make-audit VS hadolint

Cool!

I also have an experimental (GNU) makefile auditor called "make-audit", available here: https://github.com/david-a-wheeler/make-audit

Per its README: "It will report when an execution of make reads or changes files in ways that are inconsistent with its Makefile. It requires an "auditor" tool named pmaudit in your PATH. It also requires GNU make to be installed and run as make."

Sadly, make-audit is also rather experimental. As I say in its README, "This is an extremely early version. Much needs fixing." For example:

* This doesn't properly handle grouped targets or empty commands. It should handle makefiles with their own SHELL and .ONESHELL values.

* I don't think it handles multi-line make commands exactly correctly (it's close but not quite right).

* Lots more options are needed.

* It needs a better internal test suite.

Still, make-audit does do some useful things, and it'd be awesome if others would be willing to work with me to make it reliably useful.

This is very cool.

A while back I started an experiment/prototype called "make-audit"; this is a (draft) tool to report when an execution of GNU make reads or changes files in ways that are inconsistent with its Makefile: https://github.com/david-a-wheeler/make-audit It's nowhere ready for serious use, but it can detect the following:

* Error: Target TARGET : unreported prerequisites: SET : The make recipe for creating TARGET is reading from the prerequisites in SET, but the makefile fails to report them as dependencies. You may want to add SET to the prerequisites of TARGET.

* Error: Target TARGET : claimed but unused prerequisites: SET : The make recipe for creating TARGET claims that it depends on SET, but the items in SET were never read. You may want to remove SET from the prerequisites of TARGET.

* Error: Target TARGET : unreported target: SET The make recipe for updating TARGET also modifies the files in SET but this is not reported.

* Error: Target TARGET : unmodified reported target: SET

This depended on Poor Man's File Auditor (pmaudit): https://github.com/boyski/pmaudit

3. Hadolint: https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint Hadolint is a Dockerfile linter that helps you build best practice Docker images, reducing vulnerabilities in your container configurations.

To skip the "move your scripts to standalone files" step some devs don't like, consider something like https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint which runs Shellcheck over inline scripts within Containerfiles.

This is neat :)

I love going and making containers smaller and faster to build.

I don't know if it's useful for alpine, but adding a --mount=type=cache argument to the RUN command that `apk add`s might shave a few seconds off rebuilds. Probably not worth it, in your case, unless you're invalidating the cached layer often (adding or removing deps, intentionally building without layer caching to ensure you have the latest packages).

Hadolint is another tool worth checking out if you like spending time messing with Dockerfiles: https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint

With Depot, we make use of two Dockerfile linters, hadolint and a set of Dockerfile linter rules that Semgrep has written to make a bit of a smarter Dockerfile linter.

# Download hadolint wget https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint/releases/download/v2.12.0/hadolint-Linux-x86_64 # Download SHA256 checksum wget https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint/releases/download/v2.12.0/hadolint-Linux-x86_64.sha256 # Validate the checksum sha256sum -c hadolint-Linux-x86_64.sha256 # Make the file executable chmod + ./hadolint-Linux-x86_64 # Rename the file mv hadolint-Linux-x86_64 hadolint

The most common linter I've seen and used it Hadolint, which does: https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint/wiki/DL3002 I didn't bother checking to see if alternatives also support this as well though.

Some discussion on that here:

https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck/issues/58

The hadolint project does shell checking for Dockerfiles and it uses shellcheck:

https://github.com/hadolint/hadolint

So the approach is definitely feasible, but you do need a new project and probably it needs to be written in Haskell.

how does this compare to something like hadolint?