<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Alpine on qone.io</title><link>http://qone.io/tags/alpine/</link><description>Recent content in Alpine on qone.io</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://qone.io/tags/alpine/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Docker alpine smaller image footprint</title><link>http://qone.io/posts/docker-apline-image-size-improvments/</link><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>http://qone.io/posts/docker-apline-image-size-improvments/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Working with docker images to minimise the footprint i.e the size if a image. There is a few things that you can do to get smaller images. I will show some examples for a small go and python3 service built in a Debian and alpine linux based image to compare the result and the footprint that a image.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The key to building small docker images is only use &lt;code&gt;one&lt;/code&gt; &lt;code&gt;RUN&lt;/code&gt; step in the Dockerfile. Why you might think. Every RUN in docker is a layer. The layer will contain what you do in that layer like adding package cache. If you then remove the cache in a later RUN you will still have it in the parent layers. So what you do is use al lot of &lt;code&gt;&amp;amp;&amp;amp;&lt;/code&gt; in the same RUN and in the end remove the files and cache you don&amp;rsquo;t need. Selecting the base image will affect you the most when it comes to footprint. I will look on Debian and alpine based images.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>