Appologies if I am unclear.<p>&gt; why are you trying to create FUD about how Alpine Linux is unmaintainable, unsustainable, and insecure?<p>I never tried to make that claim.<p>What I am trying to say is that if YOU built YOUR software against Alpine, IT will be hard to maintain&#x2F;sustain&#x2F;insecure. Because your software will probably have dependencies. Dependencies not found in Alpine. And now you have to maintain and test those dependencies. You&#x27;ll have to keep informed on all the security advisories of those dependencies. All the changelogs. And by then, you&#x27;ve started to reinvent wheels that the fine folks of Debian, Ubuntu, Centos have invented already.<p>That is a resource drain on companies that is inefficient and cumbersome with little to no added value.<p>&gt; While you&#x27;re at it, please show me the Debian, Ubuntu, or CentOS distribution that doesn&#x27;t have desktop bus installed.<p>A container is not the same beast as a distribution. It does not have the same requirements. It is just a tarball. And you can throw anything into it, or out of it.<p>I&#x27;m just saying to use debootstrap to throw stuff in that tarball so you have the benefits of an enterprise-level, proven distribution, instead of using this something that has not yet proven itself. So if you ever need to take your software OUT of the container and run it on an AWS instance, or on your own hardware, you&#x27;ll have no problem with it.<p>In short: I see no added value for Alpine. It does not address my operational concerns, and raises a bucketload of new ones when I compare it to Debian, Ubuntu or Centos.