sdk-container-builds VS buildah

You can also publish .NET apps/services directly as container images [1].

Or you can distribute them as a single file, standalone, "ready to run" application, which precompiles your methods and includes the JIT. This results in a larger executable, but keeps all the functionality, including reflection and runtime code generation, intact.

And, of course, you can install .NET core directly on your Linux system, just as you would for Python or Ruby (where you also don't usually rely on the default installation).

[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/docker/publish...

If you're using the https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds tech to build containers, we're working on a 0.4 version of that package that applies this rootless user by default - the goal is that the SDK tooling is the smoothest, least-effort pathway to secure, correct, best-practice containers for all .NET applications!

Alternatively, here's Microsoft's own documentation about how to do all of the above: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds/blob/main/docs/GettingStarted.md

We've been baking this functionality directly into the .NET SDK for a couple releases now: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds

It's really nice to derive mostly-complete container images from information your build system already has available, and the speed/UX benefits are great too!

Funny you should mention scaffolding out a Dockerfile - internally we'd been talking about that as a bridge to other services that are highly Dockerfile-based. I just logged https://github.com/dotnet/sdk-container-builds/issues/146 to track this request. We likely won't prioritize it for the 7.0 release unless we get huge amounts of feedback that it would be helpful, but it is something we'd like to do.

For the task of building the graph image, my first idea was to rely on buildah. In fact, our design was already heavily relying on containers/image for all things regarding copying images from one registry to the other, or from one registry to an archive. The obvious choice was to use the same suite of modules in order to keep dependencies to a minimum.

I appreciate that podman can run daemonless, but I've gotten tired of waiting for them to implement heredoc support and have continued to use docker.

You do realize that, under the hood, buildah uses a container engine (runc by default)? See https://github.com/containers/buildah/blob/main/docs/buildah...

buildah

I found this small tutorial: https://github.com/containers/buildah/blob/main/docs/tutorials/04-include-in-your-build-tool.md and it works.

# https://github.com/containers/buildah/issues/3666 volume /var/lib/containers

Last week, Buildah version 1.29 was also released. The prune command has been added to clean intermediate images as well as the build and mount cache.  Support for the –group-add option to the from and build commands was added. One useful feature of this, it to use the –group-add keep-groups option, which allows rootless users to take advantage of their group access to file and devices mounted into the build containers. And the –cache-from and –cache-to options for the build command now allow for multiple sources. This can be used to improve the speed of builds, especially in CI/CD environments.

Unfortunately this syntax is not generally supported yet - it's only supported with the buildkit backend and only landed in the 1.3 "labs" release. It was moved to stable in early 2022 (see https://github.com/moby/buildkit/issues/2574), so that seems to be better, but I think may still require a syntax directive to enable.

Many other dockerfile build tools still don't support it, e.g. buildah (see https://github.com/containers/buildah/issues/3474)

Useful now if you have control over the environment your images are being built in, but I'm excited to the future where it's commonplace!

For more information regarding the bundled tools see: CRI tools.