Latest Docker plugin update

    • Source Code

      1. Error #0:
      2. OMV\ExecException: Failed to execute command 'export PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin; export LANG=C; docker images 2>&1' with exit code '1': Cannot connect to the Docker daemon at unix:///var/run/docker.sock. Is the docker daemon running? in /usr/share/php/openmediavault/system/process.inc:182
      3. Stack trace:
      4. #0 /usr/share/openmediavault/engined/rpc/docker.inc(1534): OMV\System\Process->execute(Array)
      5. #1 [internal function]: OMVRpcServiceDocker->getDockerRepo(Array, Array)
      6. #2 /usr/share/php/openmediavault/rpc/serviceabstract.inc(123): call_user_func_array(Array, Array)
      7. #3 /usr/share/php/openmediavault/rpc/rpc.inc(86): OMV\Rpc\ServiceAbstract->callMethod('getDockerRepo', Array, Array)
      8. #4 /usr/sbin/omv-engined(536): OMV\Rpc\Rpc::call('Docker', 'getDockerRepo', Array, Array, 1)
      9. #5 {main}

      Well I also have some Error ... I hope that the fix will arrive soon enough...
      SATAN POUET POUET !!
    • botteur wrote:

      Well I also have some Error ... I hope that the fix will arrive soon enough...
      Revert back to docker 18.06 if you need it now. Docker plugin - After the last update it does not start
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by ryecoaaron ().

    • @ryecoaaron I just saw your commit on omv-docker-gui's repo. Shouldn't you lock docker-ce dependency to 2018.09 instead of happily allowing newer major versions? This should prevent problems like this in the future, where an unknown update of a dependency breaks many users OMV configurations. Obviously, this will lock users to the "last known-to-be-working version", but this seems like a better approach than "be up to date and potentially break things".
    • dziekon wrote:

      I just saw your commit on omv-docker-gui's repo. Shouldn't you lock docker-ce dependency to 2018.09 instead of happily allowing newer major versions? This should prevent problems like this in the future, where an unknown update of a dependency breaks many users OMV configurations. Obviously, this will lock users to the "last known-to-be-working version", but this seems like a better approach than "be up to date and potentially break things".
      It isn't locked to that version. It requires that 18.09 or newer.
      docker-ce (>= 18.09)
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      dziekon wrote:

      I just saw your commit on omv-docker-gui's repo. Shouldn't you lock docker-ce dependency to 2018.09 instead of happily allowing newer major versions? This should prevent problems like this in the future, where an unknown update of a dependency breaks many users OMV configurations. Obviously, this will lock users to the "last known-to-be-working version", but this seems like a better approach than "be up to date and potentially break things".
      It isn't locked to that version. It requires that 18.09 or newer.docker-ce (>= 18.09)
      That's what I said. I've proposed to LOCK IT to that version, not the other way around.
    • dziekon wrote:

      That's what I said. I've proposed to LOCK IT to that version, not the other way around.
      My mistake. I read that backwards and thought you were saying I shouldn't lock it. I'm scrambling to fix this and reading everything too fast.

      While it would make sense to lock it, most people would complain since docker updates often. most updates don't break the plugin (first in at least a year). What really needs to be done is someone needs to be maintaining the plugin and testing against a pre-release docker repo.

      Otherwise, this just helps the idea of getting rid of the plugin in favor of portainer.
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      While it would make sense to lock it, most people would complain since docker updates often. most updates don't break the plugin (first in at least a year). What really needs to be done is someone needs to be maintaining the plugin and testing against a pre-release docker repo.
      I assume you're talking about minor updates, since 2018.09 seems like a major one (previous major was three or four months ago it seems). It should be possible to lock dep to major version, while still allowing minor patches.

      In general, I understand that sentiment, but it's not good to have production systems breaking because it's "unlikely that the new version will have breaking changes". We're talking NASes here, where people expect stability to be a first class citizen of the project, so stability should come first, especially when maintainers do not have time to accommodate for breaking changes. It's better to have an outdated set of features, rather than no features at all. What's more, this approach gives you, the maintainer of the plugin, enough time to accommodate to any changes in your free time, on your own terms.

      I won't push this discussion any further, and obviously I have no way to force you into this approach, so you'll do as you think is the best. But still... please reconsider my proposal for the sake of project's stability.
      BTW, I'm not trying to distract you from fixing the problem, just trying to prevent same "disaster" in the future while it's still time to take notes from this accident.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by dziekon ().

    • dziekon wrote:

      What's more, this approach gives you, the maintainer of the plugin, enough time to accommodate to any changes in your free time, on your own terms.

      I won't push this discussion any further, and obviously I have no way to force you into this approach, so you'll do as you think is the best. But still... please reconsider my proposal for the sake of project's stability.
      BTW, I'm not trying to distract you from fixing the problem, just trying to prevent same "disaster" in the future while it's still time to take notes from this accident.
      Like I said, I agree with you but I'm not the maintainer (just the only one who can fix this crisis right now I guess) and I don't want to be the one who has to update the plugin every time a quarterly release is out. I will change it in a bit.
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • @ryecoaaron
      Just had a look at the demo of portainer and imho it's somewhat of an overkill. Seems to be really sophisticated but on the other hand far to complex for the average user running one or two docker containers. In addition to that one has yet again another UI to open and check and you're not able to see if the service is running from within the OMV gui.
      I'm aware that it's a lot of work to maintain that much plugins and Portainer is the way to go if you can't maintain them all anymore.
    • Stramm wrote:

      Just had a look at the demo of portainer and imho it's somewhat of an overkill.
      Personally, I think the plugin is overkill for one or two containers as well.

      Stramm wrote:

      In addition to that one has yet again another UI to open and check
      Most people are using dockers for services that have UIs.

      Stramm wrote:

      you're not able to see if the service is running from within the OMV gui.
      Why not? You don't need an entire plugin just to get a service status. My plan was to add a button to install docker and portainer to omv-extras. I could very easily add the code to show the docker status.

      Stramm wrote:

      I'm aware that it's a lot of work to maintain that much plugins and Portainer is the way to go if you can't maintain them all anymore.
      Unfortunately, that is the situation. I really would like to do much less. I think once people are used to Portainer, it wouldn't be so scary. Some of the addition features might even come in handy. Plus, the stability would be much better.
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:


      Stramm wrote:

      you're not able to see if the service is running from within the OMV gui.
      Why not? You don't need an entire plugin just to get a service status. My plan was to add a button to install docker and portainer to omv-extras. I could very easily add the code to show the docker status.
      And maybe a link to the UI in the services section of OMV gui?

      While playing around with Portainer I'm sure it'll work as well as the plugin. With a little tutorial most people will get the hang of it. And you're right, the plugin is not easy to understand, too.
    • Stramm wrote:

      And maybe a link to the UI in the services section of OMV gui?
      I could probably do that.

      Stramm wrote:

      With a little tutorial most people will get the hang of it.
      I think technodadlife did a good job on this video of using it - Installation and Setup Videos - Beginning, Intermediate and Advanced
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      Stramm wrote:

      And maybe a link to the UI in the services section of OMV gui?
      I could probably do that.

      Stramm wrote:

      With a little tutorial most people will get the hang of it.
      I think technodadlife did a good job on this video of using it - Installation and Setup Videos - Beginning, Intermediate and Advanced
      Sounds awesome, Aaron. I'll stop now to babble as there are too many people around asking for your help with the docker update problem.
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      Stramm wrote:

      And maybe a link to the UI in the services section of OMV gui?
      I could probably do that.

      Stramm wrote:

      With a little tutorial most people will get the hang of it.
      I think technodadlife did a good job on this video of using it - Installation and Setup Videos - Beginning, Intermediate and Advanced
      There are other docker alternatives out there. I'll look at them when I come back. I'll have limited internet for the next 10 days. I found these after a brief search. alternative.me/portainer
      Build, Learn, Create.

      How to Videos for OMV

      Post any questions to the forum, so others can benefit from your curiosity. :thumbsup:
    • TechnoDadLife wrote:

      There are other docker alternatives out there. I'll look at them when I come back. I'll have limited internet for the next 10 days. I found these after a brief search.
      Just to save you some time... Rancher isn't really an alternative. It is for kubernetes which is also on the list. It was a while ago but I tried shipyard and it isn't wasn't as good as portainer. Maybe it is better. Not sure I have seen any other web interfaces.
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • TechnoDadLife wrote:

      There are other docker alternatives out there. I'll look at them when I come back. I'll have limited internet for the next 10 days. I found these after a brief search. alternative.me/portainer
      So far I only can find two alternatives to Portainer (Kitematic and Dockstation don't have a web interface afaik).
      1. Rancher

      2. Kubernetes
      Rancher and Kubernetes seem to be absolutely overkill.

      The advantage of Portainer is, that it runs as docker container.
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      TechnoDadLife wrote:

      There are other docker alternatives out there. I'll look at them when I come back. I'll have limited internet for the next 10 days. I found these after a brief search.
      Just to save you some time... Rancher isn't really an alternative. It is for kubernetes which is also on the list. It was a while ago but I tried shipyard and it isn't wasn't as good as portainer. Maybe it is better. Not sure I have seen any other web interfaces.
      Looks like Portainer is the only alternative right now.
      Build, Learn, Create.

      How to Videos for OMV

      Post any questions to the forum, so others can benefit from your curiosity. :thumbsup:
    • gderf wrote:

      Maybe you can apply the fix needed to increase the contrast in the log viewer before releasing?
      The version I pushed should have it. Browser cache?

      Here is the version I intend to put in the repo unless someone finds something wrong - omv-extras.org/testing/openmediavault-docker-gui_4.1_all.deb
      omv 4.1.13 arrakis | 64 bit | 4.15 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 4.1.13
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • Users Online 1

      1 Guest