Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [che-dev] Multi-arch builds of some Che containers: can we simplify?

I don't think we need to continue building s390x and ppc64le images.

That said we should work on windows/amd64 (there is a RH internal RFE), the number of community requests for arm64/v8 is growing with the adoption of Apple silicon processors [1] [2] [3] and there is an historical demand for arm/v7 [4].

For buildx: currently UDI build doesn't work with podman [5]. We should address that first.


On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:10 PM Nick Boldt <nboldt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hey, Che community! 

I wanted to start a conversation about the usefulness of building and publishing SOME Che containers for alternative architectures.

In particular, we have builds that use `docker buildx` to create containers for the following arches:

che-code: amd64 
che-dashboard: amd64, arm64, ppc64le
che-devfile-registry: amd64 
che-docs: amd64 
che-e2e: amd64 
kubernetes-image-puller: amd64
che-machine-exec: amd64, arm64, ppc64le
che-operator: amd64, ppc64le
che-plugin-registry: amd64 
configbump: amd64, arm64, ppc64le, s390x (last built in 2021)
developer-images (UDI): amd64 

We also have other builds that are simple single arch:


And we have chectl, which is built for many arches, including Mac and Windows:

chectl: linux-arm,linux-x64,linux-s390x,linux-ppc64le,darwin-x64,darwin-arm64,win32-x64,win32-x86

So here are my questions:

1. Why are we building some components of Che for multiple arches? Is there a compelling reason to have a dashboard and server/factory, without the ability to launch a workspace running che-code? 

2. Can you even install the Che operator without a compatible DevWorkspace operator for your arch? (I would be surprised if this is possible.)

3. Could we simplify the Che build infrastructure to use `podman build` or `docker build` instead of `docker buildx`, and focus on the single end to end deployment of Che on amd64?

For those worried that this means they can't use Windows to Mac to connect to their cluster, don't worry - I'm not suggesting we drop support of darwin or win32 arches. 

I'm suggesting we drop container builds for arm64, s390x, and ppc64le, since there is no way to use those containers for a COMPLETE Che 7.60+ deployment with a vscode-based workspace.

What do you think, community members? 

If you'd like to weigh in, please do so in this thread or in 




Nick Boldt (he/him/his)

Principal Software Engineer, RHCSA

Productization Lead :: OpenShift Dev Spaces (formerly CodeReady Workspaces)

IM: @nickboldt / @nboldt /

“The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change” - Heraclitus
che-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top