docker-node icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
docker-node copied to clipboard

Missing ARM32v6 platform for some Node.js 18 alpine tags

Open Hazmi35 opened this issue 3 years ago • 16 comments

Environment

  • Platform: arm32v6
  • Docker Version: 20.10.18
  • Node.js Version: 18.9.0
  • Image Tag: 18.9.0-alpine

Expected Behavior

ARM32v6 platform exists in all Node.js 18 alpine tags

Current Behavior

Some Node.js 18 alpine tags does not contain the ARM32v6 platforms

For example 18.9.0-alpine and 18.9-alpine does not contain ARM32v6 platforms, but 18-alpine does.

Additional Information

image image image

Hazmi35 avatar Sep 17 '22 15:09 Hazmi35

@tianon @yosifkit any idea?


For example 8.9.0-alpine

I assume you mean 18 🙂

EDIT: actually, quite sure as that's what the screenshot shows 😀

SimenB avatar Sep 17 '22 16:09 SimenB

I assume you mean 18 :slightly_smiling_face:

Yes, sorry, it's edited now

Hazmi35 avatar Sep 17 '22 16:09 Hazmi35

From the logs, it looks like the build took so long it timed out -- I've given it another try now, and hopefully it works this time. (If it doesn't, we'll want to look into why this latest build of 18 is taking so much longer to build on this one architecture. :sweat_smile:)

tianon avatar Sep 19 '22 16:09 tianon

It took a very long time (almost two hours per build, compared to roughly half of one for previous builds of 18 on that same architecture :weary:), but it's finally built successfully! Those builds should be pushed and available Soon. :+1:

tianon avatar Sep 19 '22 19:09 tianon

Some Node.js 18 builds seems to be failed again, (ARM32v6 and ARM32v7?)

Hazmi35 avatar Sep 27 '22 07:09 Hazmi35

:weary: indeed -- I wonder what's so different about these recent Node.js 18 releases that they're taking so much longer to build on 32bit ARM than the previous point releases did? :thinking:

tianon avatar Sep 27 '22 23:09 tianon

@nodejs/build ^ any ideas?

SimenB avatar Sep 28 '22 09:09 SimenB

Are builds using compilation caches from previous builds (e.g. ccache)? If so any release with any sort of update to V8 (patches/backports etc) would potentially invalidate the cache for the bulk of the build.

richardlau avatar Sep 28 '22 11:09 richardlau

Nope, each build is 100% independent of any previous build (the only cache is the Docker build cache, which is only going to be a cache of the top layers that install dependencies, etc).

tianon avatar Sep 28 '22 22:09 tianon

ARM32v7 platform is also failing too now, 18.10.0-alpine doesn't have the same platforms as 18-alpine

Hazmi35 avatar Sep 29 '22 14:09 Hazmi35

It took a few tries, but this is now fixed again.

tianon avatar Oct 03 '22 20:10 tianon

Side question (I'm curious!) what are people's use cases for Alpine on armv6l? I'd be surprised if there were many such systems out there that you'd want to run anything in docker containers onm but I guess if it's been noticed there is some demand for it.

sxa avatar Oct 04 '22 09:10 sxa

Side question (I'm curious!) what are people's use cases for Alpine on armv6l?

@sxa My use case is that I've written a javascript-based music player. It mostly runs in the browser, but there's a few cases where I want to run it where there isn't a browser environment available. So I run the logic in node, deployed on a raspberry pi. In the past few years, raspberry pis have been in limited supply, meaning I have to make do with whichever model is available. Wrapping the code in docker generally makes it easy to deploy across most models of raspberry pi, but the differences in architecture means I do hit problems like this one now and again.

lucas42 avatar Feb 27 '23 19:02 lucas42