Thanks, Luca.
For the short term, please go ahead and add the warning like on [1] that
using the image = agreeing to Oracle's license.
Another issue that we should address is the size of the image:
alpine latest 76da55c8019d 8 weeks
ago 3.97MB
nutjob4life/catpics latest de30a9f84796 6 weeks
ago 57.4MB
lwieske/java-8 jdk-8u131-slim 326f0b00e419 4 months
ago 164MB
python 2.7-slim 451c85955bc2 3 months
ago 182MB
plone latest e9918460c2e8 9 months
ago 424MB
oodthub/oodt-node latest cac1bf988d5d 3 months
ago 1.38GB
1.38 *giga* bytes! I'm going to wager you're not using a multi-stage
build here because that's enormous. Once you commit the Dockerfile we
can work together to see if we can trim it down a bit.
Take care
--k
Cinquini, Luca (398G) <mailto:luca.cinqu...@jpl.nasa.gov>
2017-11-8 at 1.41 p
Hi Sean,
I am afraid I am responsible for creating those images :)…
Chris asked me already to move them to the official Apache repo, which
is on my list of things to do.
In the past, openJDK gave me problem when using some advanced SSL
features, like certificate authentication - not sure if that is the
case any more.
I think we could start with your proposal [1] and then possibly
implement [3].
BTW all these images are based on OODT-1.0, and contain only a few
core services (File Manager, Workflow Manager, Crawler).
thanks, Luca
Chris Mattmann <mailto:mattm...@apache.org>
2017-11-8 at 1.34 p
Great catch!
I would vote to just switch it to OpenJDK yay….
Cheers
Chris
On 11/8/17, 11:33 AM, "Sean Kelly" <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi folks:
I'm playing more and more with Docker and happily discovered that
there's already an OODT presence on the Docker Store [1].
So I pulled the oodt-node image [2] and looked inside ("docker history
--no-trunc") and saw that one of the steps performed is:
/bin/sh -c wget --no-cookies --no-check-certificate --header "Cookie:
oraclelicense=accept-securebackup-cookie" -O
/tmp/jdk-8-linux-x64.rpm
"http://download.oracle.com/otn-pub/java/jdk/${JAVA_VERSION}-${JAVA_BUILD_VERSION}/d54c1d3a095b4ff2b6607d096fa80163/jdk-${JAVA_VERSION}-linux-x64.rpm";
What stands out is the cookie.
My fear is that using this image effectively makes the user accept
Oracle's license agreement for Java but in no way notifies the user this
is happening.
Could we at least update the page at [1] to warn users, similar to the
way this unofficial Java 8 image does it [3]? Or even better, try OpenJDK?
--Sean
[1] https://store.docker.com/profiles/oodthub
[2] https://store.docker.com/community/images/oodthub/oodt-node
[3] https://store.docker.com/community/images/lwieske/java-8
--
Sean Kelly
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Sean Kelly <mailto:ke...@apache.org>
2017-11-8 at 1.33 p
Hi folks:
I'm playing more and more with Docker and happily discovered that
there's already an OODT presence on the Docker Store [1].
So I pulled the oodt-node image [2] and looked inside ("docker history
--no-trunc") and saw that one of the steps performed is:
/bin/sh -c wget --no-cookies --no-check-certificate --header "Cookie:
oraclelicense=accept-securebackup-cookie" -O
/tmp/jdk-8-linux-x64.rpm
"http://download.oracle.com/otn-pub/java/jdk/${JAVA_VERSION}-${JAVA_BUILD_VERSION}/d54c1d3a095b4ff2b6607d096fa80163/jdk-${JAVA_VERSION}-linux-x64.rpm";
What stands out is the cookie.
My fear is that using this image effectively makes the user accept
Oracle's license agreement for Java but in no way notifies the user
this is happening.
Could we at least update the page at [1] to warn users, similar to the
way this unofficial Java 8 image does it [3]? Or even better, try
OpenJDK?
--Sean
[1] https://store.docker.com/profiles/oodthub
[2] https://store.docker.com/community/images/oodthub/oodt-node
[3] https://store.docker.com/community/images/lwieske/java-8
