-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add linux-arm64-lts and linux-arm64-musl #27
Conversation
linux-arm64-musl is good to have. I'm not so sure about linux-arm64-lts. Why is a higher glibc version a problem for you? Maybe we should fix our existing linux-arm64 image instead. What other differences are there between the two dockcross base images? |
We tried to use
This is because the glibc version in linux-arm64 is higher then the version in
I can modify the PR to use
According to the document for dockcross, the main difference is the version of glibc and gcc |
Due to the GCC version difference, that might be a breaking change. We can hold off on that for now, keep this PR as-is. At some point I want to align and upgrade GCC versions (prebuild/prebuildify-cross#13), when we get there we'll do a major version bump and evaluate whether to keep |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you please add these new images to the README?
@vweevers Added 👍. Could you take a look? |
Thanks |
Description
This PR add two docker images:
linux-arm64-lts
: arm64 image with glibc 2.27linux-arm64-musl
: arm64 image with musl as libcContext
We are running Node.js on an arm server. But when prebuilding native extension, we encounter the following issue:
node:lts-bullseye
), which is 2.31