There are various articles like this, this and this and many more, that explains how to use X11 forwarding to run GUI apps on Docker. I am using a Centos Docker container.
However, all of these approaches use
docker run
with all appropriate options in order to visualize the result. Any use of docker run creates a new image and performs the operation on top of that.
A way to work in the same container is to use docker start followed by docker attach and then executing the commands on the prompt of the container. Additionally, the script (let's say xyz.sh) that I intend to run on Docker container resides inside a folder MyFiles in the root directory of the container and accepts a parameter as well
So is there a way to run the script using docker start and/or docker attach while also X11-forwarding it?
This is what I have tried, although would like to avoid docker run and instead use docker start and docker attach
sudo docker run -it \
--env="DISPLAY" \
--volume="/tmp/.X11-unix:/tmp/.X11-unix:rw" \
centos \
cd MyFiles \
./xyz.sh param1
export containerId='docker ps -l -q'
This in turn throws up an error as below -
/usr/bin/cd: line 2: cd: MyFiles/: No such file or directory
How can I run the script xyz.sh under MyFiles on the Docker container using docker start and docker attach?
Also since the location and the name of the script may vary, I would like to know if it is mandatory to include each of these path in the system path variable on the Docker container or can it be done at runtime also?
It looks to me your problem is not with X11 forwarding but with general Docker syntax.
You could do it rather simply:
sudo docker run -it \
--env="DISPLAY" \
--volume="/tmp/.X11-unix:/tmp/.X11-unix:rw" \
-w MyFiles \
--rm \
centos \
bash -c xyz.sh param1
I added:
--rm to avoid stacking old dead containers.
-w workdir, obvious meaning
/bin/bash -c to get sure your script is interpreted by bash.
How to do without docker run:
run is actually like create then start. You can split it in two steps if you prefer.
If you want to attach to a container, it must be running first. And for it to be running, there must be a process currently running inside.
Related
The following command runs fine on my local machine.
docker run -it --rm --ulimit memlock=-1 \
-v "$HOMEDIR/..":"/home/user/repo" \
-w "/home/user/repo/linux" \
${DOCKER_IMAGE_NAME} bash build.sh
Running it in a docker-in-docker evirionment (that means the mentioned docker command is executed in a container on google cloudbuild) is leading to two problems though:
Docker complains The input device is not a tty. My workaround: I simply used only docker run -i --rm.
Somehow the assigned volume and working directory on the container do not exist under the given path. But i checked them on the host system and they exist, but somehow do not make it until the container.
I thought also already about using docker exec but there i don't have the fancy -v options. I tried both, the docker run command with the -i and the -it flag on my local machine where it both runned fine. Anyway on cloudbuild i get the tty error when usind -it and the unacessible volume problem occurs when using -i.
Can I execute a local shell script within a docker container using docker run -it ?
Here is what I can do:
$ docker run -it 5ee0b7440be5
bash-4.2# echo "Hello"
Hello
bash-4.2# exit
exit
I have a shell script on my local machine
hello.sh:
echo "Hello"
I would like to execute the local shell script within the container and read the value returned:
$ docker run -it 5e3337440be5 #Some way of passing a reference to hello.sh to the container.
Hello
A specific design goal of Docker is that you can't. A container can't access the host filesystem at all, except to the extent that an administrator explicitly mounts parts of the filesystem into the container. (See #tentative's answer for a way to do this for your use case.)
In most cases this means you need to COPY all of the scripts and support tools into your image. You can create a container running any command you want, and one typical approach is to set the image's CMD to do "the normal thing the container will normally do" (like run a Web server) but to allow running the container with a different command (an admin task, a background worker, ...).
# Dockerfile
FROM alpine
...
COPY hello.sh /usr/local/bin
...
EXPOSE 80
CMD httpd -f -h /var/www
docker build -t my/image .
docker run -d -p 8000:80 --name web my/image
docker run --rm --name hello my/image \
hello.sh
In normal operation you should not need docker exec, though it's really useful for debugging. If you are in a situation where you're really stuck, you need more diagnostic tools to be understand how to reproduce a situation, and you don't have a choice but to look inside the running container, you can also docker cp the script or tool into the container before you docker exec there. If you do this, remember that the image also needs to contain any dependencies for the tool (interpreters like Python or GNU Bash, C shared libraries), and that any docker cpd files will be lost when the container exits.
You can use a bind-mount to mount a local file to the container and execute it. When you do that, however, be aware that you'll need to be providing the container process with write/execute access to the folder or specific script you want to run. Depending on your objective, using Docker for this purpose may not be the best idea.
See #David Maze's answer for reasons why. However, here's how you can do it:
Assuming you're on a Unix based system and the hello.sh script is in your current directory, you can mount that single script to the container with -v $(pwd)/hello.sh:/home/hello.sh.
This command will mount the file to your container, start your shell in the folder where you mounted it, and run a shell:
docker run -it -v $(pwd)/hello.sh:/home/hello.sh --workdir /home ubuntu:20.04 /bin/sh
root#987eb876b:/home ./hello.sh
Hello World!
This command will run that script directly and save the output into the variable output:
output=$(docker run -it -v $(pwd)/hello.sh:/home/test.sh ubuntu:20.04 /home/hello.sh)
echo $output
Hello World!
References for more information:
https://docs.docker.com/storage/bind-mounts/#start-a-container-with-a-bind-mount
https://docs.docker.com/storage/bind-mounts/#use-a-read-only-bind-mount
It's CentOS 7, already installed vi and vim in my CentOS and I can use them. I run docker in CentOS, when I excute this line below:
docker exec -it mysolr /bin/bash
I cannot use vi/vim in the solr container:
bash: vim: command not found
Why is that and how do I fix it so I can use vi/vim to edit file in docker container?
A typical Docker image contains a minimal set of libraries and utilities to run one specific program. Additionally, Docker container filesystems are not long-lived: it is extremely routine to delete and recreate a container, for instance to use a newer version of a base image.
The upshot of this is that you never want to directly edit files in a Docker container, and most images aren't set up with "rich" editing tools. (BusyBox contains a minimal vi and so most Alpine-based images will too.) If you make some change, it will be lost as soon as you delete the container. (Similarly, you usually can install vim or emacs or whatever, but it will get lost as soon as the container is deleted: installing software in a running container isn't usually a best practice.)
There are two good ways to deal with this, depending on what kind of file it is.
If the file is part of the application, like a source file, edit, debug, and test it outside of Docker space. Once you're convinced it's right (by running unit tests and by running the program locally), docker build a new image with it, and docker run a new container with the new image.
ed config.py
pytest
docker build -t imagename .
docker run -d -p ... --name containername imagename
...
ed config.py
pytest
docker build -t imagename .
docker stop containername
docker run -d -p ... --name containername imagename
If the file is configuration that needs to be injected when the application starts, the docker run -v option is a good way to push it in. You can directly edit the config file on your host, but you'll probably need to restart (or delete and recreate) the container for it to notice.
ed config.txt
docker run \
-v $PWD/config.txt:/etc/whatever/config.txt \
--name containername -p ... \
imagename
...
ed config.txt
docker stop containername
docker rm containername
docker run ... imagename
Do I understand Docker correctly?
docker run -it --rm --name verdaccio -p 4873:4873 -d verdaccio/verdaccio
gets verdaccio if it does not exist yet on my server and runs it on a specific port. -d detaches it so I can leave the terminal and keep it running right?
docker exec -it --user root verdaccio /bin/sh
lets me ssh into the running container. However whatever apk package that I add would be lost if I rm the container then run the image again, as well as any edited file. So what's the use of this? Can I keep the changes in the image?
As I need to edit the config.yaml that is present in /verdaccio/conf/config.yaml (in the container), my only option to keep this changes is to detach the data from the running instance? Is there another way?
V_PATH=/path/on/my/server/verdaccio; docker run -it --rm --name
verdaccio -p 4873:4873 \
-v $V_PATH/conf:/verdaccio/conf \
-v $V_PATH/storage:/verdaccio/storage \
-v $V_PATH/plugins:/verdaccio/plugins \
verdaccio/verdaccio
However this command would throw
fatal--- cannot open config file /verdaccio/conf/config.yaml: ENOENT: no such file or directory, open '/verdaccio/conf/config.yaml'
You can use docker commit to build a new image based on the container.
A better approach however is to use a Dockerfile that builds an image based on verdaccio/verdaccio with the necessary changes in it. This makes the process easily repeatable (for example if a new version of the base image comes out).
A further option is the use of volumes as you already mentioned.
Am trying to install and configure openstack (devstack) inside docker container. While installing am getting the following error
"Failed to get D-Bus connection: No connection to service manager."
Later, I checked and found that its because of systemd problem. When I tried executing the command systemd
$>systemd
Am getting the following output.
Trying to run as user instance, but the system has not been booted with systemd.
Following are the things which am used.
Host machine OS : Ubuntu 14.04,
Docker Version : Docker version 1.12.4, build 1564f02,
Docker Container OS : Ubuntu 14.04
Can anyone help in this. Thanks in advance.
First of all, systemd expects /sys/fs/cgroup to be mounted. Additionally, you must make the container privileged, or else this happens:
docker run -v /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup:ro --privileged -it --rm ubuntu
Then you can go ahead and run /bin/systemd --system --unit=basic.target from bash, and it should run normally (with some errors of course, because Docker does not virtualize an entire system, nor is the library:ubuntu image more than the minimum size required to run properly):
After you have systemd running (semi-)properly, you can simply use a docker stop to stop the container.
This post is based on my own research, a few weeks of it too, for a project I like to call initbuntu (originally I tried to get init running, but running systemd directly was my only solution after all my failed tries). The container will be available on Docker Hub as logandark/initbuntu, Soon™. For now, a broken copy (or not broken, I dunno) is available there at the time of posting.
Sources (kinda):
/sys/fs/cgroup: Here
systemd --system: A StackOverflow post I lost the link to.
Existing DevStack on Docker Project
First of all, you can get a preconfigured Dockerfile with DevStack Ocata/Pike on Docker here. The repository also contains further information on DevStack and containers.
Build Your Own Image
Running systemd in Docker is certainly possible and has been done before. I found Ubuntu 16.04 LTS is a good foundation for the Docker host as well as the base image.
Your systemd/DevStack Dockerfile needs this configuration, which also cleans up services you probably don't want inside a Docker container:
FROM ubuntu:16.04
#####################################################################
# Systemd workaround from solita/ubuntu-systemd and moby/moby#28614 #
#####################################################################
ENV container docker
# No need for graphical.target
RUN systemctl set-default multi-user.target
# Gracefully stop systemd
STOPSIGNAL SIGRTMIN+3
# Cleanup unneeded services
RUN find /etc/systemd/system \
/lib/systemd/system \
-path '*.wants/*' \
-not -name '*journald*' \
-not -name '*systemd-tmpfiles*' \
-not -name '*systemd-user-sessions*' \
-exec rm \{} \;
# Workaround for console output error moby/moby#27202, based on moby/moby#9212
CMD ["/bin/bash", "-c", "exec /sbin/init --log-target=journal 3>&1"]
If you intend to run OpenStack/DevStack inside said container, it might save you lots of trouble to start it privileged instead of defining separate security capabilities and volumes:
docker run \
--name devstack \
--privileged \
--detach \
image
To get a bash inside your new systemd container try this:
docker exec \
--tty \
--interactive \
devstack \
bash
Systemd should work inside properly configured container. You can run the container in privileged mood to run systemd.
"Systemd cannot run without SYS_ADMIN, less privileges than that won't work (see #2296 (comment)). Yes it's possible to make it "easier" (a tool that automatically sets these), but it'll still need certain privileges"
See this Github issue
After all docker is an application container and it runs the process which you specify at run time , after completing that process it will exit. May be you need an OS container or a virtual machine for your use case. See OS container vs Application Container here
In most cases the error messages comes up because an installer program has tried to run "systemctl start ". Unlike initscripts the systemctl command will not try execute the start script directly - instead it tries to contact the systemd daemon to execute the start sequence of the service. So all services have a common parent in the systemd daemon.
It can be quite overdone to run a systemd daemon inside a docker container just to start a service. You could use the systemctl-docker-replacement overwriting /usr/bin/systemctl in which case the target service is started without the help of a systemd daemon. It runs the ExecStart from the *.service file directly.