Docker Hub "latest" tag did not auto-update

[brandonhoughton]

Apologies if this is a manual process, it seems that builds are automated and I would assume docker tagging is automated as well.

[Fank]

Its a known issue

[MagicHack]

It's most probably due to the hack of dockerhub https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19763413

[benjaminbrumbaugh]

@brandonhoughton As a workaround you can pull this down and build it on your instance. The following got me up and running: git clone https://github.com/dtandersen/docker_factorio_server.git cd docker_factorio_server/0.17 docker build -t factorio_local_build . sudo docker run -d -p 34197:34197/udp -p 27015:27015/tcp -v /opt/factorio:/factorio --name factorio_local_build --restart=always factorio_local_build

[SuperSandro2000]

@Manpoozle just a friendly notice: You should probably add your user to the docker group instead of using sudo. Then I am like 50 % sure that the name tag here is unnecessary and I personally dislike restart=always due to the risk of boot looping and not be able to docker stop the container.

[benjaminbrumbaugh]

@SuperSandro2000 Good advice. Also if you don't do the name tag you're assigned a random name, which should work, just preference.

[Fank]

The Problem here is now that docker hub in general wont work for now, ill setup a new build system as a workaround.

[SuperSandro2000]

@Manpoozle you are probably right. Expected it to work like docker-compose.

@Fank there were quite some issues with docker hub in the past. Maybe it is a good idea. Let me know if you encounter trouble and need some help with it. I have some but not to much experience with Travis and pushing docker images.

[bastianh]

I know friends are using quay.io for several images.. maybe thats a viable alternative?

[SuperSandro2000]

I have mixed feelings about quay.io. It could complicate the pull process and would break updating for existing users. Switching the build env shouldn't be a problem as the end user does not notice it in any way (eg switch to maybe travis to better debug stuff, faster builds, etc.) but changing the registry could be problematic.

[danstis]

I agree with @SuperSandro2000, changing the registry could have quite an impact on existing users. I think the best idea is to move to build process to something like Travis-CI where we would have complete control over the build process.

I saw that @mgh87 suggested that he could assist by creating a CI/CD pipeline. @mgh87 do you have a preferred build service?

Edit: @Fank should also have input as I believe he is the one that has been controlling this in the past.

[SuperSandro2000]

My preference would be travis cause I used it before but to be honest circle or any other service would probably work as well.

[Fank]

quary.io and docker hub, are the same because both host docker images. The only problem we have is the build system on docker hub.

In preparation of #229 i created a new organisation with a test repository https://github.com/factoriotools/docker_factorio_server_test .

My idea was to use gitlab ci but due some overhead and the problem of maintaining different tools, i would prefer travis too.

@SuperSandro2000 you have full access to the repo above, can you test travis integration? I haven't used travis for a long time, so my knowledge is a bit rusty.

[SuperSandro2000]

I am on it over here: https://github.com/factoriotools/docker_factorio_server_test/commits/ci%2Bother

We should probably move this discussion to a new issue.

Edit: And PR open to better discuss it https://github.com/factoriotools/docker_factorio_server_test/pull/1

[SuperSandro2000]

I just saw that we have GitHub Actions unlocked. I have never seen it and I pretty sure it is new and my other repos don't have it. It might be an idea looking into that.

[Fank]

See https://github.com/dtandersen/docker_factorio_server/issues/229#issuecomment-488607081 for upcomming changes about the build system.