Skip to content
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

Standalone mode #119

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 26, 2022
Merged

Standalone mode #119

merged 2 commits into from Apr 26, 2022

Conversation

crazy-max
Copy link
Member

@crazy-max crazy-max commented Dec 17, 2021

In in the future we might want to use buildx in standalone mode.

Also display buildx version being used as suggested in docker/buildx#850 (comment)

Signed-off-by: CrazyMax crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com

Copy link
Member

@tonistiigi tonistiigi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you add more docs? I'm not sure what standalone mode means and what cases I would want to use it.

@crazy-max crazy-max force-pushed the standalone branch 3 times, most recently from e2b514f to 8e47826 Compare April 12, 2022 21:30
@crazy-max
Copy link
Member Author

@tonistiigi Added a section in the README about this use case and also a job in our ci workflow to check this behavior: https://github.com/docker/setup-buildx-action/runs/5997903516?check_suite_focus=true

Docker info
  Docker info skipped in standalone mode
Download and install buildx
  Downloading https://github.com/docker/buildx/releases/download/v0.8.2/buildx-v0.8.2.linux-amd64
  Standalone mode
  Fixing perms
  Added buildx to the path
Buildx version
  /tmp/docker-setup-buildx-sUFOIL/bin/buildx version
  github.com/docker/buildx v0.8.2 6224def4dd2c3d347eee19db595348c50d7cb491
Creating a new builder instance
  /tmp/docker-setup-buildx-sUFOIL/bin/buildx create --name builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba0 --driver kubernetes --buildkitd-flags --allow-insecure-entitlement security.insecure --allow-insecure-entitlement network.host --use
  builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba0
Booting builder
  /tmp/docker-setup-buildx-sUFOIL/bin/buildx inspect --bootstrap --builder builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba0
  #1 [internal] booting buildkit
  #1 waiting for 1 pods to be ready
  #1 waiting for 1 pods to be ready 10.4s done
  #1 DONE 10.5s
  Name:   builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba0
  Driver: kubernetes
  
  Nodes:
  Name:      builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba00-59f548fdf-msdbr
  Endpoint:  
  Status:    running
  Platforms: linux/amd64, linux/amd64/v2, linux/amd64/v3, linux/386
Inspect builder
  {
    "name": "builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba0",
    "driver": "kubernetes",
    "node_name": "builder-cc4b69f7-2699-433a-9998-687962319ba00-59f548fdf-msdbr",
    "node_status": "running",
    "node_platforms": "linux/amd64,linux/amd64/v2,linux/amd64/v3,linux/386"
  }

Copy link
Member

@tonistiigi tonistiigi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a point in making it configurable or should it just be an automatic fallback if there is no docker or accessing docker buildx fails while buildx binary exists?

README.md Outdated
### Standalone mode

If you don't have the Docker engine and CLI installed on your GitHub Runner,
you can use buildx in standalone mode. This can be useful if you want to use
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can add "mode. In this case buildx binary is invoked directly, instead of calling it as a docker plugin."

@crazy-max
Copy link
Member Author

crazy-max commented Apr 14, 2022

Is there a point in making it configurable or should it just be an automatic fallback if there is no docker or accessing docker buildx fails while buildx binary exists?

Good point, I guess we can do that.

@crazy-max crazy-max force-pushed the standalone branch 3 times, most recently from 0b02f3b to a656177 Compare April 17, 2022 15:14
Signed-off-by: CrazyMax <crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: CrazyMax <crazy-max@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Member

@tonistiigi tonistiigi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does the build-push action support the same thing?

@crazy-max
Copy link
Member Author

Does the build-push action support the same thing?

Not yet, will work on it.

@crazy-max crazy-max merged commit 7117987 into docker:master Apr 26, 2022
@crazy-max crazy-max deleted the standalone branch April 26, 2022 12:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants