[t_sawyer]

Well this kinda screws me over running docker on macos. Not all images I use have an arm version.

[physicsguy]

https://github.com/apple/container

They released this a while ago which has hints of supporting amd64 beyond the Rosetta end date.

[dur-randir]

Believing in hints from Apple about software? Sweet summer child.

[mxey]

It doesn’t say if that is going away. The message calls out another part as sticking around:

> Beyond this timeframe, we will keep a subset of Rosetta functionality aimed at supporting older unmaintained gaming titles, that rely on Intel-based frameworks.

Since the Linux version of Rosetta requires even less from the host OS, I would expect it to stay around even longer.

[wmwragg]

Yes that was my first thought as well, and as the images aren't designed to be run on a mac specifically, like a native app might be, there is no expectation for the developers to create a native apple silicon version. This is going to be a pretty major issue for a lot of developers

[TimTheTinker]

Case in point - Microsoft's SQL Server docker image, which is x86-only with no hint of ever being released as an aarch64 image.

I run that image (and a bunch of others) on my M3 dev machine in OrbStack, which I think provides the best docker and/or kubernetes container host experience on macOS.

[anon7000]

I’ve worked in DevOps and companies I’ve worked for put the effort in when M1 came out, and now local images work fine. I honestly doubt it will have a huge impact. ARM instances on AWS, for example, are much cheaper, so there’s already lots of incentive to support ARM builds of images

[mxey]

Apple Silicon is ARM64 which is supported by Linux and Docker.

[swiftcoder]

This isn't about the virtualisation support - it's about all the Mac system frameworks being available in the rosetta environment

[nicce]

The performance that makes containers usable currently depends on Rosetta on Linux as well. Removing the support makes them much less usable.

[ehutch79]

Ask the maintainers to build arm images. Realistically they should be, unless the project uses lots of x86 assembly.

[jamesgeck0]

It's not just images; any software the images pull down must also support ARM64 now as well. For example, the official Google Chrome binaries used by Puppeteer for headless browsing/scraping don't have a Linux ARM build.

[tobyjsullivan]

How does this work currently? I was under the impression that Docker for Mac already ran containers in an x86 VM. Probably outdated info, but I’m curious when that changed.

[cpuguy83]

Docker on Mac runs containers in a VM, but the VM is native the cpu architecture and takes advantage of hardware virtualization.

You can of course always use qemu inside that vm to run non-native code (eg x86 on Apple Silicon), however this is perceived as much slower than using Rosetta (instead of qemu).

[ChocolateGod]

Surely, as it is on Linux, QEMU can take over here in running the x86 images on ARM.

Is it slow? Absolutely. But you'd be insane to run it in production anyway.

[coldtea]

Wanting it to be fast is not just about "running it on production".

A test suite that becomes 10x slower is already a huge issue.

That said, it doesn't seem llike Rosetta for container use is going anywhere. Rosetta for legacy Mac applications (the macOS level layer) is.

[hakube]

Doesn't Orbstack or Colima solve this?

[p0w3n3d]

if you run x86 code without rosetta (probably using the qemu) it will work painfully slow

[saagarjha]

That won’t be going away, none of that requires any support from the host OS.

[lostlogin]

Are you running this via that travesty of a desktop app?

[juancn]

Back to the QEMU dark ages