Re: ALP WG Meeting minutes - July 5th 2022
Jiri Slaby
On 05. 07. 22, 17:46, Dan Čermák wrote:
we have mostly focused this week's meeting on how the ALP Desktop is going to look like and how we can dispel fears around flatpaks and containers when it comes to the ALP desktop.
I have never looked into this container stuff in more detail. But one of the concerns I was always afraid of was how this behaves WRT shared libraries and their memory footprint? IOW, containers kill the purpose of shlibs completely and one has to hold all of the versions (per each container on the top of ones from the base system) in memory, right? This sounds as if using static libraries.
A lot of the containerized software is written in Go and that is already statically linked, so my guess is that no one really looked at this so far. However with flatpaks the situation is different and it would be theoretically possible to deduplicate shared runtimes of flatpaks. Unfortunately I don't know whether that is actually done in practice or even feasible.
And what about userspace live patching? Would we provide it for SLE for all the containers? Or don't you expect these continaers to be available on SLE (which would be against the advertised purpose, it seems)?
This would be a question for Libor, who is driving the Kernel and Live
Patching WG.
Cheers,
Dan
--
Dan Čermák
participants (1)
-
Dan Čermák