Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 281 posts

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#251

Post by hinkley »

ogre_codes wrote: post #174
momokoko wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize most engineers write software that runs in production on x86 Linux, right? All that performance is going to be used to run cloud based Linux x86 development environments. Repl.it and Github codespaces are the real winners with the move to Apple Silicon

"Most"? I'm not entirely sure that's true. Or at least not entirely relevant/ interesting. First, you have thousands of developers writing code for iOS/ Android & Chromebooks. That right there is a pretty big chunk of developers. And at least for the iOS developers, running on ARM instead of x86 is a significant advantage. Second, a lot of us are writing software for the web which means primarily writing software tha…

100% of my coworkers deploy to x86-64. I wasn't trying to speak for everyone. I thought I was pretty clear about that.

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#252

Post by user5994461 »

runjake wrote: post #247
dan1234 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of them is used for charging, so you really only have one useable port. Still, TB3 dock should be able to provide enough ports for most people (at the expense of portability).

Not to defend Apple because your point is valid, but you can buy a $25 Anker hub and run power through that and gain a ton of ports.

Not really. You could try to get a $25 hub from Amazon and hope it works, half the reviews seems to disagree on that.

However it still won't give you any HDMI or audio or Ethernet output. If you try to get one more adapter, say HDMI to connect a projector, you won't be able to plug it because there was only one thunderbolt port in the first place.

£75 pounds for basic connectivity https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MUF82ZM/A/usb-c-digita...

£120 pounds for dual display with dual USB. https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/HMX02ZM/A/caldigit-thu...

£230 for a dock https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/HMX12Z/A/caldigit-ts3-...

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#253

Post by vlovich123 »

cercatrova wrote: post #150
vlovich123 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think the bigger problems are drivers & secure boot rather than just instructions. M1 is a regular ARM processor so existing backends at a minimum would work fine even if they're not fully optimized (+ I would be a bit surprised if the M1 support for LLVM isn't upstreamed).

Is that really true that M1 is just an ARM processor? I've heard the difficulty in emulating it is due to Apple specific things, whether they be drivers or new instructions.

I understood this thread to be about running Linux bare metal natively on the M1, so there's no emulation there & new instructions don't matter. Drivers & secure boot are always the biggest problem. It sounds like you can sign your own kernel & add it so in theory secure boot may not be a problem. Then the question is which driver support are missing & need implementation & how close that lines up with existing ARM device trees.

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#254

Post by rubyn00bie »

angrygoat wrote: post #152
LeSaucy wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a huge reason why I decided to go with a 16" MBP with an i9 vs the M1 today. I assume this will get worked out eventually , but as massive as Apple's gravity is in their ecosystem to pull apps along, they will have a much harder time against the massive library of x86 docker images.

I guess the flip side is that, hopefully, the Docker ecosystem will start getting a lot better at multi-arch, at least for x86-64 and ARM. I just ordered an M1 MBP and I'll be quite happy to start thwacking bugs in images and upstreaming the fixes.

Just a heads up; I haven't tried using my DTK in a while but... development was still VERY rough last time I checked. I was pretty much forced to write code on an x86 machine and schlep it over via ssh to then run it.

Also, be real careful you don't accidentally build for x86 when installing libraries or it all goes to shit. I got bitten by this by using iTerm (building it from source was fine though) and not realizing it was the x86 variant. That is to say, make sure your terminal is the system terminal or built for ARM-- otherwise when you install things using package managers they'll be the x86 variant.

Like, I'm super stoked for the M1, but also just totally fucking irritated about the toolchain changes and MacOS in general... They've not been the best stewards of their software and developer communities as of late, and they're pushing a totally proprietary architecture onto them expecting them to foot the bill (hours spent fixing/debugging) to make their platform usable.

Truly, I get paid to write software that runs on Linux not on Macs. In fact, I've never gotten paid to write software for Macs, because no production systems use Macs. Now it is harder for me to do primary development on a Mac; because I must fix MacOS or live with MacOS only bugs... bugs which only exist on a platform I do not intend to deploy my code to... these aren't just some config bugs either they're going to be a fucking mess of irritating, show-stopping, moving targets with a negative ROI.

I still can't believe they didn't incorporate containers into the OS before switching platforms to keep developers around but that's a totally different rant.

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#255

Post by throwaway894345 »

markonen wrote: post #230
pvorb wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would your employer pay you to build and test ARM images when the server they're running on is AMD64? Okay, let's be realistic: they'll probably never find out. But still this is wasted effort when you could just as well use a regular x86 machine for development. Cross compilation will lead to many small problems that add up over time...

More likely than not, those servers are at AWS. And if that's the case, once all the components have ARM images the server instances can be switched over to the M6g instance type for significant cost savings.

Even if not AWS, every cloud provider will have cheaper ARM offerings in a few years. The writing is on the wall at this point. Not to mention that some significant portion of the PC market will certainly follow suit, and now whether you’re developing for desktop, mobile, or server, there’s a good chance you’ll be targeting ARM.

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#256

Post by [deleted] »

irateswami wrote: post #238
ubermonkey wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL. Because people value different things? I stay on MacOS because it works very, very, very well for what I want to do. There are a large number of affirmative reasons I prefer Macs. Hardware build quality has traditionally been stellar, on par with the golden age of Thinkpads (which is one reason the keyboard thing was so jarring). The OS is immensely, profoundly stable. The built-in tools for things like mail, co…

So much this, OSX remains a great tool for devs on X86. As much as I would love to move to Linux full time, I also don't want to think or deal with OS issues when I'm trying to write my code. OSX is far more polished than any other unix-based system out there, and there's a ton of support for any issues you might have. I also love homebrew, it strikes a good balance between something like apt and windows-style instal…

[deleted]

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#257

Post by panpanna »

ubermonkey wrote: post #228
OOPMan wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That begs an even bigger why, given it's such an awful OS in many ways.

LOL. Because people value different things? I stay on MacOS because it works very, very, very well for what I want to do. There are a large number of affirmative reasons I prefer Macs. Hardware build quality has traditionally been stellar, on par with the golden age of Thinkpads (which is one reason the keyboard thing was so jarring). The OS is immensely, profoundly stable. The built-in tools for things like mail, co…

Why is there this illusion that osx just works and linux requires much maintenance??

Only today we had 2-3 _major_ osx issues on HN front page. For example

https://twitter.com/lapcatsoftware/status/132699029641299148...

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#258

Post by ogre_codes »

hinkley wrote: post #251
ogre_codes wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most"? I'm not entirely sure that's true. Or at least not entirely relevant/ interesting. First, you have thousands of developers writing code for iOS/ Android & Chromebooks. That right there is a pretty big chunk of developers. And at least for the iOS developers, running on ARM instead of x86 is a significant advantage. Second, a lot of us are writing software for the web which means primarily writing software tha…

100% of my coworkers deploy to x86-64. I wasn't trying to speak for everyone. I thought I was pretty clear about that.

You were very clear you were only speaking for "Most Engineers".

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#259

Post by willejs »

happosai wrote: post #217
willejs wrote: post #33

Is it going to be interesting to see how new Apple machines running ARM based processors plays out. Writing code, and building docker images locally on ARM and building and running the same code on X86 in production could potentially, in some circumstances cause some issues. If not, it's a bit of a pain to potentially build and publish x86 and ARM images so that people can run them anywhere (Some projects are already…

If you are developing on Apple silicon, the path of least resistance is to deploy to AWS Graviton2 instances, even if the instance cpu/memory/io combination isn't perfect fit for your usecase.

I agree. However for a lot of people, their workloads have been running on x86 forever, maybe their production instances are not reproducible, and with combinations of cpu/memory/io being limited, at scale this could cost $$$. I’m just curious to see how this will pan out.

Re: Docker fails to launch on Apple Silicon

#260

Post by hinkley »

ogre_codes wrote: post #258
hinkley wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% of my coworkers deploy to x86-64. I wasn't trying to speak for everyone. I thought I was pretty clear about that.

You were very clear you were only speaking for "Most Engineers".

different responder
Post reply on HN