What is the cptool image in a Kubernetes/Docker Environment? - docker

I have an image named cptool:latest with the size of 0 bytes.
This is the line that is printed when using docker images -a
What is it and what is it needed for?

You can check its history:
docker history --no-trunc 67b18221c757
Or use dive to explore this image.
But if those commands reports nothing, because of its size (0), then removing the image from your local registry is, as commented, the sensible option.

Related

Is there a way to find out which version of docker was used to build an image?

I'm looking for a way to find out which version of docker was used for a given image, to determine if a specific docker engine is causing an error when building the software.
docker image history IMAGE_ID doesn't give me the information I require.
The docker image inspect command has the DockerVersion field which is probably what you need:
docker image inspect IMAGE_ID
Output:
"DockerVersion": "19.03.11"

How to find out the base image for a docker image

I have a docker image and I would like to find out from which image it has been created. Of course there are multiple layers, but I'd like to find out the last image (the FROM statement in the dockerfile for this image)?
I try to use docker image history and docker image inspect but I can't find this information in there.
I tried to use the following command but it gives me a error message
alias dfimage="sudo docker run -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock --rm xyz/mm:9e945ff"
dfimage febae8978318
This is the error message I'm getting
container_linux.go:235: starting container process caused "exec: \"febae8978318\": executable file not found in $PATH"
/usr/bin/docker-current: Error response from daemon: oci runtime error: container_linux.go:235: starting container process caused "exec: \"febae8978318\": executable file not found in $PATH".
Easy way is to use
docker image history deno
This above command will give you output like this
Then just look at the IMAGE column and take that image ID which a24bb4013296 which is just above the first <missing>
Then just do the
For Linux
docker image ls | grep a24bb4013296
For Windows
docker image ls | findstr a24bb4013296
This will give you the base image name
The information doesn't really exist, exactly. An image will contain the layers of its parent(s) but there's no easy way to reverse layer digests back to a FROM statement, unless you happen to have (or are able to figure out) the image that contains those layers.
If you have the parent image(s) on-hand (or can find them), you can infer which image(s) your image used for its FROM statement (or ancestry) by cross-referencing the layers.
Theoretical example
Suppose your image, FOO, contains the layers 1 2 3 4 5 6. If you have another image, BAR on your system containing layers 1 2 3, you could infer that image BAR is an ancestor of image FOO -- I.E. that FROM BAR would have been used at some point in its hierarchy.
Suppose further that you have another image, BAZ which contains the layers 1 2 3 4 5. You could infer that image BAZ has image BAR in its ancestry and that image FOO inherits from image BAZ (and therefore indirectly from BAR).
From this, information you could infer the dockerfiles for these images might have looked something like this:
# Dockerfile of image BAR
FROM scratch
# layers 1 2 and 3
COPY ./one /
COPY ./two /
COPY ./three /
# Dockerfile of Image BAZ
FROM BAR
RUN echo "this makes layer 4" > /four
RUN echo "this makes layer 5" > /five
# Dockerfile of image FOO
FROM BAZ
RUN echo "this makes layer 6" > /six
You could get the exact commands by looking at docker image history for each image.
One important thing to keep in mind here, however, is that docker tags are mutable; maintainers make new images and move the tags to those images. So if you built an image with FROM python:3.8.1 today, it won't contain the same layers as if you had built an image with that same FROM line a few weeks ago. You'll need the SHA256 digest to be sure you're using the exact same image.
Practical Example, local images
Now that we understand the theory behind identifying images and their bases, let's put it to practice with a real-world example.
Note: because the tags I use will change over time (see above RE: tag mutability), I'll be using the SHA256 digest to pull the images in this example so it can be reproduced by viewers of this answer.
Let's say we have a particular image and we want to find its base(s). We'll use the official maven image here.
First, we'll take a look at its layers.
# maven:3.6-jdk-11-slim at time of writing, on my platform
IMAGE="docker.io/maven#sha256:55f1c145a04e01706233d68fe0b6b20bf76f765ab32f3fe6e29c8ef933917af6"
docker pull $IMAGE
docker image inspect $IMAGE | jq -r '.[].RootFS.Layers[]'
This will output the layers:
sha256:6e06900bc10223217b4c78081a857866f674c462e4f90593b01894da56df336d
sha256:eda2f4da9b1e70500ac340d40ee039ef3877e8be13b9a24cd345406bf6693412
sha256:6bdb7b3c3e226bdfaa911ba72a95fca13c3979cd150061d570cf569e93037ce6
sha256:ce217e530345060ca0973807a3288560e1e15cf1a4eeec44d6aa594a926c92dc
sha256:f256c980a7d17a00f57fd42a19f6323fcc2341fa46eba128def04824cafa5afa
sha256:446b1af848de2dcb92bbd229ca6ecaabf2f48dab323c19f90d02622e09a8fa67
sha256:10652cf89eaeb5b5d8e0875a6b1867b5cf92c509a9555d3f57d87fab605115a3
sha256:d9a4cf86bf01eb170242ca3b0ce456159fd3fddc9c4d4256208a9d19bae096ca
Now, from here, we can try to find other images that have a (strict) subset of these layers. Assuming you have the images on-hand, you can find them by cross-referencing the layers of images you have on disk, for example, using docker image inspect.
In this case, I just happen to know what these images are and have them on-hand (I'll discuss later what you might do if you don't have the images on-hand) so we'll go ahead and pull those images and take a look at the layers.
If you want to follow along:
# openjdk:11.0.10-jdk-slim at time of writing, on my platform
OPENJDK='docker.io/openjdk#sha256:fe6a46a26ff7d6c31b258e07b3d53f0c42fe68f55f646cc39d60d0b17cbc827b'
# debian:buster-20210329-slim at time of writing on my platform
DEBIAN='docker.io/debian#sha256:088be7d6017ad3ae98325f47707112e1f61687c371be1865e55d5e5531ca97fd'
docker pull $OPENJDK
docker pull $DEBIAN
If we inspect these images and compare them against the layers we saw in the output of docker image inspect for the maven image, we can confirm that the layers from openjdk and debian are present in our original maven image.
$ docker image inspect $DEBIAN | jq -r '.[].RootFS.Layers[]'
sha256:6e06900bc10223217b4c78081a857866f674c462e4f90593b01894da56df336d
$ docker image inspect $OPENJDK | jq -r '.[].RootFS.Layers[]'
sha256:6e06900bc10223217b4c78081a857866f674c462e4f90593b01894da56df336d
sha256:eda2f4da9b1e70500ac340d40ee039ef3877e8be13b9a24cd345406bf6693412
sha256:6bdb7b3c3e226bdfaa911ba72a95fca13c3979cd150061d570cf569e93037ce6
sha256:ce217e530345060ca0973807a3288560e1e15cf1a4eeec44d6aa594a926c92dc
As stated, because these 5 layers are a strict subset of the 8 layers from the maven image, we can conclude the openjdk and debian images are, at least, both in the ancestry path of the maven image.
We can further infer that the last 3 layers most likely come from the maven image itself (or, potentially, some unknown image).
Caveats, when you don't have images locally
Now, of course the above only works because I happen to have all the images on-hand. So, you'd either need to have the images or be able to locate them by the layer digests.
You might still be able to figure this out using information that may be available from registries like Docker Hub or your own private repositories.
For official images, the docker-library/repo-info contains historical information about the official images, including the layer digests for the various tags cataloged over the last several years. You could use this, for example, as a source of layer information.
If you can imagine this like a database of layer digests, you could infer ancestry of at least these official images.
"Distribution" (remote) digests vs "Content" (local) digests
An important caveat to note is that, when you inspect an image for its layer digests locally, you are getting the content digest of the layers. If you are looking at layer digests in a registry manifest (like what appears in the docker-library/repo-info project) you get the compressed distribution digest and won't be able to compare the layer digests with content.
So you can compare digests local <--> local OR remote <--> remote only.
Example, using remote images
Suppose I want to do this same thing, but I want to associate images in a remote repository and find its base(s). We can do the same thing by looking at the layers in the remote manifest.
You can find references how to do this for your particular registry, as described in this answer for dockerhub.
Using the same images from the example above, we would find that the distribution layer digests also match in the same way.
$ get-remote-layers $IMAGE
sha256:6fcf2156bc23db75595b822b865fbc962ed6f4521dec8cae509e66742a6a5ad3
sha256:96fde6667c188c81fcddee021ccbb3e054ebe83350fd4609e17a3d37f0ec7f9d
sha256:74d17759dd2a1b51afc740fadd96f655260689a2087308e40d1865a0098c5fae
sha256:bbe8ebb5d0a64d265558901c7c6c66e1d09f664da57cdb2e5f69ba52a7109d31
sha256:b2edaadd7dd62cfe7f551b902244ee67b84bc5c0b6538b9480ac9ca97a0a4986
sha256:0fca65d33e353bdfdd5edd8d4c8ab5efde52c078bd25e2dcf454f995e5420725
sha256:d6d771d0512387eee1e419a965b929a9a3b0365cf1935b3719d60bf9feffcf63
sha256:dee8cd26669373102db07820072127c46bbfdad340a586ee9dfe60ae933eac2b
$ get-remote-layers $DEBIAN
sha256:6fcf2156bc23db75595b822b865fbc962ed6f4521dec8cae509e66742a6a5ad3
$ get-remote-layers $OPENJDK
sha256:6fcf2156bc23db75595b822b865fbc962ed6f4521dec8cae509e66742a6a5ad3
sha256:96fde6667c188c81fcddee021ccbb3e054ebe83350fd4609e17a3d37f0ec7f9d
sha256:74d17759dd2a1b51afc740fadd96f655260689a2087308e40d1865a0098c5fae
sha256:bbe8ebb5d0a64d265558901c7c6c66e1d09f664da57cdb2e5f69ba52a7109d31
One other caveat with distribution digests in repositories is that you can only compare digests of the same manifest schema version. So, if an image was pushed with manifest v1 it won't have the same digest pushed again with manifest v2.
TL;DR
Images contain the layers of their ancestor image(s). Therefore, if an image A contains a strict subset of image B layers, you know that image B is a descendent of image A.
You can use this property of Docker images to determine the base images from which your images were derived.
You can use method suggested in this answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/53841690/3691891
First, pull chenzj/dfimage:
docker pull chenzj/dfimage
Get ID of your image:
docker images | grep <IMAGE_NAME> | awk '{print $3}'
Replace <IMAGE_NAME> with the name of your image. Use this ID as
the parameter to chenzj/dfimage:
docker run -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock --rm chenzj/dfimage <IMAGE_ID>
If you find this too hard just pull the chenzj/dfimage image and then
use the following docker-get-dockerfile.sh script:
#!/usr/bin/env sh
if [ "$#" -lt 1 ]
then
printf "Image name needed\n" >&2
exit 1
fi
image_id="$(docker images | grep "^$1 " | awk '{print $3}')"
if [ -z "$image_id" ]
then
printf "Image not found\n" >&2
exit 2
fi
docker run -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock --rm chenzj/dfimage "$image_id"
You need to pass image name as the parameter. Example usage:
$ ./docker-get-dockerfile.sh alpine
FROM alpine:latest
ADD file:fe64057fbb83dccb960efabbf1cd8777920ef279a7fa8dbca0a8801c651bdf7c in /
CMD ["/bin/sh"]
docker run image:tag cat /etc/*release*
Run a docker container from that image with the command above(change "image:tag" with your image name and tag). your container will print details you need to answer your question.

Docker registry space if pushing two images from same docker file

What happens on docker registry server space side when an image is created from same docker file. So, for example in case below, if I push an image with tag 1.0 and then create another image with same docker file and push that with tag 1.1. Is it going to take any additional space on docker registry?
docker build . -t myRegistry.com/myImage:1.0
docker push myRegistry.com/myImage:1.0
docker build . -t myRegistry.com/myImage:1.1
docker push myRegistry.com/myImage:1.1
docker build . -t myRegistry.com/myImage:1.2
docker push myRegistry.com/myImage:1.2
docker build . -t myRegistry.com/myImage:1.3
docker push myRegistry.com/myImage:1.3
In your sample case, the container registry will use the same image, which is calculated by the image's sha256 value (also known as the IMAGE ID) -- the tag is simply alias to that unique image.
It's a one-to-many relationship, i.e., you can have many tags point to the same image. You can use docker images --no-trunc to see the full value of the IMAGE ID. (Note this is useful if you have consistency issues using common tags like "latest" or "develop" since you can't be sure which image it actually is unless you use the sha256 value.)
For builds on different machines/environments, using the same Dockerfile with the same files may result in the same hash, but it depends on many variables like how dynamic your dependencies are, if timestamps have changed, etc.
As #Henry mentioned, this further applies (largely behind the scenes) to individual layers of an image:
Docker images have intermediate layers that increase reusability,
decrease disk usage, and speed up docker build by allowing each step
to be cached. These intermediate layers are not shown by default.
see docs
Btw, to see a container's sha256 value to see which image it came from, you can inspect it, e.g., docker inspect --format='{{index .RepoDigests 0}}' mongo:3.4-jessie

Why are container's size and image's size equivalent?

The glossary of docker says that
A Docker container consists of
A Docker image
Execution environment
A standard set of instructions
When I type docker images, I see 324.2 MB in SIZE column of mysql:5.6.
When I type docker ps -s -a, this command tells me that the size of the container, which is created by docker run mysql:5.6 -d, is also 324.2 MB.
Does this mean that Execution environment and A standard set of instructions do not occupy any disk space?
or the disk space they use is less than 0.1 MB?
or docker ps -s -a just lists the size of the container's image?
Because of the copy-on-write mechanism, the size of a container is... at first 0.
Meaning, you can launch 100 containers, then won't take 100 times the size of the image. They will share the filesystem proposed by the image.
Then any modification done during the life of the container will be written in a new layer, one per image.
See more at "Understand images, containers, and storage drivers":
When you create a new container, you add a new, thin, writable layer on top of the underlying stack. This layer is often called the “container layer”.
All changes made to the running container - such as writing new files, modifying existing files, and deleting files - are written to this thin writable container layer. The diagram below shows a container based on the Ubuntu 15.04 image.

Cached Docker image?

I created my own image and pushed it to my repo on docker hub. I deleted all the images on my local box with docker rmi -f ...... Now docker images shows an empty list.
But when I do docker run xxxx/yyyy:zzzz it doesn't pull from my remote repo and starts a container right away.
Is there any cache or something else? If so, what is the way to clean it all?
Thank you
I know this is old now but thought I'd share still.
Docker will contain all those old images in a Cache unless you specifically build them with --no-cache, to clear the cache down you can simply run docker system prune -a -f and it should clear everything down including the cache.
Note: this will clear everything down including containers.
You forced removal of the image with -f. Since you used -f I'm assuming that the normal rmi failed because containers based on that image already existed. What this does is just untag the image. The data still exists as a diff for the container.
If you do a docker ps -a you should see containers based on that image. If you start more containers based on that same previous ID, the image diff still exists so you don't need to download anything. But once you remove all those containers, the diff will disappear and the image will be gone.

Resources