-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support building the Ingress Container with Podman #2924
Comments
Hi @aknot242 The Docker images that we create are OCI compliant and can be run in Podman, so I think you just want to be able to build the Dockerfile with If that's the case the good news is that |
Correct, @lucacome. The request is about building with podman (technically, buildah, to your point). Use case summary is being able to build it locally (on a developer's desktop) using freely available tools in light of Docker Desktop's licensing changes. |
docker as a cli and build tool is not tied to Docker Desktop nor docker desktop licensing. |
This is only true for Linux machines. There is no docker-cli for Mac or Windows and the docker FAQ states the user must install a linux virtual machine.
Ideally, we want users to be able to build the NIC containers natively on any platform they want. |
I think we're getting off track here... this request is about removing operational complexity and making it easier for more people to build and use NIC. |
@codygreen @aknot242 I understand (and share) the desire to make it easier for people to use the Ingress Controller. That's why we have pre-built images for as many OSs and architectures as possible. Is there something missing that makes you want to build the images manually? Maybe that's the real issue. I think the normal (and recommended) use case for the majority of people is to use one of the images that we publish (and please feel free to open an issue if you think something is missing) since they have our "stamp of approval" 🙂 but even if somebody wants to build the image manually, Docker is still the most popular by far and removing features just to make the Dockerfile compatible with buildah doesn't seem like a really good trade-off, at least for now. This is only the second request (?) that we received about buildah (#2490) since the change in Docker Desktop licensing that was mentioned, which went into effect in August 2021, so that makes me think that the alternatives to Docker are not very popular, but I'm happy to be proven wrong. TL;DR my suggestion is to use pre-built images as much as possible and open issues/proposals about expanding on that. |
Linking containers/buildah#4295 that will reduce the number of warnings and containers/podman#15423 that is a blocker at the moment. |
Adding containers/buildah#4325 to the list |
Still not hearing the feedback on this that we would like to prioritize it at this time. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The current image build is Docker-centric, and you cannot build the ingress controller with Podman.
Describe the solution you'd like
The instructions, Makefile and Dockerfile should support building the ingress container with podman.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Attempted to simply
alias
podman to docker, however this alone does not work since unix alias will not expand into non-interactive shells. Additionally, a number of changes need to be made to the Makefile and Dockerfile to make them compatible with the feature set that podman supports (such as removing--link
flags).Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: