#6566 Delete Dockerfile.armhf; Dockerfile now builds on armhf

[Anonymous]

Originally created by: joakimr-axis

The current Dockerfile builds for armhf so there is no longer need for
the separate Dockerfile.armhf.

Change-Id: I7a90c32cc53dd7c08404ca019f16ff6e31dc5c34
Signed-off-by: Joakim Roubert joakimr@axis.com

Resolves [#6167]

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by: ijc

Unfortunately I don't think they are precisely the same (ignoring the expected version bump) this is effectively switching from using https://download.docker.com/linux/static/stable/armhf/docker-17.12.0-ce.tgz as the source of the docker binary to using the docker:18.06.1 image on hub.

However although the docker image on hub is multiplatform it doesn't seem to have armhf precisely:

$ docker manifest inspect docker:18.06.1 | jq '.manifests[].platform | select (.architecture|contains("arm"))'
{
  "architecture": "arm",
  "os": "linux",
  "variant": "v6"
}
{
  "architecture": "arm64",
  "os": "linux",
  "variant": "v8"
}

armhf is variant=7, while the image only have v6 (probably because that is what the alpine bases support).

In that light I'm slightly reluctant to make the change without a better understanding of the implications.

A switch to pull the binary from "https://download.docker.com/linux/static/stable/armhf/docker-18.06.1-ce.tgz" would, I think, be ok though, or perhaps given [#6561] (once CI is happy) we might as well flip to 18.09.3 for consistency (in fact you could just as well do that change in that PR too).

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by: joakimr-axis

armhf is variant=7, while the image only have v6 (probably because that is what the alpine bases support).

Ok. I have built and run the result on a Raspberry Pi and on another armhf (armv7hf) device.

A switch to pull the binary from "https://download.docker.com/linux/static/stable/armhf/docker-18.06.1-ce.tgz" would, I think, be ok though, or perhaps given [#6561] (once CI is happy) we might as well flip to 18.09.3 for consistency (in fact you could just as well do that change in that PR too).

I will add this removal of the armhf file to that PR and then close this one!

There is something—to me—strange going in with "Internal error" in the Jenkins build that I do not know how to come to terms with; is it me or is something behind the scenes unhappy?

[Anonymous]

Ticket changed by: joakimr-axis

• status: open --> closed

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by: joakimr-axis

As per Ian's suggestion, this patch was incorporated in https://github.com/docker/compose/pull/6561. Hence, this PR will be closed.