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

Support MySQL without root access #194

Closed
Grendel7 opened this issue Dec 29, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

Support MySQL without root access #194

Grendel7 opened this issue Dec 29, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@Grendel7
Copy link

I would like to deploy Seafile in Docker in Kubernetes. I can run the application and memcached DB in there, but I already have a separate MySQL database running outside the cluster which I would like to use for Seafile.

The thing is that this database is used by other tools as well, so I would like to setup the database and user for Seafile myself. However, this Docker image will refuse to start without root access to the database.

Ironically, the setup-seafile-mysql.py script supports this use case already, but the scripts in the /scripts folder has various hard coded references to the root user DB_ROOT_PASSWD key.

I would like to see the possibility to pass a custom username, password and database name instead of the root password.

@GRBurst
Copy link

GRBurst commented Jan 8, 2020

@lins05 we haven't seen any commits for a while now. #187 also targets this feature. Are there any plans supporting this?

@renfeipeng
Copy link
Contributor

Very sorry.
For other reasons, we cannot support this feature in the release image.
If you need this feature, I suggest that you can build a seafile image on your own to use it.

@GRBurst
Copy link

GRBurst commented Jan 12, 2020

Very sorry.
For other reasons, we cannot support this feature in the release image.
If you need this feature, I suggest that you can build a seafile image on your own to use it.

Hey, thanks for the reply @renfeipeng. I think that is totally fine, but could you please tell us what these other reasons are? Just being curious :-)

@Grendel7
Copy link
Author

I'm curious about why this was rejected too. I applaud the fact that Docker support was at least considered, but the current image heavily focuses on the docker-compose based setup, and is quite cumbersome to work with in most other scenarios.

If Docker support isn't a focus for Seafile right now, or a larger revamp to improve the versatility is coming up, that's fine too. But that's why I went through the effort myself to offer a fix.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants