-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 794
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
[feat]: support build for ARM architectures #496
Conversation
image: oreoluwa/shadowbox
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). 📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign. Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here with What to do if you already signed the CLAIndividual signers
Corporate signers
ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info. |
@@ -0,0 +1,502 @@ | |||
# Copyright 2018 The Outline Authors |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This file is almost identical to install_server.sh. Let's add a --arm flag? or --platform={arm,x86}
src/shadowbox/docker/arm.Dockerfile
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ | |||
ARG SS_VERSION=1.0.7 | |||
# bundled prometheus version is 2.4.3 | |||
ARG PM_VERSION=2.4.3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The Prometheus args are only needed in the second build stage, let's move them down there?
src/shadowbox/docker/arm.Dockerfile
Outdated
|
||
RUN GOOS=linux GOARCH=arm GOARM=7 go build -o /app/outline-ss-server | ||
|
||
RUN upx -5 /app/outline-ss-server |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Any particular reason for this? Especially since we don't have ARM machines to test on, I'd lean towards removing this and the associated apk add
call unless it's necessary
@JonathanDCohen totally agree with all the comments above, thanks for reviewing.
|
@oreoluwa We're definitely down for best-effort ARM support although it isn't currently in our CI suite. I'll take a look whenever you get around to updating :) |
We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request), but were unable to find agreements for all the commit author(s) or Co-authors. If you authored these, maybe you used a different email address in the git commits than was used to sign the CLA (login here to double check)? If these were authored by someone else, then they will need to sign a CLA as well, and confirm that they're okay with these being contributed to Google. ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info. |
@JonathanDCohen implemented the multi-arch build. However, I'm not sure I fully understand the CI setup yet, but I'd propose we do a multi-arch deployment, with |
image: oreoluwa/shadowbox
Just a reference implementation for building for the arm architecture.