• Drito@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I tried Alpine for a desktop installation. The package manager has surprisingly decent package set. And the performance is the best I found, for some reason applications starts faster. But I had to stop the experience because websites thats includes widevine didn’t work. Its sad to say, but many softwares relies on non-standard glibc shit. With glibc instead of musl Alpine can be simply the best distro. If musl is not faster that glibc I don’t think glibc will make Alpine slower.

    • dsemy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can use glibc programs in Alpine using containers, chroots, Flatpak, etc.

      This wasn’t on Alpine, but I used to run Steam on a musl Void Linux install in a chroot.

    • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Alpine’s main thing is musl. musl is a lot better than glib, but you have to compile for it, which means no proprietary software.

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why is musl better than glibc? Looking at the licence, it’s just your classic corporate cuckolding that always leads to a net decrease in upstream contributions

        • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          yeah, fair enough, that’s a good point. Also now that I think about it, the dns resolution in musl is pretty bad, too. But I do appreciate that musl is designed to be lighter weight than glib, and that it supports static linking.