-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
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
Discard "docker-compose" in favor of "docker compose" #222
Comments
Hi there, This report has been escalated for further investigation. If you have more information that can help us, please add it below. Thanks! |
The above issue, #232, is unrelated to this issue. My instance is successfully using the 'docker compose' binary located in $HOME/.docker/cli-plugins
I manually update this file using the Docker Compose Github releases page https://github.com/docker/compose/releases. I do not have the binary that comes with the apt package docker-compose-plugin in my system path so it's not being used.
|
The #232 actually is related. If you manually install "docker-compose", the "bitwarden.sh" script is written to use it by preference. And it's obsolete and unsupported, and should no longer even be attempted in place of the better supported "docker compose" command. |
just adding my experience/pain regarding the use of docker-compose in the bitwarden.sh script 😅
even though it actually does exists. |
Do you need a pull request for this? Because the old 'docker-compose' binary is now six months older. |
Folks, for your information this just broke support for Synology NAS, where we're stuck with Synology's "Container Manager", it comes with bitwarden@DiskStation:/volume1/docker$ docker version
Client:
Version: 20.10.23
API version: 1.41
Go version: go1.19.1
Git commit: 876964a
Built: Fri Sep 8 08:19:48 2023
OS/Arch: linux/amd64
Context: default
Experimental: true
Server:
Engine:
Version: 20.10.23
API version: 1.41 (minimum version 1.12)
Go version: go1.19.1
Git commit: 5fcb1cf
Built: Fri Sep 8 08:18:18 2023
OS/Arch: linux/amd64
Experimental: false
containerd:
Version: v1.6.15
GitCommit: b23a389d8c181697302d163356e97dec04eb8d88
runc:
Version: v1.1.4
GitCommit: 5af893d
docker-init:
Version: 0.19.0
GitCommit: ed96d00
bitwarden@DiskStation:/volume1/docker$ and does not like docker: 'compose' is not a docker command.
See 'docker --help' |
Synology's version of docker is apparently obsolete. See:
If we still need to support 'docker-compose' for cases like yours, then the old order of operations should be reversed and 'docker composee' should be checked for first. Would you care to test that? |
Others have noticed the EOL docker on Synology, see:
|
I see this is been taken care in #309 , really appreciate how responsive you folks are. Happy to test it on my Synology DS218+. On top of that, I've checked and figured that in "Beta packages" in my Synology Package Center (this option has to be enabled in Package Center' settings), they brought Container Manager version 24.0.2-1525. With that, version got bumped but still no compose, so the PR really helps there: bitwarden@DiskStation:~$ docker version
Client:
Version: 24.0.2
API version: 1.43
Go version: go1.20.4
Git commit: 610b8d0
Built: Thu Aug 1 07:07:08 2024
OS/Arch: linux/amd64
Context: default
Server:
Engine:
Version: 24.0.2
API version: 1.43 (minimum version 1.12)
Go version: go1.20.4
Git commit: b5710a2
Built: Thu Aug 1 07:07:31 2024
OS/Arch: linux/amd64
Experimental: false
containerd:
Version: v1.7.1
GitCommit: 067f5021280b8de2059026fb5c43c4adb0f3f244
runc:
Version: v1.1.7
GitCommit: adc1b13
docker-init:
Version: 0.19.0
GitCommit: ed96d00 bitwarden@DiskStation:~$ docker compose version
docker: 'compose' is not a docker command.
See 'docker --help'
bitwarden@DiskStation:~$ |
The published "docker-compose" binary is obsolete and unmaintained, and the "docker compose" plugin is actively being supported and built into contemporary releases of docker. Please discard the use of "docker-compose" or at least check for and use "docker compose" first in the bitwarden.sh, run.sh, and run.ps1 files. Its use encourages separately installing and relying on obsolete software, which should not be welcomed for security related software.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: