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 build fails #883

Closed
juanpicado opened this issue Aug 1, 2018 · 10 comments
Closed

Docker build fails #883

juanpicado opened this issue Aug 1, 2018 · 10 comments

Comments

@juanpicado
Copy link
Member

juanpicado commented Aug 1, 2018

Describe the bug

https://hub.docker.com/r/verdaccio/verdaccio/builds/b2n7pe8mpyve3satfwhg5td/

�[91merror /usr/local/app/node_modules/iltorb: Command failed.
Exit code: 1
Command: detect-libc prebuild-install || node-gyp rebuild
Arguments: 
Directory: /usr/local/app/node_modules/iltorb
Output:
prebuild-install WARN install No prebuilt binaries found (target=10.3.0 runtime=node arch=x64 platform=linux)
gyp info it worked if it ends with ok
gyp info using node-gyp@3.7.0
gyp info using node@10.3.0 | linux | x64
gyp ERR! configure error 
gyp ERR! stack Error: Can't find Python executable "python", you can set the PYTHON env variable.
gyp ERR! stack     at PythonFinder.failNoPython (/usr/local/app/node_modules/iltorb/node_modules/node-gyp/lib/configure.js:492:19)
gyp ERR! stack     at PythonFinder.<anonymous> (/usr/local/app/node_modules/iltorb/node_modules/node-gyp/lib/configure.js:406:16)
gyp ERR! stack     at F (/usr/local/app/node_modules/which/which.js:68:16)
gyp ERR! stack     at E (/usr/local/app/node_modules/which/which.js:80:29)
gyp ERR! stack     at /usr/local/app/node_modules/which/which.js:89:16
gyp ERR! stack     at /usr/local/app/node_modules/isexe/index.js:42:5
gyp ERR! stack     at /usr/local/app/node_modules/isexe/mode.js:8:5
gyp ERR! stack     at FSReqWrap.oncomplete (fs.js:182:21)
gyp ERR! System Linux 4.4.0-1060-aws
gyp ERR! command "/usr/local/bin/node" "/usr/local/app/node_modules/iltorb/node_modules/.bin/node-gyp" "rebuild"
gyp ERR! cwd /usr/local/app/node_modules/iltorb
gyp ERR! node -v v10.3.0
gyp ERR! node-gyp -v v3.7.0
gyp ERR! not ok

Locally fails

yarn run build:docker

Expected behavior
It should not fails

Docker || Kubernetes (please complete the following information):

  • Docker verdaccio tag: beta

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

cc: @sergiohgz @dlouzan 🆘

refers:

@jeremy-albuixech
Copy link
Contributor

jeremy-albuixech commented Aug 1, 2018

Python is missing from the docker build, I had it work from my local after manually adding it back but I'm wondering why it stopped working 2 days ago, I'm not seeing any related commits.

@juanpicado
Copy link
Member Author

@Albi34 exactly, we haven't changed anything. Odd stuff.

juanpicado added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2018
juanpicado added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2018
juanpicado added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2018
fix: fix docker python issue #883
@juanpicado
Copy link
Member Author

@dlouzan
Copy link
Member

dlouzan commented Aug 2, 2018

I don't understand: there has been an upstream incompatible change in the base node image?

@dlouzan
Copy link
Member

dlouzan commented Aug 2, 2018

I have just executed this locally by removing my cached node:10.3-alpine images, and it fails now, something has been changed in the alpine image. I'm not sure if they removed python as default installed package, or it was listed as transitivie dependency of one of our apk dependencies and it's not anymore.

This extra step increases the size of the image quite a bit, but in the refactored dockerfile we'll just do this in the build step :-)

I'm opening a PR to backport this change to 4.x

@dlouzan
Copy link
Member

dlouzan commented Aug 2, 2018

@juanpicado Before doing the PR, how are managing keeping the 4.x branch up to date? are you just copying selected commits from 3.x to 4.x, are you just going to do a long cherry-pick later, should I continue with the backporting of this...?

(technicallly, it's "forward porting" :-)

@juanpicado
Copy link
Member Author

how are managing keeping the 4.x branch up to date?

if we can merge, merge, in the worse case rebase.

@juanpicado
Copy link
Member Author

But, we still have to decide when 4.x will be released, based on that, any new feature will go to 4.x minimizing the conflicts.

@juanpicado
Copy link
Member Author

@dlouzan welcome on board. Now you should be able to create your own branches if you wish.

dlouzan added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2018
dlouzan added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2018
juanpicado added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2018
juanpicado pushed a commit that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2018
priscilawebdev pushed a commit to priscilawebdev/verdaccio that referenced this issue Aug 12, 2018
priscilawebdev pushed a commit to priscilawebdev/verdaccio that referenced this issue Aug 14, 2018
priscilawebdev pushed a commit to priscilawebdev/verdaccio that referenced this issue Aug 14, 2018
priscilawebdev pushed a commit to priscilawebdev/verdaccio that referenced this issue Aug 14, 2018
paulbrimicombe pushed a commit to paulbrimicombe/verdaccio that referenced this issue Aug 23, 2018
paulbrimicombe pushed a commit to paulbrimicombe/verdaccio that referenced this issue Aug 23, 2018
@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Feb 18, 2019

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot added the outdated label Feb 18, 2019
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 18, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants