[SOLVED] Getting started with Docker

moisespedro · 12-13-2014, 10:33 AM

First question: is Docker incompatible with i386? If so, why SBo doesn't say a thing about it?

Anyways, I want to see what this "Linux containers" thing is about and decided to give Docker a try.

I've built it from SBo, created a docker group, assigned my user to it with:

Code:

# groupadd -r -g 281 docker
# usermod -a -G docker pedro

Started docker with:

Code:

/etc/rc.d/docker start

Went to start its daemon with:

Code:

docker -d

Which returns me:

Code:

2014/12/13 14:29:44 docker daemon: 1.3.1 4e9bbfa; execdriver: native; graphdriver:
[4f935441] +job serveapi(unix:///var/run/docker.sock)
2014/12/13 14:29:44 The Docker runtime currently only supports amd64 (not 386). This
will change in the future. Aborting.

unSpawn · 12-14-2014, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moisespedro

First question: is Docker incompatible with i386?

Code:

2014/12/13 14:29:44 The Docker runtime currently only supports amd64 (not 386). This will change in the future. Aborting.

In what way didn't you just answer your own question I wonder?..

vbatts · 12-14-2014, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moisespedro

First question: is Docker incompatible with i386? If so, why SBo doesn't say a thing about it?

Anyways, I want to see what this "Linux containers" thing is about and decided to give Docker a try.

I've built it from SBo, created a docker group, assigned my user to it with:

My bad. I'll make a note to update the SBo. Docker has been linux-x86_64 only, for essentially silly reasons. Hopefully that will loosen up soon. In the meantime the SBo should note that it is only for x86_64 presently.

moisespedro · 12-14-2014, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unSpawn

In what way didn't you just answer your own question I wonder?..

I just wanted to be sure because there was nothing in SBo and it compiled fine.

EDIT: @vbatts, any good alternatives?

vbatts · 12-14-2014, 08:25 AM

If you are wanting to use docker, alternatives include waiting. It is not for lack of attention that i386 is not supported yet. Lots of eyes are on it. I suspect it will start opening up after the new year.
The issue is largely around the docker-registry support. The patch to allow the local docker daemon to use different arches (arm too) is a one liner. and if you are not pushing to the hub, perhaps that is an okay use-case.

Otherwise, you can look into the lxc toolchain, and not use docker for the time being, if ix86 is a current requirement.

willysr · 12-14-2014, 05:38 PM

Code:

commit aeb3113f2a1e6096f240bb9bb4b3de8d31e5ef73
Author: Vincent Batts <vbatts@hashbangbash.com>
Date:   Mon Dec 15 06:38:01 2014 +0700

    system/docker: Add note about requirement.
    
    Signed-off-by: Willy Sudiarto Raharjo <willysr@slackbuilds.org>

diff --git a/system/docker/README b/system/docker/README
index 7afec75..d9c5e78 100644
--- a/system/docker/README
+++ b/system/docker/README
@@ -28,3 +28,5 @@ well, then append "swapaccount=1" to your kernel's parameters. This is often in
 /etc/lilo.conf, on the "append" variable.
 
 NOTE: google-go-lang is only needed at compile time - not needed for runtime.
+
+Docker doesn't support x86, only x86_64
diff --git a/system/docker/docker.info b/system/docker/docker.info
index fdcd39f..9039305 100644
--- a/system/docker/docker.info
+++ b/system/docker/docker.info
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
 PRGNAM="docker"
 VERSION="1.3.1"
 HOMEPAGE="https://docker.io/"
-DOWNLOAD="https://github.com/docker/docker/archive/v1.3.1.tar.gz"
-MD5SUM="098c366f9c8eb82ba537b93eec66303e"
-DOWNLOAD_x86_64=""
-MD5SUM_x86_64=""
+DOWNLOAD="UNSUPPORTED"
+MD5SUM=""
+DOWNLOAD_x86_64="https://github.com/docker/docker/archive/v1.3.1.tar.gz"
+MD5SUM_x86_64="098c366f9c8eb82ba537b93eec66303e"
 REQUIRES="google-go-lang"
 MAINTAINER="Vincent Batts"
 EMAIL="vbatts@hashbangbash.com"

vbatts · 12-14-2014, 07:57 PM

thanks Willy!

zakame · 12-16-2014, 01:29 AM

You can approximate around 80% of what a Docker container can give you (that is, lacking isolated networking,) via other tools. I remember using things like schroot on Debian back in the day; looking for Slackware port, it seems that vbatts already got that covered too in http://www.slackware.com/~vbatts/schroot/ .

To cover the remaining 20%, you might want to play around with OpenVZ Virtual Ethernet devices and/or Virtual Distributed Ethernet...

vbatts · 12-16-2014, 12:05 PM

true, but chroot and schroot do not handle the cgroups and namespaces. You could wrap some things up with unshare(1) and other tools, but there is a good deal more than just a change root. I do like schroot, and have since made the same workflow for myself using docker images instead. Having a way to distribute the image is much nicer now.