I'm new to docker, so I have visited the https://www.docker.com/101-tutorial tutorial and executed, folowing their advice:
docker run -dp 80:80 docker/getting-started
This let me read the manual via http:/localhost:80. This works all right and I'm presented with the official docker manual. I follow it. They say to prepare a Dockerfile like this:
FROM node:12-alpine
WORKDIR /app
COPY . .
RUN yarn install --production
CMD ["node", "src/index.js"]
which i did. I built the image: docker build -t getting-started . and tried to run it, docker run -dp 3000:3000 getting-started, but with no success. I checked with docker ps that this did not work. After some experimentation (with some "debugging" via an interactive docker launch, with /bin/sh as the initial command) I produced this Dockerfile, which works:
FROM node:alpine
WORKDIR /app
COPY . .
RUN yarn install --production
RUN yarn add express
RUN yarn add sqlite3
CMD ["node", "app/src/index.js"]
I'm quite impressed that without much knowledge about docker, and with absolutely no knowledge about node.js and Alpine Linux, I managed to fix the problem myself. Now I would like to understand what's going on here.
My question is as in the title: why the original instructions from the official manual fail on my computer? Why do I have to install extra libraries and why my working files go to /app/app rather than just /app?
My environment:
> cat /etc/lsb-release
DISTRIB_ID=ManjaroLinux
DISTRIB_RELEASE=20.2
DISTRIB_CODENAME=Nibia
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Manjaro Linux"
> docker --version
Docker version 19.03.13-ce, build 4484c46d9d
My experiment with an interactive container:
> docker run -it my_image /bin/sh
/app # ls
Dockerfile app node_modules package.json yarn.lock
/app # ls app
package.json spec src yarn.lock
Related
New to docker. I wanted to create a simple Node.js app using docker on my Ubuntu OS. But all the tutorials/YouTube Videos are first installing Node on host machine, then run and test the app, and then dockerizing the app. Means all the tutorials are simply teaching "How to dockerize an existing app".
If anyone can provide a little guidance on this then it would be really helpful.
First create a directory for your source code and create something like the starter app from here in app.js. You have to make one change though: hostname has to be 0.0.0.0 rather than 127.0.0.1.
Then run an interactive node container using this command
docker run -it --rm -v $(pwd):/app -p 3000:3000 node /bin/bash
This container has your host directory mapped to /app, so if you do
cd /app
ls -al
you should see your app.js file.
Now you can run it using
node app.js
If you then switch back to the host, open a browser and go to http://localhost:3000/ you should get a 'Hello world' response.
Follow this
# Create app directory
WORKDIR /usr/src/app
# Install app dependencies
# A wildcard is used to ensure both package.json AND package-lock.json are copied
# where available (npm#5+)
COPY package*.json ./
RUN npm install
# If you are building your code for production
# RUN npm ci --only=production
# Bundle app source
COPY . .
EXPOSE 8080
CMD [ "node", "server.js" ]
docker build . -t <your username>/node-web-app
docker run -p 49160:8080 -d <your username>/node-web-app
You can create package*.json ./ files manually, if you don't want to install node/npm on your local machine.
I have a problem after creating a docker image.
If I build applications without Docker (npm run build, npm start), everything works correctly. Screenshots below.
Please suggest how to fix the problem
Dockerfile:
FROM node:alpine
RUN apk add --no-cache libc6-compat
RUN mkdir /brahhouse
WORKDIR /brahhouse
COPY ./package*.json /brahhouse
RUN npm install
COPY . /brahhouse
RUN npm run build
CMD ["npm", "start"]
I build docker image with command:
docker build -t brahouse .
I run docker image with command:
docker run -p 3000:3000 brahouse
Screenshots:
App without Docker
App in Docker Images
Problem solved
Thank you brc-dd
Solution:
Editing tailwind.config.js (purge -> content) Set the correct paths for components, pages and other folders used by tailwind-css
I am run a single Node.js script like so: docker run -it --rm -u node --name build_container -v $(pwd):/home/node/app -w "/home/node/app" node:lts bash -c "yarn install --no-cache --frozen-lockfile".
However, the script log shows the displays info No lockfile found, and, what is even weirder, a message that says a package-lock.json was found. However, the work directory has no package-lock.
Are there any ideas what could be the issue?
I would suggest using your own Dockerfile to build your image - and then run it inside the build - like so:
Dockerfile
FROM node:12-alpine
# Create work directory
RUN mkdir -p /express
WORKDIR /express
# Bundle app sources
COPY . .
# Build app
RUN yarn install --prod --frozen-lockfile && yarn run build
EXPOSE 3000
# Set default NODE_ENV to production
ENV NODE_ENV production
ENTRYPOINT [ "yarn", "start" ]
.dockerignore
node_modules
build
dist
config
docs
*.log
.git
.vscode
And then build the image:
docker build -t <your image name> -f <Dockerfile (if omitted uses local folder .Dockerfile> <path to code your code>
Once built, run it as you would a normal image - as everything is already in.
I am trying some something out with gitlab-runner image,
FROM gitlab/gitlab-runner:alpine
WORKDIR /app
COPY . /app
RUN apk add yarn && yarn install
RUN yarn --version # this layer prints 1.16.0
RUN ng build --prod
EXPOSE 3000
CMD ["yarn", "run", "start"]
above is the docker file I have created
docker build -t runner:1 .
I was able to build the image successfully
docker run -p 3000:3000 runner:1
but when I try to run the container it gives me below error
`*FATAL: Command yarn not found.*`
not sure about the behavior, if it is able to install yarn (apk add yarn) in base images and install the dependencies using yarn install then how it is not able to find the yarn command while running the container? Where I am going wrong.
Also at which directory yarn is installed in the alpine ?
I know it is not an efficient docker file, but I am trying to run the container first before optimizing it.
It outputs the version. It means the yarn is installed already. You could find the path the same as you find the version.
RUN which yarn
Step 6/10 : RUN which yarn
---> Running in 0f633b81f2ed
/usr/bin/yarn
We can see the /usr/bin/ has added to PATH.
Step 7/11 : RUN echo $PATH
---> Running in fc3f40b6bfd9
/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin
But I couldn't figure out why isn't reading yarn from the PATH.
So, we have set the PATH explicitly in our Dockerfile.
ENV PATH=${PATH}
But still, the issue persists. Now we have to separate yarn and commands as ENTRYPOINT and CMD respectively in the Dockerfile.
ENTRYPOINT ["yarn"]
CMD ["run", "start"]
Updated Dockerfile
FROM gitlab/gitlab-runner:alpine
ENV PATH=${PATH}
WORKDIR /app
COPY . /app
RUN apk add yarn && yarn install
RUN yarn --version # this layer prints 1.16.0
RUN ng build --prod
EXPOSE 3000
ENTRYPOINT ["yarn"]
CMD ["run", "start"]
---
$ docker run -p 3000:3000 harik8/yarn:latest
yarn run v1.16.0
error Couldn't find a package.json file in "/app"
info Visit https://yarnpkg.com/en/docs/cli/run for documentation about this command.
The behaviours of the base image look unusual. It'd be better to go through it.
To build your app you shouldn't use gitlab-runner image, but a 'node' one.
Gilab-runner image is for running a gitlab agent which can be connected to docker engine and spawn the node container in which you will execute your build, in your case a docker image build.
To use gilab you need to prepare a gitlab-ci file where you will define what steps and which 'services' you need to do your build.
Tl;dr: change base image to node:latest and as a entirely separate work setup gitlab runner.
However if your aim is to have your application to extend gitlab runner, try docker multistage builds.
First, use node:latest image to build your app, and then copy the build output into gitlab-runner.
Runtime images such as gitlab-runner are stripped from build tools like yarn or npm, that's why your image fails. Main goal is to keep runtime images as small as possible and sdk's are not needed and sometimes dangerous when it comes to production-level work.
I am having a problem running Docker container after upgrading from NodeJS 8.2 to 9.1. This is the message I am getting.
I used the Dockerfile I found in Docker Hub but got an error of not being able to find package.json. So I commented it out and use the one I found on NodeJS website.
Below is the Docker File:
Dockerfile
FROM node:9.1.0
RUN mkdir -p /usr/src/app
WORKDIR /usr/src/app
ONBUILD ARG NODE_ENV
ONBUILD ENV NODE_ENV $NODE_ENV
ONBUILD COPY package*.json ./
ONBUILD RUN npm install && npm cache clean --force
ONBUILD COPY . /usr/src/app
CMD [ "npm", "start" ]
I would appreciate help from more experienced users.
Your docker run command syntax is wrong. Everything after the image name is used to override the command run in your container. So docker run myimage -d will try to run -d inside the container, while docker run -d myimage will run your container with the -d option to docker run (detached mode).
The Dockerfile you referenced is meant to be used as parent image for an easy dockerization of your application.
So to dockerize your nodejs application, you'd need to create a dockerfile using the docker image created by said dockerfile.
The ONBUILD instruction gets executed whenever a new image is built with this particular image as parent image (FROM instruction). More info
I've never used an image like this, but from the looks of it, it should be enough to reference the image with the FROM instruction and then provide the NODE_ENV via build args.
The dockerfile to add into your project:
FROM this_image:9.1
How to build your application image:
docker build -t IMAGE_NAME:TAG --build-arg NODE_ENV=production .