You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Builds for Linux/x64/musl (Primarily Alpine) are now being published alongside the other platforms but are not currently downloadable on the web site. Now that it has been enabled for all supported versions (22, 24, 26) we should look at adding it as a download to the main web site.
While it is quite likely that the primary way of getting these build may be the containers that we publish, we have seen from when the builds were experimental that there were still notable numbers of downloads of the tarballs for the musl builds.
The builds are published as .gz and .xz tarballs as for other Linux builds and named as e.g.
Hi @sxa , I'd like to work on this issue. I'll review how the website currently presents Node.js builds and release information, then identify the required changes to represent Alpine/x64 builds consistently with the existing platform information. Could you confirm the current scope and assign the issue to me if it's still available? I'll follow the contribution guidelines and test the changes before submitting a PR.
Thanks for looking at this. I don't think there's much additional scope that I can provide to you. The problem is that it's not showing on the web site at the moment and it should be. Nothing has yet been done to try and make it work. There's a possibility that the extra - in the name might cause some problems but you'll find that out if you work on it.
Activity
Shriraj1901 commentedon Oct 28, 2026
Hi @sxa , I'd like to work on this issue. I'll review how the website currently presents Node.js builds and release information, then identify the required changes to represent Alpine/x64 builds consistently with the existing platform information. Could you confirm the current scope and assign the issue to me if it's still available? I'll follow the contribution guidelines and test the changes before submitting a PR.
sxa commentedon Oct 28, 2026
Thanks for looking at this. I don't think there's much additional scope that I can provide to you. The problem is that it's not showing on the web site at the moment and it should be. Nothing has yet been done to try and make it work. There's a possibility that the extra
-in the name might cause some problems but you'll find that out if you work on it.MikeMcC399 commentedon Oct 28, 2026
There appears to already be a PR #9220 to resolve this issue, although it has conflicts.