Edge-home-orchestration-go: Build error occurred in arm architecture
Describe the bug
During $./build.sh container arm or $./build.sh container arm64, I got the following build error.
**********************************
Create Docker container
**********************************
Error: No such container: edge-orchestration
Error: No such image: edge-orchestration:baobab
docker build --tag edge-orchestration:baobab --file /home/t25kim/work/edge-home-orchestration-go/GoMain/Dockerfile --build-arg PLATFORM=arm32v7 .
Sending build context to Docker daemon 301.4MB
Step 1/17 : ARG PLATFORM
Step 2/17 : FROM $PLATFORM/ubuntu:16.04
---> 8eedc387cb89
Step 3/17 : ENV TARGET_DIR=/edge-orchestration
---> Using cache
---> 5f0a61e388ca
Step 4/17 : ENV HTTP_PORT=56001
---> Using cache
---> b067bb7683b3
Step 5/17 : ENV MDNS_PORT=5353
---> Using cache
---> 075a5c1d1c28
Step 6/17 : ENV MNEDC_PORT=8000
---> Using cache
---> c2bc2afb2a0a
Step 7/17 : ENV MNEDC_BROADCAST_PORT=3333
---> Using cache
---> 5730d8bb2687
Step 8/17 : ENV ZEROCONF_PORT=42425
---> Using cache
---> b6b101e9d328
Step 9/17 : ENV APP_MAIN_DIR=GoMain
---> Using cache
---> b6d791035071
Step 10/17 : ENV APP_BIN_DIR=$APP_MAIN_DIR/bin
---> Using cache
---> e178739df475
Step 11/17 : ENV APP_NAME=edge-orchestration
---> Using cache
---> e75f9b70dc2c
Step 12/17 : RUN apt update
---> Running in 244a90de8ea7
standard_init_linux.go:211: exec user process caused "exec format error"
The command '/bin/sh -c apt update' returned a non-zero code: 1
Makefile:94: recipe for target 'build-container' failed
make: *** [build-container] Error 1
To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
$./build.sh container arm or $./build.sh container arm64
t25kim
All 10 comments
In the end, this is related to the general policy to support the platform extension, that I raised as https://github.com/lf-edge/edge-home-orchestration-go/issues/127. @tdrozdovsky Any thought about this?
MoonkiHong
on 28 Oct 2020
@MoonkiHong I reproduced this issue and as I wrote earlier (and created a commit) it would be correct for each platform to create its own Dockerfile (This will solve the current problem).
P.S. Without creating a separate configuration for each hardware platform, we will greatly complicate our build machine.
tdrozdovsky
on 28 Oct 2020
@MoonkiHong I reproduced this issue and as I wrote earlier (and created a commit) it would be correct for each platform to create its own
Dockerfile(This will solve the current problem).
P.S. Without creating a separate configuration for each hardware platform, we will greatly complicate our build machine.
@tdrozdovsky Makes sense. What about considering the design of resolution after the Coconut release from yours?
MoonkiHong
on 28 Oct 2020
@MoonkiHong I can fix this problem today. When have you Coconut release?
Of course a new build system can be proposed later (this task takes more time)
tdrozdovsky
on 28 Oct 2020
@tdrozdovsky Coconut release is by the end of October, this month. Let us start to resolve this issue from November. Thank you.
MoonkiHong
on 28 Oct 2020
@MoonkiHong I will try to do this today so that the Coconut release will be without this issue. And also today I will eliminate one more inaccuracy with the documentation, which arose with the last commits. These will be different commits
tdrozdovsky
on 28 Oct 2020
@MoonkiHong I will try to do this today so that the Coconut release will be without this issue. And also today I will eliminate one more inaccuracy with the documentation, which arose with the last commits. These will be different commits
@tdrozdovsky Really appreciate your passionate contribution!
MoonkiHong
on 28 Oct 2020
@tdrozdovsky Just for the checker, we can successfully build the package for arm without any code modification w.r.t. the proper guidance from
https://www.stereolabs.com/docs/docker/building-arm-container-on-x86/, which means to apply a revision of the build environment. What about guiding this script properly in the regarding document then? (instead of a separate build system design)
MoonkiHong
on 28 Oct 2020
@tdrozdovsky Just for the checker, we can successfully build the package for
armwithout any code modification w.r.t. the proper guidance from
https://www.stereolabs.com/docs/docker/building-arm-container-on-x86/, which means to apply a revision of the build environment. What about guiding this script properly in the regarding document then? (instead of a separate build system design)
@t25kim Thank you for your another great suggestion and evaluation for this issue! (including the self build validation w.r.t. the guidance as well)
MoonkiHong
on 28 Oct 2020
@MoonkiHong I have prepared changes to fix this issue, but still need to test. When everything is ready, I will create a PR.
tdrozdovsky
on 29 Oct 2020
Related issues
MoonkiHong
·
6Comments
DoomsdayT
·
3Comments
t25kim
·
4Comments
t25kim
·
4Comments
MoonkiHong
·
4Comments
Most helpful comment
@MoonkiHong I reproduced this issue and as I wrote earlier (and created a commit) it would be correct for each platform to create its own
Dockerfile(This will solve the current problem).P.S. Without creating a separate configuration for each hardware platform, we will greatly complicate our build machine.