diff options
Diffstat (limited to '')
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 46 |
1 files changed, 42 insertions, 4 deletions
@@ -32,18 +32,56 @@ the receiver in dump1090-fa's arguments (`--lat` and `--lon`). Start the containers using - docker-compose pull && docker-compose up -d + make pull && make up You can now access the interactive map at http://0.0.0.0:8080/dump1090-fa/ and the fr24feed web interface at http://0.0.0.0:8754/. Stop the containers using - docker-compose down -v + make down Development ----------- -Build the images using +TL;DR: build the native images using - docker-compose build --force-rm + make compose-build + +Or, if you have Compose version 1.24.x or below, + + make docker-build + +### Dependencies + +* Docker with BuildKit support (18.09 or higher), +* Compose with BuildKit support for `compose-build` (1.25.0 or higher). + +### CI + +I used a guide to set up multiarch builds ([1][1]). +I don't understand it completely at the moment, but whatever. + +The goal is to have a single multiarch repo on Docker Hub for each of the +services. +The approach is to use Docker's new BuildKit builder + the buildx command line +plugin. + +Other possibilities are: +* use QEMU + multiarch base images directly ([2][2], [3][3]), and create a manifest file +manually, +* build natively on multiple architectures (not sure how to combine them in a +single manifest then though). + +The disadvantages of the approach taken are: +* newer Docker version is required, +* docker-compose doesn't seem to support that method natively. + +[1]: https://mirailabs.io/blog/multiarch-docker-with-buildx/ +[2]: https://lobradov.github.io/Building-docker-multiarch-images/ +[3]: https://ownyourbits.com/2018/06/27/running-and-building-arm-docker-containers-in-x86/ + +### TODO + +* Docker Hub automated builds instead of Travis? +* docker-compose instead of docker buildx? |