

NOTE: Most of the contents of this repository have been migrated to the new devcontainers GitHub org (https://github.com/devcontainers). See https://github.com/devcontainers/template-starter and https://github.com/devcontainers/feature-starter for information on creating your own!

Quick Overview

The alpinelinux/docker-alpine repository contains the official Docker images for Alpine Linux. Alpine Linux is a security-oriented, lightweight Linux distribution based on musl libc and busybox. These Docker images provide a minimal base for building containerized applications with a focus on small size and security.

Pros

  • Extremely small image size, typically under 5MB
  • Enhanced security due to minimal attack surface
  • Fast container startup times
  • Regular updates and maintenance

Cons

  • Limited package availability compared to larger distributions
  • Potential compatibility issues with applications requiring glibc
  • Steeper learning curve for users unfamiliar with Alpine Linux
  • Some debugging tools not included by default

Getting Started

To use the Alpine Linux Docker image, follow these steps:

  1. Pull the latest Alpine Linux image:

    docker pull alpine:latest

  2. Run a container using the Alpine image:

    docker run -it alpine:latest /bin/sh

  3. Inside the container, you can use Alpine's package manager, apk, to install additional packages:

    apk add --no-cache <package-name>

  4. To build a custom image based on Alpine, create a Dockerfile:

    FROM alpine:latest
RUN apk add --no-cache python3
COPY . /app
WORKDIR /app
CMD ["python3", "app.py"]

  5. Build and run your custom image:

    docker build -t my-alpine-app .
docker run my-alpine-app

Competitor Comparisons

gliderlabs logo

docker-alpine

5,710

Alpine Linux Docker image. Win at minimalism!

Pros of docker-alpine (Gliderlabs)

  • More actively maintained with frequent updates
  • Includes additional tools and utilities for enhanced functionality
  • Better documentation and community support

Cons of docker-alpine (Gliderlabs)

  • Slightly larger image size due to additional tools
  • May include unnecessary components for minimal container requirements

Code Comparison

docker-alpine (Alpine Linux):

FROM scratch
ADD alpine-minirootfs-3.14.0-x86_64.tar.gz /
CMD ["/bin/sh"]

docker-alpine (Gliderlabs):

FROM scratch
ADD rootfs.tar.gz /
CMD ["/bin/sh"]

The main difference in the Dockerfiles is the naming of the root filesystem archive. Gliderlabs' version may include additional setup steps or configurations not visible in this basic example.

Key Differences

  • Maintenance: Gliderlabs' version is more frequently updated
  • Features: Gliderlabs includes extra tools and utilities
  • Image size: Alpine Linux's version is slightly smaller
  • Community: Gliderlabs has more active community involvement

Both repositories provide Alpine-based Docker images, but Gliderlabs' version offers more features and active maintenance at the cost of a slightly larger image size. The choice between them depends on specific project requirements and the need for additional tools versus minimal container size.

microsoft logo

vscode-dev-containers

4,712

NOTE: Most of the contents of this repository have been migrated to the new devcontainers GitHub org (https://github.com/devcontainers). See https://github.com/devcontainers/template-starter and https://github.com/devcontainers/feature-starter for information on creating your own!

Pros of vscode-dev-containers

  • Provides a comprehensive development environment setup for various programming languages and frameworks
  • Integrates seamlessly with Visual Studio Code, offering a smooth developer experience
  • Includes pre-configured settings and extensions for specific development scenarios

Cons of vscode-dev-containers

  • Larger image size and resource consumption compared to the minimal Alpine-based images
  • More complex setup and configuration process
  • May include unnecessary tools and dependencies for simpler projects

Code comparison

docker-alpine:

FROM alpine:3.14
RUN apk add --no-cache python3
WORKDIR /app
CMD ["python3"]

vscode-dev-containers:

FROM mcr.microsoft.com/vscode/devcontainers/python:0-3.9
RUN pip install --no-cache-dir pylint
WORKDIR /workspace
CMD ["sleep", "infinity"]

Summary

docker-alpine focuses on providing a minimal, lightweight base image for containerized applications, while vscode-dev-containers offers a more comprehensive development environment tailored for use with Visual Studio Code. The Alpine-based image is smaller and more resource-efficient, making it suitable for production deployments. In contrast, vscode-dev-containers provides a richer set of tools and configurations, making it ideal for development workflows but potentially overkill for simple projects or production use.

Convert Figma logo designs to code with AI

Visual Copilot

Introducing Visual Copilot: A new AI model to turn Figma designs to high quality code using your components.

Try Visual Copilot

README

= docker-alpine

:ao: alpinelinux.org :hubp: _/alpine :hub: https://hub.docker.com/r/{hubp}/

image:https://img.shields.io/docker/stars/{hubp}.svg[link={hub}] image:https://img.shields.io/docker/pulls/{hubp}.svg[link={hub}]

The official Docker image for https://{ao}[Alpine Linux]. The image is only 5MB and has access to a package repository that is much more featureful than other BusyBox based images.

== Why Docker images today are big. Usually much larger than they need to be. There are a lot of ways to make them smaller, but the Docker populace still jumps to the ubuntu base image for most projects. The size savings over ubuntu and other bases are huge: [source]

REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED SIZE alpine latest 961769676411 4 weeks ago 5.58MB ubuntu latest 2ca708c1c9cc 2 days ago 64.2MB debian latest c2c03a296d23 9 days ago 114MB centos latest 67fa590cfc1c 4 weeks ago 202MB

There are images such as progrium/busybox which get us close to a minimal container and package system, but these particular BusyBox builds piggyback on the OpenWRT package index, which is often lacking and not tailored towards generic everyday applications. Alpine Linux has a much more featureful and up to date https://pkgs.{ao}[Package Index]: [source]

$ docker run progrium/busybox opkg-install nodejs Unknown package 'nodejs'. Collected errors:

  • opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package nodejs.

$ docker run alpine apk add --no-cache nodejs fetch http://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.9/main/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz fetch http://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.9/community/x86_64/APKINDEX.tar.gz (1/7) Installing ca-certificates (20190108-r0) (2/7) Installing c-ares (1.15.0-r0) (3/7) Installing libgcc (8.3.0-r0) (4/7) Installing http-parser (2.8.1-r0) (5/7) Installing libstdc++ (8.3.0-r0) (6/7) Installing libuv (1.23.2-r0) (7/7) Installing nodejs (10.14.2-r0) Executing busybox-1.29.3-r10.trigger Executing ca-certificates-20190108-r0.trigger OK: 31 MiB in 21 packages

This makes Alpine Linux a great image base for utilities, as well as production applications. https://www.{ao}/about/[Read more about Alpine Linux here] and it will become obvious how its mantra fits in right at home with Docker images.

NOTE: All of the example outputs above were last generated/updated on May 3rd 2019.

== Usage Stop doing this: [source, dockerfile]

FROM ubuntu:22.04 RUN apt-get update -q
&& DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get install -qy mysql-client
&& apt-get clean
&& rm -rf /var/lib/apt ENTRYPOINT ["mysql"]

This took 28 seconds to build and yields a 169 MB image. Start doing this: [source, dockerfile]

FROM alpine:3.16 RUN apk add --no-cache mysql-client ENTRYPOINT ["mysql"]

Only 4 seconds to build and results in a 41 MB image!