Add support for other architectures

rharter / docker-goaccess-cloudfront

A Docker container to process and serve website analytics using CloudFront and GoAccess. https://hub.docker.com/r/rharter/goaccess-cloudfront

MIT License

18 stars 5 forks source link

Add support for other architectures #11

Closed JayNewstrom closed 3 years ago

JayNewstrom commented 4 years ago

When launching the container I get standard_init_linux.go:207: exec user process caused "exec format error"

I'm specifically looking for linux/arm64

I've solved this in personal containers by using buildx

See https://github.com/JayNewstrom/AwsS3GpgBackup/blob/master/.github/workflows/push_to_dockerhub.yml#L22

I'd be happy to contribute build support if you're interested.

JayNewstrom commented 4 years ago

I'm on a Pi4 32 bit.

$ getconf LONG_BIT
32
$ uname -m
armv7l

In order to get this to build locally, I had to make a few changes:

I had to change the build container to use alpine:3.12 instead of alpine:edge. Something to do with time, I'm not really sure why.
I had to change the published container to use oznu/s6-alpine:3.12-armhf instead of oznu/s6-alpine:3.12.

These 2 small changes allowed me to build/deploy locally, and everything is working fine.

rharter commented 4 years ago

I haven't tried running this on an Arm device, but I think it's definitely a worthwhile change to support if you want to submit a PR. GitHub notifications@github.com wrote: “I'm on a Pi4 32 bit.

$ getconf LONG_BIT 32 $ uname -m armv7l

In order to get this to build locally, I had to make a few changes:

• I had to change the build container to use alpine:3.12 instead of alpine:edge. Something to do with time, I'm not really sure why. • I had to change the published container to use oznu/s6-alpine:3.12-armhf instead of oznu/s6-alpine:3.12.

These 2 small changes allowed me to build/deploy locally, and everything is working fine.”

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

JayNewstrom commented 4 years ago

So I think the biggest change would be in publishing right now you're using a github action to do publishing, and I'd propose using a different one (https://github.com/crazy-max/ghaction-docker-buildx).

The other change (which should have basically no impact), would be to change the base image to one that's published with a manifest (allowing for publishing for multiple images under a single tag). And the image I've found success with is https://github.com/crazy-max/docker-alpine-s6

Are you okay with those 2 changes @rharter?