What I am trying to do is setup a local development database and to prevent everyone having to go through all the steps I thought it would be useful to create a script.
What I have below stop once it is in the terminal, which looks like:
output
./dbSetup.sh
hash of container 0d1b182aa6f1
/ #
At which point I have to manually enter exit.
script
#!/bin/bash
command=$(docker ps | grep personal)
set $command
echo "hash of container ${1}"
docker exec -it ${1} sh
Is there a way I can inject a command via a script into a dockers container terminal?
In order to execute command inside a container, you can use something like this:
docker exec -ti my_container sh -c "echo a && echo b"
More information available at: https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/exec/
Your script finds a running Docker container and opens a shell to it. The "-it" makes it interactive and allocates a tty which is why it continues to wait for input, e.g. "exit". If the plan is to execute some commands to initialize a local development database, I'd recommend looking at building an image with a Dockerfile instead. i.e. Once you figure out the commands to run, they would become RUN commands and the container after docker run would expose a local development database.
If you really want some commands to run within the shell after it is started and maintain the session, depending on the base image, you might be able to mount a bash profile that has the required commands, e.g. -v db_profile:/etc/profile.d where db_profile is a folder with the shell scripts you want to run. To get them to run you'd exec sh -l to have the login startup scripts to run.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Pass commands as input to another command (su, ssh, sh, etc)
(3 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I want to create s sh script but it stops when "docker exec -it cli bash" is executed and do not go to the next line. How to run the other commands on root?
root#ee3abae377df:/opt/gopath/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/peer#
Stops here and i am not able do execute the next command
docker exec -it cli bash
export CORE_PEER_MSPCONFIGPATH=/opt/gopath/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/peer/crypto/peerOrganizations/org1.example.com/users/Admin#org1.example.com/msp
export CORE_PEER_ADDRESS=peer0.org1.example.com:7051
export CORE_PEER_LOCALMSPID="Org1MSP"
export CORE_PEER_TLS_ROOTCERT_FILE=/opt/gopath/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/peer/crypto/peerOrganizations/org1.example.com/peers/peer0.org1.example.com/tls/ca.crt
export CHANNEL_NAME=mychannel
docker exec -it creates an interactive docker container. It starts a new shell in your current terminal. This blocks the rest of the commands from running until you kill or exit the container. The rest of the commands you have will in fact be run, once you exit the container.
I assume this is not desired. You should look into creating an entrypoint in a custom Dockerfile for your docker container where you execute the remainder of the commands in your script.
If you haven't created a Dockerfile before, the getting started guide from Docker is a pretty good intro to everything docker-related.
Executing commands using CLI on any peer
As per the description you have given, cli is pointing to
peer0.org1.example.com:7051. (Please check your docker-compose file
and there would be one service with container name as "cli" and image
as hyperledger/fabric-tools)
When you are executing "docker exec -it cli bash", you are entering
into container of peer0.org1. It provides an interactive shell to
you.
Let us consider we want to install chaincode using cli on Pee1 Org1, create one test.sh file and write the following cammand inside test.sh file
docker exec -e "CORE_PEER_LOCALMSPID=Org1MSP" -e "CORE_PEER_ADDRESS=peer1.org1.example.com:7051" -e "CORE_PEER_MSPCONFIGPATH=/opt/gopath/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/peer/crypto/peerOrganizations/org1.example.com/users/Admin#org1.example.com/msp" cli peer chaincode install -n cc_name -v cc_version -p cc_path
Here we are passing environment varibles CORE_PEER_ADDRESS and CORE_PEER_MSPCONFIGPATH.
Then just execute test.sh file, the chaincode will be installed on peer1 provided container is already running and environment varibles are correct. (please provide correct chaincode path, name, and version)
You should leverage the option given by #jeremysprofile. But still, if you want to achieve it through shell script then you might want to write a expect script along with shell script or might merge both the scripts in one. It should look something like this :
#!/usr/bin/expect -f
expect "*root*" {
send -- "<your command>\r"
send -- "exit \r"
}
Expect is a program that "talks" to other interactive programs according to a script. Following the script, Expect knows what can be expected from a program and what the correct response should be.
Here is the Linux man Page.
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'm trying to execute a script on the master node of AWS EMR cluster. The intention is to create a new conda env and link it to jupyter. I'm following this doc from AWS. Problem is, whatever be the content of the script, I'm getting the same error: bash: /home/hadoop/scripts/bootstrap.sh: No such file or directory while executing sudo docker exec jupyterhub bash /home/hadoop/scripts/bootstrap.sh. I've made sure the sh file is in the correct location.
But if I copy the bootstrap.sh file inside the container, and then run the same docker exec cmd, it's working fine. What am I missing here? I've tried with a simple script with the following entries, but it throws the same error:
#!/bin/bash
echo "Hello"
The doc clearly says:
Kernels are installed within the Docker container. The easiest way to
accomplish this is to create a bash script with installation commands,
save it to the master node, and then use the sudo docker exec
jupyterhub script_name command to run the script within the jupyterhub
container.
The docker exec command runs a command within the container's namespaces. One of those namespaces is the filesystem. So unless the command is part of the image, written into the container directly, or you have mounted a host volume to map a host directory into the container, you won't be able to execute it. A host volume could look like:
docker run -v /host/scripts:/container/scripts -n your_container $your_image
docker exec -it your_container /container/scripts/test.sh
That host volume could be the same path on both the host and the container.
If it is a shell script, you could use I/O redirection, e.g.:
docker exec -i $container_id /bin/bash <local_script.sh
but be aware that you cannot do interactive stuff this way since the script content has replaced your terminal as stdin. This works because the shell inside the container is just processing commands from stdin.
Other than those scenarios, I don't know what to tell you other than the documentation from AWS appears to be wrong.
How can I include my own shell script CMD on container start/restart/attach, without removing the CMD used by an inherited image?
I am using this, which does execute my script fine, but appears to overwrite the PHP CMD:
FROM php
COPY start.sh /usr/local/bin
CMD ["/usr/local/bin/start.sh"]
What should I do differently? I am avoiding the prospect of copy/pasting the ENTRYPOINT or CMD of the parent image, and maybe that's not a good approach.
As mentioned in the comments, there's no built-in solution to this. From the Dockerfile, you can't see the value of the current CMD or ENTRYPOINT. Having a run-parts solution is nice if you control the upstream base image and include this code there, allowing downstream components to make their changes. But docker there's one inherent issue that will cause problems with this, containers should only run a single command that needs to run in the foreground. So if the upstream image kicks off, it would stay running without giving your later steps a chance to run, so you're left with complexities to determine the order to run commands to ensure that a single command does eventually run without exiting.
My personal preference is a much simpler and hardcoded option, to add my own command or entrypoint, and make the last step of my command to exec the upstream command. You will still need to manually identify the script name to call from the upstream Dockerfile. But now in your start.sh, you would have:
#!/bin/sh
# run various pieces of initialization code here
# ...
# kick off the upstream command:
exec /upstream-entrypoint.sh "$#"
By using an exec call, you transfer pid 1 to the upstream entrypoint so that signals get handled correctly. And the trailing "$#" passes through any command line arguments. You can use set to adjust the value of $# if there are some args you want to process and extract in your own start.sh script.
If the base image is not yours, you unfortunately have to call the parent command manually.
If you own the parent image, you can try what the people at camptocamp suggest here.
They basically use a generic script as an entry point that calls run-parts on a directory. What that does is run all scripts in that directory in lexicographic order. So when you extend an image, you just have to put your new scripts in that same folder.
However, that means you'll have to maintain order by prefixing your scripts which could potentially get out of hand. (Imagine the parent image decides to add a new script later...).
Anyway, that could work.
Update #1
There is a long discussion on this docker compose issue about provisioning after container run. One suggestion is to wrap you docker run or compose command in a shell script and then run docker exec on your other commands.
If you'd like to use that approach, you basically keep the parent CMD as the run command and you place yours as a docker exec after your docker run.
Using mysql image as an example
Do docker inspect mysql/mysql-server:5.7 and see that:
Config.Cmd="mysqld"
Config.Entrypoint="/entrypoint.sh"
which we put in bootstrap.sh (remember to chmod a+x):
#!/bin/bash
echo $HOSTNAME
echo "Start my initialization script..."
# docker inspect results used here
/entrypoint.sh mysqld
Dockerfile is now:
FROM mysql/mysql-server:5.7
# put our script inside the image
ADD bootstrap.sh /etc/bootstrap.sh
# set to run our script
ENTRYPOINT ["/bin/sh","-c"]
CMD ["/etc/bootstrap.sh"]
Build and run our new image:
docker build --rm -t sidazhou/tmp-mysql:5.7 .
docker run -it --rm sidazhou/tmp-mysql:5.7
Outputs:
6f5be7c6d587
Start my initialization script...
[Entrypoint] MySQL Docker Image 5.7.28-1.1.13
[Entrypoint] No password option specified for new database.
...
...
You'll see this has the same output as the original image:
docker run -it --rm mysql/mysql-server:5.7
[Entrypoint] MySQL Docker Image 5.7.28-1.1.13
[Entrypoint] No password option specified for new database.
...
...
I am trying to create a shell script for setting up a docker container. My script file looks like:
#!bin/bash
docker run -t -i -p 5902:5902 --name "mycontainer" --privileged myImage:new /bin/bash
Running this script file will run the container in a newly invoked bash.
Now I need to run a script file (test.sh)which is already inside container from the above given shell script.(eg: cd /path/to/test.sh && ./test.sh)
How to do that?
You can run a command in a running container using docker exec [OPTIONS] CONTAINER COMMAND [ARG...]:
docker exec mycontainer /path/to/test.sh
And to run from a bash session:
docker exec -it mycontainer /bin/bash
From there you can run your script.
Assuming that your docker container is up and running, you can run commands as:
docker exec mycontainer /bin/sh -c "cmd1;cmd2;...;cmdn"
I was searching an answer for this same question and found ENTRYPOINT in Dockerfile solution for me.
Dockerfile
...
ENTRYPOINT /my-script.sh ; /my-script2.sh ; /bin/bash
Now the scripts are executed when I start the container and I get the bash prompt after the scripts has been executed.
In case you don't want (or have) a running container, you can call your script directly with the run command.
Remove the iterative tty -i -t arguments and use this:
$ docker run ubuntu:bionic /bin/bash /path/to/script.sh
This will (didn't test) also work for other scripts:
$ docker run ubuntu:bionic /usr/bin/python /path/to/script.py
This command worked for me
cat local_file.sh | docker exec -i container_name bash
You could also mount a local directory into your docker image and source the script in your .bashrc. Don't forget the script has to consist of functions unless you want it to execute on every new shell. (This is outdated see the update notice.)
I'm using this solution to be able to update the script outside of the docker instance. This way I don't have to rerun the image if changes occur, I just open a new shell. (Got rid of reopening a shell - see the update notice)
Here is how you bind your current directory:
docker run -it -v $PWD:/scripts $my_docker_build /bin/bash
Now your current directory is bound to /scripts of your docker instance.
(Outdated)
To save your .bashrc changes commit your working image with this command:
docker commit $container_id $my_docker_build
Update
To solve the issue to open up a new shell for every change I now do the following:
In the dockerfile itself I add RUN echo "/scripts/bashrc" > /root/.bashrc". Inside zshrc I export the scripts directory to the path. The scripts directory now contains multiple files instead of one. Now I can directly call all scripts without having open a sub shell on every change.
BTW you can define the history file outside of your container too. This way it's not necessary to commit on a bash change anymore.
Thomio's answer is helpful but it expects the script to exist inside the image. If you have a one-of script that you want to run/test inside a container (from command-line or to be useful in a script), then you can use
$ docker run ubuntu:bionic /bin/bash -c '
echo "Hello there"
echo "this could be a long script"
'
Have a look at entry points too. You will be able to use multiple CMD
https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/builder/#/entrypoint
If you want to run the same command on multiple instances you can do this :
for i in c1 dm1 dm2 ds1 ds2 gtm_m gtm_sl; do docker exec -it $i /bin/bash -c "service sshd start"; done
This is old, and I don't have enough reputation points to comment. Still, I guess it is worth sharing how one can generalize Marvin's idea to allow parameters.
docker exec -i mycontainer bash -s arg1 arg2 arg3 < mylocal.sh