Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
    Rob Loach
    @RobLoach
    mmmhmm
    Considering his concerns, I'd be okay with issuing a notice on the README.md or similar stating that the extensions will change, along with some documentation on how to use a Dockerfile to add your own extensions.
    Rob
    @alcohol
    that sounds good to me too
    Rob Loach
    @RobLoach
    We'd need to pick a date to push up all the new tags.
    Rob
    @alcohol
    i'm just a bit skeptical regarding the visibility of the readme; or rather, i doubt existing users will be checking the readme frequently :(
    Rob Loach
    @RobLoach
    I have no plans on maintaining robloach/composer. I'd rather maintain composer/composer, anything else is a waste of time.
    @alcohol have anyother way to notify users? I don't see anything in Docker Hub for it.
    Rob
    @alcohol
    there is nothing, no
    Rob Loach
    @RobLoach
    People will notice when they reference `composer/composer:0.1 and it breaks.
    lol
    Added @pirog because he has been doing some awesome stuff with packaging PHP applications with Docker.
    Rob
    @alcohol
    great
    in that case, I will just submit a pull request to your repo with my changes
    Rob Loach
    @RobLoach
    Can collaborate on there until we merge. Think Jordi would be open to moving the git sources to /composer? I think it's about time.
    Rob
    @alcohol
    i think he would be open to that. i'm just not sure if he would grant you ownership there.
    Rob Loach
    @RobLoach
    @alcohol The other idea is to introduce composer image on Docker Hub (rather then composer/composer).
    Rob
    @alcohol
    yes i saw. that would be great
    Rob
    @alcohol
    also, question; composer currently also has a 1.2 branch. tags in the 1.2.x range are made on this, but there is no docker image that points to the HEAD of 1.2
    Mike Pirog
    @pirog
    @alcohol @RobLoach late to the party here. reviewing your comments.
    so i dont really have a lot to add here beyond a few things
    1. if this is going to be the "official" composer image then we should def hit up the docker people to add it to their official images repo
    Mike Pirog
    @pirog
    1. if this is going to be the "official" composer image then we def want to install only the bare necessities/extensions it needs to run
    regarding transitioning older stuff that lives at composer/composer
    if we can get this new barebones "official" image to live at /composer we could continue to offer the older "official" image over at composer/composer for some reasonable amount of time with some migration instructions (method of distro tbd) to move from that to the new /composer. Eventually we can just remove composer/composer in favor of composer and possibly offer something like robloach/composer if it seems like a bunch of people are not capable of migrating.
    Mike Pirog
    @pirog
    anyway, i don't really have any strong opinions about what you guys ultimately do but thought id at least offer some ideas.
    Rob
    @alcohol
    that sounds like a good suggestion too
    thanks
    will look into that
    Rob
    @alcohol
    ok, https://github.com/composer/docker has been created
    Théo FIDRY
    @theofidry
    :tada:
    Rob
    @alcohol
    could also use some feedback on https://github.com/composer/satis/pull/354/files before i add composer/satis on the docker hub
    Rob
    @alcohol
    Rob
    @alcohol
    @RobLoach i like the suggestion made by @pirog. i just need to clean up the composer/docker repo so that i can get it into a state where it can be submitted to the docker-library repo
    the generate-stackbrew-library.sh script doesn't like non-numerical versions it seems :<
    maybe i should ditch the master variant of the container
    Doqnach
    @Doqnach
    any idea when composer:1.8.5 will be on docker-hub? since 1.8.4 gives CVE warnings because of the git version (alpine 3.8 based)
    Rob
    @alcohol
    The pr is open, so very soon
    Doqnach
    @Doqnach
    awesome!
    Jose Marcelius Hipolito
    @joeyhipolito

    question:
    is there an equivalent docker-compose syntax for this

     docker run --rm --volumes-from=ssh-agent -v ~/.ssh:/.ssh -it docker-ssh-agent:latest ssh-add /root/.ssh/id_rsa

    in a compose file

    Doqnach
    @Doqnach
    you mean the --rm part?
    or the volumes-from?
    @joeyhipolito
    Saif Ul Islam
    @Rubix982

    ( I'm not sure if I should make this an issue on github - let me know asap )

    Hello! I had a question. Was building the docker image for CloudCV/EvalAI ( https://github.com/Cloud-CV/EvalAI ) when I kept running into the problem of "ERROR: Couldn't connect to Docker daemon at http://127.0.0.1:2375 - is it running?". Tried every solution on github, SO - could not get it work. I then ran "sudo systemctl status docker" which showed a green light, but it also showed these warnings / logs:

    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.248774558+05:00" level=warning msg="Your kernel does not support cgroup blkio w>
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.248783329+05:00" level=warning msg="Your kernel does not support cgroup blkio w>
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.248944198+05:00" level=info msg="Loading containers: start."
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.319261422+05:00" level=info msg="Default bridge (docker0) is assigned with an I>
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.351822143+05:00" level=info msg="Loading containers: done."
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.397434297+05:00" level=warning msg="Not using native diff for overlay2, this ma>
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.397689626+05:00" level=info msg="Docker daemon" commit=633a0ea838 graphdriver(s>
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.397744430+05:00" level=info msg="Daemon has completed initialization"
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux dockerd[184381]: time="2020-03-16T22:10:07.412365861+05:00" level=info msg="API listen on /run/docker.sock"
    Mar 16 22:10:07 archlinux systemd[1]: Started Docker Application Container Engine.

    I'm pretty that the daemon is working. the .pid file exists, I have added myself to the docker group, enabled, started, and restarted docker service.
    Running docker version again cannot find the docker daemon, as well as dockerd, and docker ps.
    As per the warnings, I should upgrade my kernel?

    Current output of uname -a is "Linux archlinux 5.5.3-arch1-1 #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:35:41 +0000 x86_64 GNU/Linux"
    I felt it really isn't an issue, but a newbie asking a question instead.
    Thank you so much!
    zoombinis
    @zoombinis

    I have a use-case where I quickly bring up a network of containers then bring them down:

    docker-compose up && docker-compose down --rmi local

    Sometimes when I repeat that command a second time, I get:

    Creating network "foo" with the default driver
    Creating network "foo_net" with the default driver
    ERROR: Pool overlaps with other one on this address space

    I then have to run: docker-compose down again... and then it works. Why would I have to call down twice?

    Jeremy McNamara
    @n8twj
    HI folks - i'm a docker-compose newb (with only marginally more raw docker experience)... I have an example docker-compose provided that uses (perhaps?) local volumes (not real docker volumes, I gather)
    volumes:
      - ./conf/telegraf.conf:/etc/telegraf/telegraf.conf
    is this an expected way to run things or should I convert to actual docker volumes?