manifest-tool VS sdk-container-builds

Now we have multi-arch(amd64(aka. x86_64) and arm64(aka. aarch64)) docker images built using manifest-tool, it's should run much faster on Apple Silicon Mac than using qemu to run amd64 docker image.

You can also publish .NET apps/services directly as container images [1].

Or you can distribute them as a single file, standalone, "ready to run" application, which precompiles your methods and includes the JIT. This results in a larger executable, but keeps all the functionality, including reflection and runtime code generation, intact.

And, of course, you can install .NET core directly on your Linux system, just as you would for Python or Ruby (where you also don't usually rely on the default installation).

[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/docker/publish...

If you're using the https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds tech to build containers, we're working on a 0.4 version of that package that applies this rootless user by default - the goal is that the SDK tooling is the smoothest, least-effort pathway to secure, correct, best-practice containers for all .NET applications!

Alternatively, here's Microsoft's own documentation about how to do all of the above: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds/blob/main/docs/GettingStarted.md

We've been baking this functionality directly into the .NET SDK for a couple releases now: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds

It's really nice to derive mostly-complete container images from information your build system already has available, and the speed/UX benefits are great too!

Funny you should mention scaffolding out a Dockerfile - internally we'd been talking about that as a bridge to other services that are highly Dockerfile-based. I just logged https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds/issues/146 to track this request. We likely won't prioritize it for the 7.0 release unless we get huge amounts of feedback that it would be helpful, but it is something we'd like to do.