-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
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
Missing ARM32v6 platform for some Node.js 18 alpine tags #1772
Comments
Reverted because the temp fix is done. The problem: The 18.9.0-alpine tag on the upstream image does not contain arm32v6 platform, but 18-alpine does. I'll report this to Docker official-images team later. (Reported: nodejs/docker-node#1772)
Yes, sorry, it's edited now |
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. 😅) |
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 😩), but it's finally built successfully! Those builds should be pushed and available Soon. 👍 |
Some Node.js 18 builds seems to be failed again, (ARM32v6 and ARM32v7?) |
😩 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? 🤔 |
@nodejs/build ^ any ideas? |
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. |
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).
|
ARM32v7 platform is also failing too now, |
It took a few tries, but this is now fixed again.
|
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 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. |
someone create |
The Alpine variants of Node.js 18, 20, and 22 all have support for arm32v6 (see https://oci.dag.dev/?image=node:22-alpine for example). |
yeah I figure out! thank for the reply... the only thing I keep failing to install this package at nevertheless thank u :) |
Environment
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
and18.9-alpine
does not contain ARM32v6 platforms, but18-alpine
does.Additional Information
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: