5 ms·

The golang example where he uses scratch as the base image is essentially this.

by tbrock 5y ago

pjmlp 5y ago
Except he packages it on a container.
- dijit 5y ago
  The container, if it's `from SCRATCH` is basically just a gzip/zip archive. https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/blob/master/image-layout.md https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/blob/master/ima...
- regularfry 5y ago
  Which is probably unnecessary if you've got the deployment platform to yourself and can decide that just-run-this-binary is suitable, safe, and manageable. Personally I prefer "just install this .deb" because it wraps up dependency management along with everything else, but that's not been a popular opinion for a long time.
  - secondcoming 5y ago
    Maybe because creating custom deb packages can be a hair-pulling experience? But this is our flow too. We have a jenkins job that builds our master branch and uploads deb packages to jfrog. And then another to create a GCP image with these psckages, and a third to actually deploy these images to GCE. Containers are used for the various jenkins jobs, but not on the actual GCE instances.
    - regularfry 5y ago
      It depends which tooling layer you're using, really. If you're just saying "bundle up these files and put them on that part of the filesystem" it can be extremely simple. If you're trying to provide the full build-from-source chain... less so. Being able to ignore the Debian Packaging Guidelines is the path to sanity. In a previous incarnation I wrote https://github.com/regularfry/au https://github.com/regularfry/au to take the grunt-work out of packaging up ruby apps, and pretty much all it does is generate the minimum set of files that `dpkg-deb` needs to spit out an archive.
      - debiandev 5y ago
        Debian Developer here. Reminder: the Debian Packaging Guidelines are meant for official Debian packages. Making a package with dpkg-deb -b <dir> <packagename> is very easy and gives all the features of APT (dependency tracking, config management, atomic deployment).
        secondcoming 5y ago
        Yes, dpkg-deb is a recent discovery. Out of interest, what am I losing by doing it this way rather than if I followed the official guidelines?
        regularfry 5y ago
        Yep. If you're packaging for Debian, the packaging guidelines make sense. If you're packaging something nobody outside your org is ever going to see, you can be a lot more flexible.

The golang example where he uses scratch as the base image is essentially this.

by tbrock 5y ago

The golang example where he uses scratch as the base image is essentially this.

pjmlp 5y ago

Except he packages it on a container.

dijit 5y ago
The container, if it's `from SCRATCH` is basically just a gzip/zip archive. https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/blob/master/image-layout.md https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/blob/master/ima...
regularfry 5y ago
Which is probably unnecessary if you've got the deployment platform to yourself and can decide that just-run-this-binary is suitable, safe, and manageable. Personally I prefer "just install this .deb" because it wraps up dependency management along with everything else, but that's not been a popular opinion for a long time.
- secondcoming 5y ago
  Maybe because creating custom deb packages can be a hair-pulling experience? But this is our flow too. We have a jenkins job that builds our master branch and uploads deb packages to jfrog. And then another to create a GCP image with these psckages, and a third to actually deploy these images to GCE. Containers are used for the various jenkins jobs, but not on the actual GCE instances.
  - regularfry 5y ago
    It depends which tooling layer you're using, really. If you're just saying "bundle up these files and put them on that part of the filesystem" it can be extremely simple. If you're trying to provide the full build-from-source chain... less so. Being able to ignore the Debian Packaging Guidelines is the path to sanity. In a previous incarnation I wrote https://github.com/regularfry/au https://github.com/regularfry/au to take the grunt-work out of packaging up ruby apps, and pretty much all it does is generate the minimum set of files that `dpkg-deb` needs to spit out an archive.
    - debiandev 5y ago
      Debian Developer here. Reminder: the Debian Packaging Guidelines are meant for official Debian packages. Making a package with dpkg-deb -b <dir> <packagename> is very easy and gives all the features of APT (dependency tracking, config management, atomic deployment).
      - secondcoming 5y ago
        Yes, dpkg-deb is a recent discovery. Out of interest, what am I losing by doing it this way rather than if I followed the official guidelines?
      - regularfry 5y ago
        Yep. If you're packaging for Debian, the packaging guidelines make sense. If you're packaging something nobody outside your org is ever going to see, you can be a lot more flexible.