Enable httpd in busybox image about docker-busybox

[jpetazzo]

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)

[jpetazzo]

I don't have a particular opinion so I'll ask to my busybox philosophical consultant... @tianon ? :)

[tianon]

Hahahaha -- if upstream recommends it, absolutely! 👍 😉

[jpetazzo]

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

[endersonmaia]

What’s the smaller ? Choose it!

[jpetazzo]

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
#17 (comment)
.

@jpetazzo https://twitter.com/jpetazzo
"Is it safe to run applications into containers?"
http://www.slideshare.net/jpetazzo/docker-linux-containers-lxc-and-security

[apatrushev]

rootfs.tar image sizes

Original: 3573760
BR2_PACKAGE_LIGHTTPD: 4188160 (+17.2%)
BR2_PACKAGE_THTTPD: 3737600 (+4.6%)
BR2_PACKAGE_TINYHTTPD: 3584000 (+2.9%)