[meta-virtualization] RFT/FYI: docker/containerd/runc uprevs pushed to master

Shakthi Pradeep (tpradeep) tpradeep at cisco.com
Thu Apr 5 06:02:13 PDT 2018


Hello Bruce,

Which version of Docker are you running.

I just noticed I am running Docker 1.13.1 which is too old.

How do I migrate to latest version of Docker & also corresponding dependencies.

Regards,
Shakthi 

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Ashfield [mailto:bruce.ashfield at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2018 6:45 PM
To: Shakthi Pradeep (tpradeep) <tpradeep at cisco.com>
Cc: meta-virtualization at yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [meta-virtualization] RFT/FYI: docker/containerd/runc uprevs pushed to master

Excellent news.

Yes, everything is in master of meta-virtualization now. That way it will have time to soak a bit before the upcoming release.

Cheers,

Bruce

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:32 AM, Shakthi Pradeep (tpradeep) <tpradeep at cisco.com> wrote:
> Hello Bruce,
>
> Yes I was missing the bbappend for kernel config. Got it working after I wrote the mail to you.
>
> Are your changes committed to git repo? Is it in the master branch of Yocto?
>
> Regards,
> Shakthi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Ashfield [mailto:bruce.ashfield at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2018 5:57 PM
> To: Shakthi Pradeep (tpradeep) <tpradeep at cisco.com>
> Cc: meta-virtualization at yoctoproject.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-virtualization] RFT/FYI: docker/containerd/runc 
> uprevs pushed to master
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:57 AM, Shakthi Pradeep (tpradeep) <tpradeep at cisco.com> wrote:
>> Hello Bruce,
>>
>>
>>
>> Timing is Perfect !!!
>>
>>
>>
>> I am currently trying to get Docker CE to work with Yocto. I could 
>> include the Docker executable in ISO but when I run it I get some errors.
>>
>>
>>
>> When I boot the image looks like Docker service start is failing due 
>> to missing kernel modules. Please refer attached screenshot and below 
>> error log.
>
> Do you have a bbappend for your 4.8 kernel that adds the docker configuration fragments ?
>
> That's the most likely reason for the issues.
>
> I was able to run a whole suite of tests against 4.12, 4.14 and 4.15 so those kernels + fragments are known to work.
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>>
>>
>> * docker.service - Docker Application Container Engine
>>
>>    Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/docker.service; enabled; 
>> vendor
>> preset: enabled)
>>
>>    Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Tue 2018-04-03 13:17:51 
>> UTC; 17min ago
>>
>>      Docs: https://docs.docker.com
>>
>>   Process: 317 ExecStart=/usr/bin/dockerd -H fd:// (code=exited,
>> status=1/FAILURE)
>>
>> Main PID: 317 (code=exited, status=1/FAILURE)
>>
>>
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 dockerd[317]:
>> time="2018-04-03T13:17:51.035178755Z" level=warning msg="Running 
>> modprobe xt_conntrack failed with message: `modprobe: WARNING: Module 
>> xt_conntrack not found in directory 
>> /lib/modules/4.8.24-WR9.0.0.10_standard`, error: exit status 1"
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 dockerd[317]:
>> time="2018-04-03T13:17:51.040727372Z" level=info msg="Firewalld running:
>> false"
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 dockerd[317]:
>> time="2018-04-03T13:17:51.170575344Z" level=warning msg="Could not 
>> load necessary modules for IPSEC rules: Running modprobe xfrm_user 
>> failed with
>> message: `modprobe: WARNING: Module xfrm_user not found in directory 
>> /lib/modules/4.8.24-WR9.0.0.10_standard`, error: exit status 1"
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 dockerd[317]:
>> time="2018-04-03T13:17:51.172397913Z" level=info msg="Default bridge
>> (docker0) is assigned with an IP address 172.17.0.0/16. Daemon option 
>> --bip can be used to set a preferred IP address"
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 dockerd[317]: Error starting daemon:
>> Error initializing network controller: Error creating default "bridge" network:
>> Failed to Setup IP tables: Unable to enable ACCEPT INCOMING rule:
>> (iptables
>> failed: iptables --wait -I FORWARD -o docker0 -m conntrack --ctstate 
>> RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT: iptables: No chain/target/match by that name.
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 dockerd[317]:  (exit status 1))
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 systemd[1]: docker.service: Main process 
>> exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 systemd[1]: Failed to start Docker 
>> Application Container Engine.
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 systemd[1]: docker.service: Unit entered 
>> failed state.
>>
>> Apr 03 13:17:51 intel-x86-64 systemd[1]: docker.service: Failed with 
>> result 'exit-code'.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Shakthi
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: meta-virtualization-bounces at yoctoproject.org
>> [mailto:meta-virtualization-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Bruce Ashfield
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2018 8:44 AM
>> To: meta-virtualization at yoctoproject.org
>> Subject: [meta-virtualization] RFT/FYI: docker/containerd/runc uprevs 
>> pushed to master
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> After spending a few days de-tangling the moby/docker/runc/containerd 
>> and oe-core go infrastructure changes, I was able to run 
>> docker/runc/containerd through a system/stress test and everything seems to be working.
>>
>>
>>
>> There were a few regressions that I worked through, as well as 
>> build/packaging changes, but I'm no longer seeing any issues and all 
>> the patches/functionality have been carried forward.
>>
>>
>>
>> One thing of note is that the docker and open containers containerd 
>> split/fork is no longer an issue, so I've modified the default to be 
>> the opencontainers variant. Similarly, the docker and opencontainers 
>> runc are very similar. I've kept both variants of both recipes for 
>> now, since I'd like to track things for a bit longer before declaring 
>> the split unnecessary.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also for those that care, I created a reference docker-ce recipe that 
>> tracks the docker-ce repo versus the components themselves.  Right 
>> now it is reference only, since it needs a bit more work, but I 
>> wanted to get it out there, in case someone really cares about 
>> docker-ce (I don't really, but someone might!).
>>
>>
>>
>> Summary: I just pushed the following changes to master:
>>
>>
>>
>>   d7d310ae4113 meta-virt: prefer containerd-opencontainers
>>
>>   935e3d969ef1 containerd: uprev to v1.0.2
>>
>>   f5fbfa8ac4db docker-ce: introduce reference recipe/build
>>
>>   a5074cecf18f docker: uprev to 18.03.0
>>
>>   e3d960f4fcd9 runc: uprev to 1.0.0-rc5
>>
>>
>>
>> If anyone sees regressions, build or architecture issues .. report 
>> them to me (and the list) and we'll get them fixed up.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await 
>> thee at its end"
>>
>> --
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> meta-virtualization mailing list
>>
>> meta-virtualization at yoctoproject.org
>>
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-virtualization
>
>
>
> --
> "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end"



--
"Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end"


More information about the meta-virtualization mailing list