Talk:Alpine Linux

Alpine Linux and Docker

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I think it should be interesting to put some sentences presenting how popular Alpine Linux became for Docker users. I think Alpine should be at position 2 or 3 in a Linux distribution popularity sort for a base image on Docker Hub. (I'd say Debian 1st, Alpine 2nd or 3rd, Ubuntu 2nd or 3rd, quality sources are welcome if you have on this topic) It's obviously not the same trend for Linux users outside the "Docker World".

MarquantOne (talk) 00:39, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

It even affects the users outside the "Docker World" Going by the IRC channel size, the user base of Alpine has increased tenfold due to Docker users + systemd expatriates.

I didn't add the Docker part because I already added a lot of other bits. Maybe it should simply be virtualization (KVM+Xen) / containers (LXC, LXD, Docker), saying that almost anything is well-supported, and for Docker has seen extreme adoption. Virtualbox host support _isn't there_ AFAIK which should also be mentioned, if someone can double check it. (Due to size, and simply how "clean" the base is, allowing for low-effort integration).

2001:A61:3433:C300:6DC4:6387:2410:D273 (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Neutrality

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The page has been tagged as it reads as advertising for the distribution: it lists claimed features as factual and also does not contrast them with any dubious aspect or criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.198.40.10 (talk) 09:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. Adding appropriate template/tags to an especially egregious example. Marcusmueller ettus (talk) 12:01, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Redirect from Adélie Linux

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi there, I'm the project founder and lead of Adélie Linux so obviously I cannot directly edit these pages. However, I don't understand the redirect from Adélie Linux to Alpine Linux. We are only very tangentially related to Alpine; we both use musl for a libc and the same package manager. Other than the package manager, we share absolutely no code with Alpine.[1] I don't see Ubuntu redirecting to Debian any time soon, so please either delete the redirect entirely or create a page about Adélie specifically. Since we are not yet notable (I'm unaware of any secondary sources beyond forums), and this page doesn't actually contain any information about us (the words "Adélie" and "Adelie" never appear), I'd actually recommend a deletion, citing WP:RDR §8.1 #10. --AndreniW (talk) 07:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ "About the Adélie Linux system". Adélie Linux. 2018-11-14. Retrieved 2018-11-24. We are not related to the Alpine Linux distribution, though we are using the same APK package manager. We have a focus on POSIX conformance, desktop software, and long-term support that Alpine does not. We are not a 'fork' of Alpine and we have virtually no shared code beyond the package manager.

License

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Good catch, Nenolod. I think I might have skimmed https://github.com/pires/alpine-linux-build/blob/master/LICENSE. What should we put in the "license" field? https://alpinelinux.org/about/ gives nothing. https://github.com/alpinelinux/alpine-wiki/blob/master/LICENSE says "alpinelinux/alpine-wiki is licensed under the MIT License". I mean, it must have a license, or likely a combination of them, which can be described, as in Template:Infobox OS#Example. HLHJ (talk) 01:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.