docker-busybox
docker-busybox copied to clipboard
Enable httpd in busybox image
httpd is such an useful applet in busybox.
httpd
httpd [-ifv[v]] [-c CONFFILE] [-p [IP:]PORT] [-u USER[:GRP]] [-r REALM] [-h HOME] or httpd -d/-e/-m STRING
Listen for incoming HTTP requests
Options:
-i Inetd mode
-f Do not daemonize
-v[v] Verbose
-c FILE Configuration file (default httpd.conf)
-p [IP:]PORT Bind to ip:port (default *:80)
-u USER[:GRP] Set uid/gid after binding to port
-r REALM Authentication Realm for Basic Authentication
-h HOME Home directory (default .)
-m STRING MD5 crypt STRING
-e STRING HTML encode STRING
-d STRING URL decode STRING
From: http://www.busybox.net/downloads/BusyBox.html
Mistakenly opened it here : https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/issues/783
I don't have a particular opinion so I'll ask to my busybox philosophical consultant... @tianon ? :)
Hahahaha -- if upstream recommends it, absolutely! :+1: :wink:
Which one do you recommend?
I see 3 options and I don't know which one to use (or all of them?)
# BR2_PACKAGE_LIGHTTPD is not set
# BR2_PACKAGE_THTTPD is not set
# BR2_PACKAGE_TINYHTTPD is not set
What’s the smaller ? Choose it!
I actually have no idea at all :)
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Enderson Tadeu S. Maia < [email protected]> wrote:
What’s the smaller ? Choose it!
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/jpetazzo/docker-busybox/issues/17#issuecomment-128469609 .
@jpetazzo https://twitter.com/jpetazzo "Is it safe to run applications into containers?" http://www.slideshare.net/jpetazzo/docker-linux-containers-lxc-and-security
rootfs.tar image sizes
Original: 3573760 BR2_PACKAGE_LIGHTTPD: 4188160 (+17.2%) BR2_PACKAGE_THTTPD: 3737600 (+4.6%) BR2_PACKAGE_TINYHTTPD: 3584000 (+2.9%)
I vote for THTTPD ;-)
(LIGHTTPD is super cool too, but I think that if someone needs a "complex" web server, they can use Alpine and get more flexibility on the server choice)