rabbitmq
rabbitmq copied to clipboard
docker-library
Convert to multi-stage builds
@tianon I've got some minimal changes in the templates to support multi-stage builds.
I'm not sure what's up with the CI failure, however:
bashbrew version v0.1.5
Processing rabbitmq:3.11.3 ...
failed fetching repo "ubuntu:20.04"
unable to find a manifest named "ubuntu" (in "/tmp/tmp.SIfMOjytit/library" or as a remote URL)
+ strategy=
...I can reproduce the same error locally, but I'm not sure of the source of the error. It seems like generate-stackbrew-library.sh is working correctly.
Note that I had to add the setup-go action to fix a compile error in bashbrew. Apparently go 1.18 is required now? 🤷♂️
Assistance is appreciated! I will of course clean up commit history once this is figured out.
Sorry! If you drop your .github changes and rebase on https://github.com/docker-library/rabbitmq/pull/590, it should be fixed. :bow:
This is just about ready for review. I need to figure out why the alpine image is quite a bit larger with these changes in my env:
$ docker images '*rabbit*'
REPOSITORY TAG IMAGE ID CREATED SIZE
rabbitmq-local-multi-stage alpine-latest fd57cc784e62 2 minutes ago 162MB
rabbitmq 3-alpine 6d8788289676 4 days ago 127MB
rabbitmq-local-multi-stage ubuntu-latest 48b7a0359d68 5 hours ago 229MB
rabbitmq 3 792f1c5d392c 6 days ago 229MB
UPDATE: hmm I really have no idea why it's 35mb larger, especially since the ubuntu one is the same size 🤔
Within the running containers the sizes are comparable:
# rabbitmq:3-alpine # alpine multi-stage
bash-5.1# du -hs * bash-5.1# du -hs *
2.0M bin 2.0M bin
0 dev 0 dev
547.0K etc 675.0K etc
512 home 512 home
4.2M lib 4.2M lib
2.0K media 2.0K media
512 mnt 512 mnt
24.5M opt 24.5M opt
512 plugins 512 plugins
1.0K root 1.0K root
512 run 512 run
160.0K sbin 171.0K sbin
512 srv 512 srv
0 sys 0 sys
1.0K tmp 1.0K tmp
98.8M usr 98.3M usr
108.0K var 108.0K var
I'm not going to worry too much about the local image size because if I build from master in the 3.11/alpine directory the size is larger than the pulled image 🤷♂️
(To be explicit: I think the readonly suggestion is the only one of those I'd make a blocker - everything else is fine as-is if you don't want to change it. :+1:)
I've always wondered exactly why shellcheck flags that use of readonly, and thanks to your example I understand why now.
@tianon thanks for the review. Seems like multiple builds are being generated for the same Docker image?
https://github.com/docker-library/rabbitmq/actions/runs/3500314277
...not sure if that's due to my changes or something in bashbrew
Seems like multiple builds are being generated for the same Docker image?
That's intentional -- note the (i386) at the end. It's doing a 32bit build for images which support it (in our case only Alpine since Ubuntu dropped it) as a rough smoke test for our multiarch support. :+1:
Ah, that's probably #592 -- Alpine 3.17 updated the default OpenSSL in the distro to OpenSSL 3, so maybe that's conflicting somehow (I thought we had some mitigations to avoid that but maybe they broke or something)?
@tianon ha, no it was much simpler... I didn't update the final base image to alpine:3.17, so there were mismatches in which packages were added for Erlang run-time deps.
It did prompt me to ask this - https://github.com/docker-library/rabbitmq/discussions/596
@tianon are we waiting on one more review here? Do you need anything else from me?
Yeah, just waiting for @yosifkit to get some time to go through it again :+1: