Skip to content
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

Support jib "container.entrypoint" configuration parameter #8937

Closed
michael-schnell opened this issue Apr 29, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #10071
Closed

Support jib "container.entrypoint" configuration parameter #8937

michael-schnell opened this issue Apr 29, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #10071
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@michael-schnell
Copy link
Contributor

Description

There should be support for the container.entrypoint configuration parameter of jib.

Beyond the simple parameter support, it would be nice to have a way to re-use the standard Quarkus entry point as a variable.

Example:
quarkus.jib.container.entrypoint=/foo/bar/wait.sh && ${quarkus.entrypoint}

This way, we do not have to create the Quarkus entry point manually.

Why?

It is often necessary to do some other stuff before the Quarkus app should start. An example could be some kind of "wait" script or utility that allows the Quarkus app to wait for a database container to be available before the app is actually started. Currently this is not possible when using jib.

Links

This feature is related to the feature #8936 (Support jib "extra directories" feature)

@quarkusbot
Copy link

/cc @geoand

@geoand
Copy link
Contributor

geoand commented Jun 17, 2020

#10071 implements this feature.

geoand added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 17, 2020
Support custom entrypoints in Jib extension
@gsmet gsmet added this to the 1.6.0 - master milestone Jun 25, 2020
johnaohara pushed a commit to johnaohara/quarkus that referenced this issue Jun 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants