I have built a Docker Cron Environment to run Cronjobs based on alseambusher/crontab-ui using alpine:3.15.3 & it works great.
For it to work I have had to install a number of things via the Dockerfile, editing it & adding python so it could run a python script, perl for another service, openssl so I could use a Self-signed certificate, etc.
As it stands the Container is a lot bigger, which is fine, but if I am to share the container others won't necessarily want or need the services I have added & will likely need other that I haven't.
I would like to be able to add a command in the ENV of a Docker Compose to add services at startup without having to do a full build each time. I'm sure it would be simpler to add build:>args: & have it rebuild the container each startup, but my goal is to have it add to an image only the services that each user needs & declares in the Docker-Compose with no need to have the files for the build on the system.
I know this will mean a longer startup depending on the services, I'm okay with that.
I know it's normal to run cron on the host & have it call into containers, but cron on Windows WSL has to be manually started every time the WSL starts & is easy to forget about & can't really be automated aside from on startup, & I'd like to do this entirely inside Docker.
How can I add an ENV like SERVICE_INSTALL to have it run in BASH (which is already added in the Dockerfile & present at /bin/bash) at container startup?
Ideally I'd like to be able to add multiple SERVICE_INSTALL lines if at all possible.
Example:
SERVICE_INSTALL1='apk add --update --no-cache python3 && ln -sf python3 /usr/bin/python'
SERVICE_INSTALL2='python3 -m ensurepip'
SERVICE_INSTALL3='apk add --no-cache perl perl-html-parser perl-http-cookies perl-lwp-useragent-determined perl-json perl-json-xs'
Or, if nothing else:
SERVICE_INSTALL=apk add --update --no-cache python3 && ln -sf python3 /usr/bin/python && perl perl-html-parser perl-http-cookies perl-lwp-useragent-determined perl-json perl-json-xs && && wget && curl && nodejs && npm
but then that leaves the problem of installing things through pip or npm.
I have tried adding a command: to the Docker-Compose but every variation I have tried does not work. I'm also concerned with this method as from my understanding a command: replaces the startup script in the container, not adds to it, so that is not ideal, regardless, it doesn't seem like an install command: is possible anyway
I have tried: (Each as a single command: not together)
command:
- BASH apk --update add openssl
- /bin/bash apk --update add openssl
- BASH RUN apk --update add openssl
- /bin/bash RUN apk --update add openssl
- sh apk --update add openssl
- /bin/sh apk --update add openssl
- apk --update add openssl
Each ends with a message along the lines of Error response from daemon: failed to create shim task: OCI runtime create failed: runc create failed: unable to start container process: exec: "/bin/bash run apk --update add openssl": stat /bin/bash run apk --update add openssl: no such file or directory: unknown
UPDATE: I discovered a few things trying to get this to work
for command: to work there needs to not be any - before it
anything, even on multiple lines, is considered a single command essentially as though they were all on the same line & have to be separated with an &&
it will repeat the command or show the error of it failing to execute the command & not continue to next until it is completed.
for example the command mkdir -p /test leaves no logs, but the container never actually starts. While portainer says it's running trying to bash into it gives a is restarting, wait until the container is running message
mkdir "-p /test" repeats this message
mkdir: unrecognized option:
BusyBox v1.34.1 (2022-02-02 18:21:20 UTC) multi-call binary.
Usage: mkdir [-m MODE] [-p] DIRECTORY...
Create DIRECTORY
-m MODE Mode
-p No error if exists; make parent directories as needed
3 times 3-4 seconds apart, them 7 seconds, then 8 seconds, then 15 seconds, 27 seconds, 53 seconds, then hits a minute & continues to grow a few seconds each try.
It also returns the same wait for the container to be running message when trying to bash in
mkdir -p "/test" seems to be the correct formatting, it appears to work but leaves no logs & when attempting to bash in it connects, shows the terminal, then exits, attempting to reconnect shows the same container is restarting message, likely because the container stopped once the command was finished & is set to restart: always. commenting out the restart command the container exits.
mkdir -p "/test" followed by a new line with supervisord -c /etc/supervisord.conf (the default start command) has mkdir reporting mkdir: unrecognized option: c
adding "supervisord -c /etc/supervisord.conf" leaves no logs & a restarting container.
reversing the order, with supervisord -c /etc/supervisord.conf 1st has supervisord reporting the error Error: positional arguments are not supported: ['mkdir', '-p', '/test'] For help, use /usr/bin/supervisord -h
bash -c "supervisord -c /etc/supervisord.conf with a new line & && mkdir -p /test with a new line & && mkdir -p /test2" runs with a working container, but no directories created
reversing the order seems to work & creates the directories, with a running container
command:
bash -c "mkdir -p /test
&& mkdir -p /test2
&& supervisord -c /etc/supervisord.conf"
Which indicates that it will run them in order, but only proceeds to the next after the one finishes.
a test confirmed that the same can be done with other dependencies so long as the initial startup is last. I'd rather have the container start 1st, then install the dependencies while it is running as they are not required for the container itself to run, but rather are added for use in the cronjobs that will be running on a schedule, so if the container starts & the dependencies cannot be used for the 1st 2, 3, even 5 or 10 minutes that might only affect their 1st attempt if it happens to be in that time.
This is alright, I now understand better how the command: option works, but it still requires users to know & properly include the default start command. The command: options are also a lot more particular & easy to get wrong, while ENV variables are something every docker user knows, has experience with, & is simpler to implement
Related
Following the instructions as outlined to deploy Duo CloudMapper to AWS environment and getting an error
Docker File
FROM python:3.7-slim as cloudmapper
LABEL maintainer="https://github.com/0xdabbad00/"
LABEL Project="https://github.com/duo-labs/cloudmapper"
WORKDIR /opt/cloudmapper
ENV AWS_DEFAULT_REGION=us-east-1
RUN apt-get update -y
RUN apt-get install -y build-essential autoconf automake libtool python3.7-dev python3-tk jq awscli
COPY cloudmapper/. /opt/cloudmapper
COPY entrypoint.sh /opt/cloudmapper/entrypoint.sh
# Remove the demo data
RUN rm -rf /opt/cloudmapper/account-data/demo
# Install the python libraries needed for CloudMapper
RUN cd /opt/cloudmapper && pip install -r requirements.txt
ENTRYPOINT /opt/cloudmapper/entrypoint.sh
Now building the docker image
C:\> docker build -t cloudmapper .
When I run the docker using the below command I get an error
C:/> docker run -t cloudmapper
Error
/bin/sh: 1: /opt/cloudmapper/entrypoint.sh: not found
Verified that the file exists in the appropriate location
Using Docker on Windows 10
Image in the dockerfile is python:3.7-slim
Assuming the images are removed and replaced with text and the question doesn't get closed.
bash can return "file not found" when
the entrypoint shell script is not marked executable for the current user
the hash bang in the entrypoint shell script points to a binary that does not exist
the shell script actually does not exist.
You can fix the first problem by ensuring you use the new --chmod flag to ensure the executable bit is set. Even if the user is root it is necessary that there is at least 1 executable bit set.
COPY --chmod=0755 *.sh /opt/cloudmapper/
ENTRYPOINT ["/opt/cloudmapper/entrypoint.sh"]
ps. This integrated COPY --chmod only works with buildkit enabled builds, so you might need to force buildkit, or split the chmod into a separate explicit RUN step.
The 2nd issue can be dealt with by ensuring the first line of entrypoint.sh uses sh rather than bash if you are using a lightweight base image like alpine:
#!/bin/sh
set -e
# etc
Also, if on Windows especially, ensure ALL files, especially the entrypoint .sh file, are set to utf-8 encoding with lf style line endings. As linux doesn't understand the cr, it will try to execute /bin/sh<cr> as the shell which clearly doesn't exist.
In terms of the file not existing, verify the entrypoint.sh is being copied into a location that is referenced by env.PATH, or that the entry point directive uses a fully qualified path.
--
edited to add cr-lf revelation.
I'm having trouble understanding or seeing some working version of using a bash script as an Entrypoint for a Docker container. I've been trying numerous things for about 5 hours now.
Even from this official Docker blog, using a bash-script as an entry-point still doesn't work.
Dockerfile
FROM debian:stretch
COPY docker-entrypoint.sh /usr/local/bin/
RUN ln -s /usr/local/bin/docker-entrypoint.sh / # backwards compat
ENTRYPOINT ["docker-entrypoint.sh"]
CMD ["postgres"]
docker-entrypoint.sh
#!/bin/bash
set -e
if [ "$1" = 'postgres' ]; then
chown -R postgres "$PGDATA"
if [ -z "$(ls -A "$PGDATA")" ]; then
gosu postgres initdb
fi
exec gosu postgres "$#"
fi
exec "$#"
build.sh
docker build -t test .
run.sh
docker service create \
--name test \
test
Despite many efforts, I can't seem to get Dockerfile using an Entrypoint as a bash script that doesn't continuously restart and fail repeatedly.
My understanding is that exec "$#" was suppose to keep the container form immediately exiting, but I'm not sure if that's dependent some other process within the script failing.
I've tried using a docker-entrypoint.sh script that simply looked like this:
#!/bin/bash
exec "$#"
And since that also failed, I think that rules out something else going wrong inside the script being the cause of the failure.
What's also frustrating is there are no logs, either from docker service logs test or docker logs [container_id], and I can't seem to find anything useful in docker inspect [container_id].
I'm having trouble understanding everyone's confidence in exec "$#". I don't want to resort to using something like tail -f /dev/null or using a command at docker run. I was hoping that there would be some consistent, reliable way that a docker-entrypoint.sh script could reliably used to start services that I could run with docker run as well for other things for services, but even on Docker's official blog and countless questions here and blogs from other sites, I can't seem get a single example to work.
I would really appreciate some insight into what I'm missing here.
$# is just a string of the command line arguments. You are providing none, so it is executing a null string. That exits and will kill the docker. However, the exec command will always exit the running script - it destroys the current shell and starts a new one, it doesn't keep it running.
What I think you want to do is keep calling this script in kind of a recursive way. To actually have the script call itself, the line would be:
exec $0
$0 is the name of the bash file (or function name, if in a function). In this case it would be the name of your script.
Also, I am curious your desire not to use tail -f /dev/null? Creating a new shell over and over as fast as the script can go is not more performant. I am guessing you want this script to run over and over to just check your if condition.
In that case, a while(1) loop would probably work.
What you show, in principle, should work, and is one of the standard Docker patterns.
The interaction between ENTRYPOINT and CMD is pretty straightforward. If you provide both, then the main container process is whatever ENTRYPOINT (or docker run --entrypoint) specifies, and it is passed CMD (or the command at the end of docker run) as arguments. In this context, ending an entrypoint script with exec "$#" just means "replace me with the CMD as the main container process".
So, the pattern here is
Do some initial setup, like chowning a possibly-external data directory; then
exec "$#" to run whatever was passed as the command.
In your example there are a couple of things worth checking; it won't run as shown.
Whatever you provide as the ENTRYPOINT needs to obey the usual rules for executable commands: if it's a bare command, it must be in $PATH; it must have the executable bit set in its file permissions; if it's a script, its interpreter must also exist; if it's a binary, it must be statically linked or all of its shared library dependencies must be in the image already. For your script you might need to make it executable if it isn't already
RUN chmod +x /usr/local/bin/docker-entrypoint.sh
The other thing with this setup is that (definitionally) if the ENTRYPOINT exits, the whole container exits, and the Bourne shell set -e directive tells the script to exit on any error. In the artifacts in the question, gosu isn't a standard part of the debian base image, so your entrypoint will fail (and your container will exit) trying to run that command. (That won't affect the very simple case though.)
Finally, if you run into trouble running a container under an orchestration system like Docker Swarm or Kubernetes, one of your first steps should be to run the same container, locally, in the foreground: use docker run without the -d option and see what it prints out. For example:
% docker build .
% docker run --rm c5fb7da1c7c1
docker: Error response from daemon: OCI runtime create failed: container_linux.go:345: starting container process caused "exec: \"docker-entrypoint.sh\": executable file not found in $PATH": unknown.
ERRO[0000] error waiting for container: context canceled
% chmod +x docker-entrypoint.sh
% docker build .
% docker run --rm f5a239f2758d
/usr/local/bin/docker-entrypoint.sh: line 3: exec: postgres: not found
(Using the Dockerfile and short docker-entrypoint.sh from the question, and using the final image ID from docker build . in those docker run commands.)
I try to run an udev rule once a mount is ready on a Vagrant box:
SUBSYSTEM=="bdi",ACTION=="add",RUN+="/usr/bin/screen -m -d bash -c 'sleep 5; cd /vagrant/; sudo -E su -c "pm2 start daemon.json" vagrant;'"
But the command isn't running properly, since the pm2 doesn't start.
When I execute /usr/bin/screen -m -d bash -c 'sleep 5; cd /vagrant/; sudo -E su -c "pm2 start daemon.json" vagrant;' manually it does work.
Any ideas?
The nested quotes are surely part of the problem, but the bigger problem is written in the udev manual:
This can only be used for very short-running foreground tasks. Running an event process for a long period of time may block all further events for this or a dependent device. Starting daemons or other long-running processes is not appropriate for udev; the forked processes, detached or not, will be unconditionally killed after the event handling has finished.
So your approach has to be changed. However, let’s suppose the command pm2 start daemon.json is appropriately short-running: your question is interesting anyway, because similar quote-nesting problems arise often. So please consider the rest of this answer as an example for the general case.
Instead of going mad with the correct escaping sequences, you can just write
RUN+="/usr/bin/screen -m -d bash -c 'sleep 5; cd /vagrant/; sudo -E -u vagrant pm2 start daemon.json"
An even simpler solution might be
RUN+="/usr/bin/screen -m -d /usr/local/bin/start_vagrant_daemon"
where /usr/local/bin/start_vagrant_daemon is executable and has the following content
#!/bin/bash
sleep 5
cd /vagrant/
sudo -E -u vagrant pm2 start daemon.json
Both solutions require setting up the correct sudo authorizations by editing /etc/sudoers or (better) writing them in a new file /etc/sudoers.d/vagrant_daemon after enabling includedir /etc/sudoers.d in /etc/sudoers.
I want two seperate JAR files to be executed automatically once a docker container is called via run command, so when I type docker run mycontainer they are both called. So far, I have a dockerfile that looks like this:
# base image is java:8 (ubuntu)
FROM java:8
# add files to image
ADD first.jar .
ADD second.jar .
# start on run
CMD ["/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java", "-jar", "first.jar"]
CMD ["/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java", "-jar", "second.jar"]
This, however, only starts second.jar.
Now, both jars are servers in a loop, so I guess once one is started it just blocks the terminal. If I run the container using run -it mycontainer bash and call them manually, too, the first one will do its outputs and I can't start the other one.
Is there a way to open different terminals and switch between them to have each JAR run in its own context? Preferably already in the dockerfile.
I know next to nothing about ubuntu but I found the xterm command that opens a new terminal, however this won't work after calling a JAR. What I'm looking for are instructions for inside the dockerfile that for example open a new terminal, execute first.jar, alt-tab into the old terminal and execute second.jar there, or at least achieve the same.
Thanks!
The second CMD instruction replaces the first, so you need to use a single instruction for both commands.
Easy (not so good) Approach
You could add a bash script that executes both commands and blocks on the second one:
# start.sh
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar first.jar &
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar second.jar
Then change your Dockerfile to this:
# base image is java:8 (ubuntu)
FROM java:8
# add files to image
ADD first.jar .
ADD second.jar .
ADD start.sh .
# start on run
CMD ["bash", "start.sh"]
When using docker stop it might not shut down properly, see:
https://blog.phusion.nl/2015/01/20/docker-and-the-pid-1-zombie-reaping-problem/
Better Approach
To solve this, you could use Phusion:
https://hub.docker.com/r/phusion/baseimage/
It has an init-system that is much easier to use than e.g. supervisord.
Here is a good starting point:
https://github.com/phusion/baseimage-docker#getting_started
Instructions for using phusion
Sadly there is not official openjdk-8-jdk available for Ubuntu 14.04 LTS. You could try with an inofficial ppa, which is used in the following explanation.
In your case you would need to bash scripts (which act like "services"):
# start-first.sh (the file has to start with the following line!):
#!/bin/bash
usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar /root/first.jar
# start-second.sh
#!/bin/bash
usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar /root/second.jar
And your Dockerfile would look like this:
# base image is phusion
FROM phusion/baseimage:latest
# Use init service of phusion
CMD ["/sbin/my_init"]
# Install unofficial openjdk-8
RUN add-apt-repository ppa:openjdk-r/ppa && apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade -y && apt-get install -y openjdk-8-jdk
ADD first.jar /root/first.jar
ADD second.jar /root/second.jar
# Add first service
RUN mkdir /etc/service/first
ADD start-first.sh /etc/service/first/run
RUN chmod +x /etc/service/first/run
# Add second service
RUN mkdir /etc/service/second
ADD start-second.sh /etc/service/second/run
RUN chmod +x /etc/service/second/run
# Clean up
RUN apt-get clean && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/* /tmp/* /var/tmp/*
This should install two services which will be run on startup and shut down properly when using docker stop.
A Docker container has only a single process when it is started.
You can still create several processes afterward.:
One simple way is to create a second process inside a bash script.
You can also use Supervisor : https://docs.docker.com/articles/using_supervisord/
You have a few options. A lot of the answers have mentioned using supervisor for this, which is a fine solution. Here are some others:
Create a short script that just kicks off both jars. Add that to your CMD. For example, the script, which we'll call run_jars.sh could look like:
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar first.jar;
/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar second.jar;
Then your CMD would be CMD sh run_jars.sh
Another alternative is just running two separate containers-- one for first.jar and the other for second.jar. You can run each one through docker run, for example:
docker run my_repo/my_image:some_tag /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -jar second.jar
If you want to start two different processes inside one docker container (not recommanded behaviour) you can use something like supervisord
I'm trying to build a new Docker image for our development process, using cpanm to install a bunch of Perl modules as a base image for various projects.
While developing the Dockerfile, cpanm returns a failure code because some of the modules did not install cleanly.
I'm fairly sure I need to get apt to install some more things.
Where can I find the /.cpanm/work directory quoted in the output, in order to inspect the logs? In the general case, how can I inspect the file system of a failed docker build command?
After running a find I discovered
/var/lib/docker/aufs/diff/3afa404e[...]/.cpanm
Is this reliable, or am I better off building a "bare" container and running stuff manually until I have all the things I need?
Everytime docker successfully executes a RUN command from a Dockerfile, a new layer in the image filesystem is committed. Conveniently you can use those layers ids as images to start a new container.
Take the following Dockerfile:
FROM busybox
RUN echo 'foo' > /tmp/foo.txt
RUN echo 'bar' >> /tmp/foo.txt
and build it:
$ docker build -t so-26220957 .
Sending build context to Docker daemon 47.62 kB
Step 1/3 : FROM busybox
---> 00f017a8c2a6
Step 2/3 : RUN echo 'foo' > /tmp/foo.txt
---> Running in 4dbd01ebf27f
---> 044e1532c690
Removing intermediate container 4dbd01ebf27f
Step 3/3 : RUN echo 'bar' >> /tmp/foo.txt
---> Running in 74d81cb9d2b1
---> 5bd8172529c1
Removing intermediate container 74d81cb9d2b1
Successfully built 5bd8172529c1
You can now start a new container from 00f017a8c2a6, 044e1532c690 and 5bd8172529c1:
$ docker run --rm 00f017a8c2a6 cat /tmp/foo.txt
cat: /tmp/foo.txt: No such file or directory
$ docker run --rm 044e1532c690 cat /tmp/foo.txt
foo
$ docker run --rm 5bd8172529c1 cat /tmp/foo.txt
foo
bar
of course you might want to start a shell to explore the filesystem and try out commands:
$ docker run --rm -it 044e1532c690 sh
/ # ls -l /tmp
total 4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4 Mar 9 19:09 foo.txt
/ # cat /tmp/foo.txt
foo
When one of the Dockerfile command fails, what you need to do is to look for the id of the preceding layer and run a shell in a container created from that id:
docker run --rm -it <id_last_working_layer> bash -il
Once in the container:
try the command that failed, and reproduce the issue
then fix the command and test it
finally update your Dockerfile with the fixed command
If you really need to experiment in the actual layer that failed instead of working from the last working layer, see Drew's answer.
The top answer works in the case that you want to examine the state immediately prior to the failed command.
However, the question asks how to examine the state of the failed container itself. In my situation, the failed command is a build that takes several hours, so rewinding prior to the failed command and running it again takes a long time and is not very helpful.
The solution here is to find the container that failed:
$ docker ps -a
CONTAINER ID IMAGE COMMAND CREATED STATUS PORTS NAMES
6934ada98de6 42e0228751b3 "/bin/sh -c './utils/" 24 minutes ago Exited (1) About a minute ago sleepy_bell
Commit it to an image:
$ docker commit 6934ada98de6
sha256:7015687976a478e0e94b60fa496d319cdf4ec847bcd612aecf869a72336e6b83
And then run the image [if necessary, running bash]:
$ docker run -it 7015687976a4 [bash -il]
Now you are actually looking at the state of the build at the time that it failed, instead of at the time before running the command that caused the failure.
Update for newer docker versions 20.10 onwards
Linux or macOS
DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 docker build ...
Windows
# Command line
set DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 docker build ...
# PowerShell
$env:DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0
Use
DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 docker build ...
to get the intermediate container hashes as known from older versions.
On newer versions, Buildkit is activated per default. It is recommended to only use it for debugging purposes. Build Kit can make your build faster.
For reference:
Buildkit doesn't support intermediate container hashes: https://github.com/moby/buildkit/issues/1053
Thanks to #David Callanan and #MegaCookie for their inputs.
Docker caches the entire filesystem state after each successful RUN line.
Knowing that:
to examine the latest state before your failing RUN command, comment it out in the Dockerfile (as well as any and all subsequent RUN commands), then run docker build and docker run again.
to examine the state after the failing RUN command, simply add || true to it to force it to succeed; then proceed like above (keep any and all subsequent RUN commands commented out, run docker build and docker run)
Tada, no need to mess with Docker internals or layer IDs, and as a bonus Docker automatically minimizes the amount of work that needs to be re-done.
Currently with the latest docker-desktop, there isn't a way to opt out
of the new Buildkit, which doesn't support debugging yet (follow the
latest updates on this on this GitHub Thread:
https://github.com/moby/buildkit/issues/1472).
Find out at which line in your Dockerfile it is failing.
Add to the top of your Dockerfile: FROM xxx as debug
Add an additional target: FROM xxx as next just one line before the failing command (as you don't want to build that part). Example:
FROM xxx as debug
RUN echo "working command"
FROM xxx as next
RUN echoo "failing command"
Run docker build -f Dockerfile --target debug --tag debug .
Then you can debug the container with: docker run -it debug /bin/sh
You can quit the shell by pressing CTRL P + CTRL Q
If you want to use docker compose build instead of docker build it's possible by adding target: debug in your docker-compose.yml under build.
Then start the container by docker compose run xxxYourServiceNamexxx and use either:
The second top answer to find out how to run a shell inside the container.
Or add ENTRYPOINT /bin/sh before the FROM xxx as next line in your Dockerfile.
Debugging build step failures is indeed very annoying.
The best solution I have found is to make sure that each step that does real work succeeds, and adding a check after those that fails. That way you get a committed layer that contains the outputs of the failed step that you can inspect.
A Dockerfile, with an example after the # Run DB2 silent installer line:
#
# DB2 10.5 Client Dockerfile (Part 1)
#
# Requires
# - DB2 10.5 Client for 64bit Linux ibm_data_server_runtime_client_linuxx64_v10.5.tar.gz
# - Response file for DB2 10.5 Client for 64bit Linux db2rtcl_nr.rsp
#
#
# Using Ubuntu 14.04 base image as the starting point.
FROM ubuntu:14.04
MAINTAINER David Carew <carew#us.ibm.com>
# DB2 prereqs (also installing sharutils package as we use the utility uuencode to generate password - all others are required for the DB2 Client)
RUN dpkg --add-architecture i386 && apt-get update && apt-get install -y sharutils binutils libstdc++6:i386 libpam0g:i386 && ln -s /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libpam.so.0 /lib/libpam.so.0
RUN apt-get install -y libxml2
# Create user db2clnt
# Generate strong random password and allow sudo to root w/o password
#
RUN \
adduser --quiet --disabled-password -shell /bin/bash -home /home/db2clnt --gecos "DB2 Client" db2clnt && \
echo db2clnt:`dd if=/dev/urandom bs=16 count=1 2>/dev/null | uuencode -| head -n 2 | grep -v begin | cut -b 2-10` | chgpasswd && \
adduser db2clnt sudo && \
echo '%sudo ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL' >> /etc/sudoers
# Install DB2
RUN mkdir /install
# Copy DB2 tarball - ADD command will expand it automatically
ADD v10.5fp9_linuxx64_rtcl.tar.gz /install/
# Copy response file
COPY db2rtcl_nr.rsp /install/
# Run DB2 silent installer
RUN mkdir /logs
RUN (/install/rtcl/db2setup -t /logs/trace -l /logs/log -u /install/db2rtcl_nr.rsp && touch /install/done) || /bin/true
RUN test -f /install/done || (echo ERROR-------; echo install failed, see files in container /logs directory of the last container layer; echo run docker run '<last image id>' /bin/cat /logs/trace; echo ----------)
RUN test -f /install/done
# Clean up unwanted files
RUN rm -fr /install/rtcl
# Login as db2clnt user
CMD su - db2clnt
In my case, I have to have:
DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 docker build ...
and as mentioned by Jannis Schönleber in his answer, there is currently no debug available in this case (i.e. no intermediate images/containers get created).
What I've found I could do is use the following option:
... --progress=plain ...
and then add various RUN ... or additional lines on existing RUN ... to debug specific commands. This gives you what to me feels like full access (at least if your build is relatively fast).
For example, you could check a variable like so:
RUN echo "Variable NAME = [$NAME]"
If you're wondering whether a file is installed properly, you do:
RUN find /
etc.
In my situation, I had to debug a docker build of a Go application with a private repository and it was quite difficult to do that debugging. I've other details on that here.
If you are using docker-compose to build docker images try to add DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 before the command to see the last successful layer id
DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 docker-compose ...
This will temporarily disable DOCKER_BUILDKIT for the command only.
Having the last layer id you can connect to it using the command from the top answer
docker run --rm -it LAST_LAYER_ID sh
my solution would be to see what step failed in the docker file, RUN bundle install in my case,
and change it to
RUN bundle install || cat <path to the file containing the error>
This has the double effect of printing out the reason for the failure, AND this intermediate step is not figured as a failed one by docker build. so it's not deleted, and can be inspected via:
docker run --rm -it <id_last_working_layer> bash -il
in there you can even re run your failed command and test it live.
What I would do is comment out the Dockerfile below and including the offending line. Then you can run the container and run the docker commands by hand, and look at the logs in the usual way. E.g. if the Dockerfile is
RUN foo
RUN bar
RUN baz
and it's dying at bar I would do
RUN foo
# RUN bar
# RUN baz
Then
$ docker build -t foo .
$ docker run -it foo bash
container# bar
...grep logs...
Still using BuildKit, as in Alexis Wilke's answer, you can use ktock/buildg.
See "Interactive debugger for Dockerfile" from Kohei Tokunaga
buildg is a tool to interactively debug Dockerfile based on BuildKit.
Source-level inspection
Breakpoints and step execution
Interactive shell on a step with your own debugigng tools
Based on BuildKit (needs unmerged patches)
Supports rootless
Example:
$ buildg.sh debug --image=ubuntu:22.04 /tmp/ctx
WARN[2022-05-09T01:40:21Z] using host network as the default
#1 [internal] load .dockerignore
#1 transferring context: 2B done
#1 DONE 0.1s
#2 [internal] load build definition from Dockerfile
#2 transferring dockerfile: 195B done
#2 DONE 0.1s
#3 [internal] load metadata for docker.io/library/busybox:latest
#3 DONE 3.0s
#4 [build1 1/2] FROM docker.io/library/busybox#sha256:d2b53584f580310186df7a2055ce3ff83cc0df6caacf1e3489bff8cf5d0af5d8
#4 resolve docker.io/library/busybox#sha256:d2b53584f580310186df7a2055ce3ff83cc0df6caacf1e3489bff8cf5d0af5d8 0.0s done
#4 sha256:50e8d59317eb665383b2ef4d9434aeaa394dcd6f54b96bb7810fdde583e9c2d1 772.81kB / 772.81kB 0.2s done
Filename: "Dockerfile"
2| RUN echo hello > /hello
3|
4| FROM busybox AS build2
=> 5| RUN echo hi > /hi
6|
7| FROM scratch
8| COPY --from=build1 /hello /
>>> break 2
>>> breakpoints
[0]: line 2
>>> continue
#4 extracting sha256:50e8d59317eb665383b2ef4d9434aeaa394dcd6f54b96bb7810fdde583e9c2d1 0.0s done
#4 DONE 0.3s
...