7 ms·

I’m sure it’s usually just a case of “thinking while typing”, but I find it surprising how often articles about Docker stuff get some basic details a bit wrong.

by ilkkal 6y ago

I’m sure it’s usually just a case of “thinking while typing”, but I find it surprising how often articles about Docker stuff get some basic details a bit wrong. In the very first code example there is a RUN instruction where the author probably meant to have a CMD instruction, and they talk about BuildKit and build cache optimisation even though that was always something to think about, way before BuildKit was a thing. I’m not trying to say I know everything or that the article is wrong or bad, but it’s an observation I’ve made.

toong 6y ago
Might have been an intentional mistake ? It fits the arguments pro build-packs.
- ilkkal 6y ago
  The RUN? I thought about that but I don’t see how that would work. Or is the argument that Dockerfiles are just too hard? (An argument I’m not unsympathetic to)
  - mewpmewp2 6y ago
    Yeah, argument is they might be prone to errors.
codefinger 6y ago
I think this is exactly why people should use Buildpacks over Dockerfiles. I've seen so many Dockerfiles that are wrong, or even introduce security problems.
genlesperance 6y ago
Hi @ilkkal. Thank you for the note - I've corrected the directive!