Re: [arch-general] Best practices for creating an Arch Docker image

[nfnty via arch-general]

I've been maintaining minimal and hardened Arch images and container 
configurations for several years now that are updated regularly [1].


All my images are based on the image `nfnty/arch-mini` [2] which has 
been made to be as minimal and automated as possible. It is built from 
scratch using a bootstrap archive that is built inside another container 
using the image `nfnty/arch-bootstrap` [3]. The bootstrap archive can be 
built outside of the container using the same script [4] as the image does.


You can find many of my images with automated builds on Docker Hub [5].

//nfnty


[1] https://github.com/nfnty/dockerfiles
[2] https://github.com/nfnty/dockerfiles/tree/master/images/arch-mini/latest
[3] 
https://github.com/nfnty/dockerfiles/tree/master/images/arch-bootstrap/latest
[4] 
https://github.com/nfnty/dockerfiles/blob/master/images/arch-bootstrap/latest/scripts/build.sh

[5] https://hub.docker.com/u/nfnty


On 2017-04-27 19:52, Giovanni Santini via arch-general wrote:

Good evening to everybody,
I got interested in Docker lately and I've decided to create an
ArchLinux image for it.
There's one suggested from the ArchWiki (*base/archlinux*) but I wanted
to learn from scratch.
So, I've then some questions:

1. As the root filesystem, I've made a repacked version of the bootstrap
tarball. Even though it is not so clean, it works and it is easy peasy
to do. Should I go still for a `pacstrap`?
2. Theorically, one step of the Dockerfile should be installing the
whole 'base' group, which includes also the kernel, which is not really
needed in a container.
So this questions splits up in 2 parts:
- which packages I can ignore of the 'base' group?
- which packages present in the bootstrap OS can be removed?
This is because I think the Docker image should contain only the least
number of packages of an Arch system; ideally, *pacman* and the needed
core utils.
3. I'm having a GPGME error with the i686 tarball... Upgrading GPGME
breaks pacman, upgrading pacman does the same. If someone is interested
in helping me, I would be glad to share the Dockerfile.

A first working code is here: https://github.com/ItachiSan/dockerfiles

Re: [arch-general] Gnome wayland + urxvt

[nfnty via arch-general]

On 2016-10-13 23:26, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:

Hello,

New Gnome 3.22 which comes with wayland breaks urxvt. I'm using the
.xsession to start the daemon (urxvtd) and .Xresources to configure
the urxvt.

What's the alternative in the new wayland world? How do you configure
these now?

Thanks



If you read urxvt(1), under RESOURCES, you'll see all the different 
possible ways of configuring urxvt. $HOME/.Xdefaults is the one I use.


//nfnty

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] libvpx moved to testing - dropping avidemux?

[nfnty via arch-general]

On 2016-07-31 10:19, Andreas Radke wrote:

The libvpx rebuilt packages have been moved to testing. Old avidemux
won't compile against it. A major update is pending for a long
time. Eric isn't around it seems already for a few months.

Is there any Dev or TU wanting to take care of it?

If not we should drop it to AUR.

-Andy



I've tried contacting Eric multiple times regarding Avidemux. Opened a 
bug report [1] which got closed by Doug for apparently not being the 
proper place to report such things. Got an updated build over on github [2].


//nfnty

[1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/48991
[2] https://github.com/nfnty/pkgbuilds/tree/master/avidemux/avidemux