The plan is to package up each Sailfish target into a Docker image to be
used in a CI system.
For my purposes, Docker is a easy-to-use chroot that's also easy to share
and deploy as compared to a virtual machine with a toolchain in sb2.
I do know that sb2 is more than just a chroot with bind mounts, but thats
all I really need: a pre-populated chroot with bind mounts. Docker fits
that bill quite nicely.
No, I don't want multiple targets in the same image.
No, I don't need the management of multiple build targets within the same
Docker image.
I don't want any of the other sb2 features: I dont need Xephyr, I don't
need to automagically run the compiled binary under qemu, etc.
Necessity is the mother of this re-invention.
Can you help?
Thanks,
-Yuvraaj
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Tone Kastlunger
wrote:
> I have personally nothing against docker.
> I think however what you are trying to do is a bit unusual, to say the
> least.
> Intending to use (at least as I understood it) docker as a substitute for
> SB2 is "wrong" (if you pass me the word).
> sb2 is more than "just" a virtualization layer bind-mounting directories.
> It manages build targets, for one, which docker does not know about,
> and never will. Yes, of course you can have a single docker image for a
> single build target, with all the replica which comes with it;
> or you can have one docker image with multiple toolchains / target envs;
> but then you have rolled your own sb2.
>
> I cant but recall the words : those who do not understand Unix, are doomed
> to reinvent it, poorly.
>
> Best,
> tortoisedoc
>
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Yuvraaj Kelkar
> wrote:
>
>> I want to create a Docker image for Sailfish development.
>> I know it is possible to create a Docker image with sb2 in it; I've done
>> that for other sb2 toolchains - Maemo and Harmattan.
>> However, those images can only run as privileged Docker containers
>> because of sb2 bind mounts (I think).
>>
>> I'd like to avoid being forced to run privileged Docker containers.
>> Also, running sb2 inside a Docker container seems like inception.
>>
>> If it is possible to install the Sailfish toolchain without sb2, it
>> should be possible to capture that into a non-privileged Docker image. (I
>> hope)
>>
>> The documentation for anything related to scratchbox is either hard to
>> google or has broken links to maemo.org or is just non-existant.
>>
>> As to why Docker and not sb2: "Why not?" and "Better documentation"
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Yuvraaj
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Tone Kastlunger <
>> users.giulie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Out of curiosity, what's blocking you from using scratchbox?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Yuvraaj Kelkar
>>> wrote:
>>>
Ha!
Any other ideas?
Thanks,
-Yuvraaj
On 12/21/17 8:08 PM, Juice wrote:
> Yuvraaj Kelkar kirjoitti torstai 21. joulukuuta 2017:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is it possible to compile for sailfish without using scratchbox2?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Yuvraaj
>>
>> Sure, just compile in the device itself... :)
>
>- juice -
>
>
>
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
To unsubscribe, please send a mail to devel-unsubscribe@lists.sailfi
shos.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
>>> To unsubscribe, please send a mail to devel-unsubscribe@lists.sailfi
>>> shos.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, please send a mail to devel-unsubscribe@lists.sailfi
>> shos.org
>>
>
>
> ___
> SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
> To unsubscribe, please send a mail to devel-unsubscribe@lists.
> sailfishos.org
>
___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
To unsubscribe, please send a mail to devel-unsubscr...@lists.sailfishos.org
