Alternative lightweight base image

[robi]

The question is what the experience is like in the terminal.

On the other hand a Python based app doesn't need to include the entire base image, only the needed parts, but that means specifying all the parts in the Docker file.

So how many base images do we need in parts to keep all the apps happy?

[timconsidine]

@robi said:

The question is what the experience is like in the terminal.

in an app packaged with cloudron-minibase ?
as far as I can tell, it is the same as with cloudron/base.

[robi]

@timconsidine as in all the troubleshooting commands still exist?

[timconsidine]

@robi honestly, I haven't explicitly tested that dimension as the minibase was a test, with those questions to be answered through actually using it.

But at the end of the day, it is simply the official cloudron/base:5.1.0 without node, etc.

I doubt troubleshooting commands would be lost during that process.
And I haven't specifically and deliberately removed any.

[timconsidine]

In the spirit of sharing experience of using cloudron-minibase, I just updated my Community App rybbit.

• 1st update was for latest rybbit upstream using cloudron/base : built app image was 5.29Gb
• 2nd update replaced final multi-stage build with cloudron-minibase + Node : built app image is 2.51Gb.

50% saving in app image size !

[jdaviescoates]

@timconsidine said:

rybbit

https://ca.cloudron.io/app/rybbit could do with a bit more of a description imho (and a working screenshot)

[timconsidine]

@jdaviescoates will get onto it - thanks for the nudge - laziness during publication - sorry.

[timconsidine]

Summary web page for the lightweight alternative, explaining what's in and what's out :
https://appx.uk/cloudron-minibase/

Also in preparation for new cloudron base image supporting ubuntu 26.04, moving name convention from cloudron-minibase:0.0.1 to tcmbp132021/cloudron-minibase:ubuntu24.04 .
Original name works.

[timconsidine]

A neat "trick" for those who are cautious about not building with official base image :

FROM cloudron/base:5.1.0 AS builder
# Ubuntu 24.04 — full toolchain: Node, Python, nginx, supervisor, etc.
# Build everything here

FROM tcmbp132021/cloudron-minibase:ubuntu24.04
# Ubuntu 24.04 — same glibc, same libssl, same everything
COPY --from=builder /what/you/need /where/you/need
CMD ["/app/code/start.sh"]

The built image is in all senses a proper cloudron build in the builder stage.
But the final runtime stage shrinks the image.
There is a level of caution and attention need to ensure that all artefacts are copied in from builder.
But you will soon know if anything is missing.

[girish]

I looked into this a bit . We can't remove so many of the packages. Mostly, it's for sharing between all the packages..

build-essential / gcc / g++, nginx-full, ImageMagick + GraphicsMagick, the whole -dev set (libssl-dev, libpq-dev, jpeg/png/xml, …), mysql/postgres/redis/sqlite/ldap clients, supervisor, git, vim, tini, yq, crudini, are still needed .

I have a new image now which is basically those packages and the hub size is around 300MB. Already something which was 2.3GB. But of course, have to see how this plays out in practice on a cloudron with many apps (because we reduce the sharing).