[WIP] Move to Centos 6 builds

[kdm9]

This is a work in progress, and will address #2

@FooBarWidget : I'll remove the "WIP" tag from the title of the PR and comment here when ready for review.

• Port 32-bit builds
• Update docs
• Check with other users that these new images work

[kdm9]

Comments from #2:

• We use tabs, not spaces, for indenting. Your activate_func.sh has mixed tabs and spaces.

Fixed

• You use the python27 SCL, but Holy Build Box already installs Python by itself. You should either not use the python27 SCL, or you should make Holy Build Box not install Python by itself.

I thought I had removed the section that installed python from source?

• Have you double checked all documentation against your image? All documentation must be compatible with your changes.

Nope, but will do so.

Cheers,
K

[FooBarWidget]

Thanks, looking good so far. You should also update the documentation section about which Linux distros are compatible with the produced binaries.

One thing you may want to take care of. CentOS 5's OpenSSL did not support SNI, so the curl in CentOS 5 fails to download from many HTTPS servers. In order to solve this, our Docker build script downloads OpenSSL and curl over plain HTTP, and builds them, so that later on in the script we can actually download tarballs over HTTPS. This workaround is probably no longer necessary with the OpenSSL and curl version included in CentOS 6, so you may want to look at making the build script shorter.

[kdm9]

@FooBarWidget How attached to 32 bit builds are you? It looks like the devtoolsets no longer support 32 bit (there aren't i386 repos). This would mean that for 32bit builds, one would need to compiler gcc et al. from source. Could we drop 32 bit support going forward, with 32 bit users still being able to use the 32 bit centos 5 images?

[FooBarWidget]

You should put this assignment inside quotes, like this:

export LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/hbb/lib:${LD_LIBRARY_PATH}"

Otherwise bash won't handle things properly if the old LD_LIBRARY_PATH contains special characters, like multiple spaces.

[FooBarWidget]

How attached to 32 bit builds are you?

We at Phusion aren't very attached. It seems only about 0.9% of our binaries downloads are for x86. But I don't know about other Holy Build Box users.

How much trouble would it be to compile GCC ourselves? If it's not too much trouble then I'd rather keep x86 support. But if the time investment is disproportionally big then we have to reevaluate.

[marehr]

We also dropped 32bit binaries, but the source code is still 32bit compliant.

I tried the image from kdmurray91/kdm-hbb-64:latest and libcheck didn't work any more:

/io/build.sh: /hbb/bin/libcheck: /hbb/bin/python: bad interpreter: No such file or directory

Apparently, /hbb/bin/python is missing and libcheck requires that (small fix):

# Activate Holy Build Box environment.
source /hbb_exe/activate

# Fix python path in /hbb/bin/python
ln -s `which python` /hbb/bin/python

[kdm9]

@marehr 8bfcaf4 should fix that issue. Let me know if it doesn't (I'm building and will push kdmurray91/kdm-hbb-64:2.0.0-a4 to docker hub)

[kdm9]

@FooBarWidget I'm tempted to drop support for 32 bit binaries (at least initially). phusion/holy-build-box-32:latest won't change, so we should not break anyone's stuff. If there is sufficient demand for 32 bit builds, then I or someone else can invest the time (that I don't currently have) to get them working.