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

Docker support for ARM based machines #404

Closed
1 task done
vedangwartikar opened this issue Sep 19, 2021 · 10 comments
Closed
1 task done

Docker support for ARM based machines #404

vedangwartikar opened this issue Sep 19, 2021 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels
help wanted We need your help with this one. new feature New feature. ready-for-release Feature is implemented and available for testing in dev branch. It will be included in the next rele
Milestone

Comments

@vedangwartikar
Copy link

vedangwartikar commented Sep 19, 2021

Use case

Currently, the Docker image supports building maddy for AMD machines.
Additional support for aarch64/arm architecture-based machines.

Your idea for a solution

Create another Docker image for arm-based machines

  • I'm willing to help with the implementation
@vedangwartikar vedangwartikar added the new feature New feature. label Sep 19, 2021
@foxcpp
Copy link
Owner

foxcpp commented Sep 19, 2021

There is nothing preventing the building of maddy image for ARM. In fact I did so in the past. But I do not know how to build and upload both amd and arm images to DockerHub.

@vedangwartikar
Copy link
Author

When I'm trying to set up maddy from https://hub.docker.com/r/foxcpp/maddy using the docker run command on my aarch64 based VM, I'm getting the error

standard_init_linux.go:211: exec user process caused "exec format error"

Looked it up and found out that it might be related to the architecture. Not sure if I'm doing anything wrong here.

@foxcpp
Copy link
Owner

foxcpp commented Sep 20, 2021

DockerHub only has the amd64 image so this is not going to work currently.

@foxcpp
Copy link
Owner

foxcpp commented Sep 20, 2021

You should be able to build the image yourself and run it, though.

git clone https://github.com/foxcpp/maddy.git
docker bulld -t foxcpp/maddy:0.5.1

@foxcpp foxcpp added the help wanted We need your help with this one. label Sep 20, 2021
@foxcpp foxcpp self-assigned this Oct 5, 2021
@maitredede
Copy link
Contributor

Hello,
I am working on golang projects with docker images that runs multi-arch. I have successfully built multi-arch images using the new buildx plugin for docker, and a raspberry pi (I had troubles with golang running on qemu, so I choosed native hardware).
It is quite easy to set up : on the pi, use raspbian arm64, install docker server, and expose it (to your LAN). Then on the amd64 machine (running also docker server), with buildx installed, you can create runnners targetting these docker servers, with explicit arch configuration. And the build/push is launched with one simple commandline.
I will try to make a doc for this.

@AlphaJack
Copy link

@foxcpp any update on #491 implementation?
Otherwise filebrowser is using goreleaser, which seems trivial to configure

@foxcpp foxcpp added the ready-for-release Feature is implemented and available for testing in dev branch. It will be included in the next rele label Jun 18, 2022
@foxcpp
Copy link
Owner

foxcpp commented Jun 18, 2022

0.6 will have an arm64 image available. Will add 32-bit ARM if someone specifically requests it.

@AlphaJack
Copy link

@foxcpp do you have an approximate ETA on the next release?

@foxcpp
Copy link
Owner

foxcpp commented Jun 20, 2022

@AlphaJack in the next few days

@foxcpp
Copy link
Owner

foxcpp commented Jun 23, 2022

изображение

@foxcpp foxcpp added this to the 0.6 milestone Jun 23, 2022
@foxcpp foxcpp closed this as completed Jun 23, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted We need your help with this one. new feature New feature. ready-for-release Feature is implemented and available for testing in dev branch. It will be included in the next rele
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants