Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Multiarch Dockerimages #20

Closed
ichbestimmtnicht opened this issue Dec 27, 2019 · 9 comments · Fixed by #33
Closed

Multiarch Dockerimages #20

ichbestimmtnicht opened this issue Dec 27, 2019 · 9 comments · Fixed by #33
Assignees
Labels
done Task is finished enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@ichbestimmtnicht
Copy link
Contributor

Dear Mengel,

I dockerized your project with automated mutliarch (arm64v8 & amd64, arm32v7 aka armhf) images.

There is a catch: automated dockerhubbuilding doesn't support experimental features, so that the "ungrouped" images are not flagged with the correct architecture. The complet manifest is tagged correct so that this can be ignored safley for endusers.

I am working on a lightweight solution for that flaw but haven't got one so far. DIND (Docker in Docker) is my best working try but to heavy for just pushing the image - if you ask me. In case you don't care about buildtimes I can help to get it running.

Steps to accept:

  1. Create or login to your hub.docker.com Account
  2. Create the repository "finalfate"
  3. Setup an automated build with github
  4. Merge a pullrequest from my fork
    • Optional: Moove the build-args from the buildhooks build (and delete them in post_checkout since src_arch isn't in use anyway to your Dockerhub
    • Replace maintainer with an email (can be found in the same file)
  5. Wait for the build to finish
  6. Test the image e.g.
    docker run -dit --name test -p 8080:80 mengel38/finalfate:latest-amd64
    and open 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser
  7. Update your Readme
  8. Enjoy

further ideas:

  • Dockerfiles could be combined into one with a some
    sed
    commands and tweaks in the build hook (DOCKERFILE_PATH is the var send from dockerhub and the
    docker build
    command already uses DOCKERFILE which is already customised right before)
  • Enabling automated tests could help with bugfinding.
  • There is a great Browsertesting gitlab-ci.yml template from where you can start
@MengelCode MengelCode self-assigned this Dec 27, 2019
@MengelCode MengelCode added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 27, 2019
@MengelCode
Copy link
Owner

Dear ichbestimmtnicht,
thank you for your effort. I will setup your prepared docker solution soon. :)

@MengelCode MengelCode added the in progress Something is being worked on label Dec 27, 2019
@MengelCode
Copy link
Owner

The Docker image solution is working now. Now it is left to properly document it, redoing the README. This could easily be a sub-task of #4 , altough the situation is not the same anymore.

@ichbestimmtnicht
Copy link
Contributor Author

Don't forget to update you nbporject source path 👍
Tags are hopefully comletly working with the next push.

@MengelCode MengelCode added done Task is finished and removed in progress Something is being worked on labels Dec 27, 2019
@MengelCode
Copy link
Owner

Won't forget this, but I'll firstly clean up my code in the alternate branch. 👍

@ichbestimmtnicht
Copy link
Contributor Author

ichbestimmtnicht commented Feb 16, 2020

I made a repo that serves as template. The Demo is working but further testing is needed. I will reopen this issue once i hit v1.0.0 with a stable interface.

Have a look at docker-autobuild

@MengelCode MengelCode added Reopen Issue re-opened because of other progressing in project. and removed done Task is finished labels Feb 16, 2020
@MengelCode MengelCode reopened this Feb 16, 2020
@MengelCode
Copy link
Owner

I do not know if you have permissions to re-open something, so I already did this for you.
I will a look on this, thanks. :)

@MengelCode MengelCode added the in progress Something is being worked on label Feb 16, 2020
@MengelCode
Copy link
Owner

@ichbestimmtnicht I saw a small thing on your repository you linked. You chose an AGPL license type for your building facility. I am inherently unsure how this might affect my repository where everything is licensed under MIT license right now.

@MengelCode MengelCode added question Further information is requested and removed in progress Something is being worked on labels Feb 19, 2020
@ichbestimmtnicht
Copy link
Contributor Author

I already thought about lowering the constraints. I procrastinated this decision until I get to the point to really use it in an other project.
I am confident to get to this point within the next 2 weeks. All basic features are working within and only environments as well as actual tests are on the have-to-do list.

@MengelCode MengelCode added in progress Something is being worked on and removed question Further information is requested labels Feb 20, 2020
@MengelCode
Copy link
Owner

Okay, just keep me informed then. :)

@MengelCode MengelCode linked a pull request Mar 28, 2020 that will close this issue
@MengelCode MengelCode removed Reopen Issue re-opened because of other progressing in project. in progress Something is being worked on labels Mar 29, 2020
@MengelCode MengelCode added the done Task is finished label Mar 29, 2020
Repository owner locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 1, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
done Task is finished enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants