starred/docker-android

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/budtmo/docker-android.git synced 2026-04-25 20:25:57 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #35] Option not to use docker health check #25

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-01 15:39:28 +03:00 by kerem · 6 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:28 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @vikramvi on GitHub (Aug 14, 2017).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/budtmo/docker-android/issues/35

CONTAINER ID        IMAGE                                 COMMAND                  CREATED             STATUS                   PORTS                                                                NAMES
1a8f82552161        butomo1989/docker-android-arm-5.0.1   "/bin/sh -c '/usr/..."   6 minutes ago       Up 6 minutes (healthy)   0.0.0.0:5554-5555->5554-5555/tcp, 4723/tcp, 0.0.0.0:6080->6080/tcp   android-container_1

adb connect 192.168.2.48:5555

adb devices
List of devices attached
192.168.2.48:5555	offline

I can see this particular emulator through VNC and interact with it as well.

Originally created by @vikramvi on GitHub (Aug 14, 2017). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/budtmo/docker-android/issues/35 ``` CONTAINER ID IMAGE COMMAND CREATED STATUS PORTS NAMES 1a8f82552161 butomo1989/docker-android-arm-5.0.1 "/bin/sh -c '/usr/..." 6 minutes ago Up 6 minutes (healthy) 0.0.0.0:5554-5555->5554-5555/tcp, 4723/tcp, 0.0.0.0:6080->6080/tcp android-container_1 ``` `adb connect 192.168.2.48:5555 ` ``` adb devices List of devices attached 192.168.2.48:5555 offline ``` I can see this particular emulator through VNC and interact with it as well.

kerem

2026-03-01 15:39:28 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
bug
label

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:29 +03:00

Author

Owner

@cwiejack commented on GitHub (Aug 15, 2017):

Hi,

we encountered the same problem and our current solution is to start the container without port forwarding for port 5554 and 5555.

@cwiejack commented on GitHub (Aug 15, 2017): Hi, we encountered the same problem and our current solution is to start the container **without** port forwarding for port 5554 and 5555.

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:29 +03:00

Author

Owner

@glazeus commented on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017):

Hi
there is bug inside docker container.
we did it inside container (shell or via noVNC)

adb connect:5555
adb devices

and it shows offline status even after adb kill-server
As results it is not working after port forwarding.

@butomo1989 Could you please take a look the root case?

Thank you

@glazeus commented on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017): Hi there is bug inside docker container. we did it **inside container** (shell or via noVNC) >adb connect:5555 >adb devices and it shows `offline` status even after adb kill-server As results it is not working after port forwarding. @butomo1989 Could you please take a look the root case? Thank you

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:29 +03:00

Author

Owner

@diemol commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2017):

@butomo1989 does it make sense to have this health check in this image?

I mean, this health check is just executing a a given script or pinging and endpoint to report some status. In my opinion, this type of feature provided by docker, makes more sense in images that are used in production (like an API, website, etc...), in this test environment perhaps it does not make sense because checking the health check status is using resources and therefore slowing down a bit the docker container.

What do you think?

@diemol commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2017): @butomo1989 does it make sense to have this health check in this image? I mean, this health check is just executing a a given script or pinging and endpoint to report some status. In my opinion, this type of feature provided by docker, makes more sense in images that are used in production (like an API, website, etc...), in this test environment perhaps it does not make sense because checking the health check status is using resources and therefore slowing down a bit the docker container. What do you think?

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:30 +03:00

Author

Owner

@andrcuns commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2017):

@diemol without the health check, if this is used in some sort of CI setup or more or less automated setup when something spools up container and starts executing tests towards it, there is no way to know when the emulator is ready to receive requests and tests will mostly fail. One could implement some check within his own build scripts but it is far less convenient. I doubt simple adb commands takes too much resources :)

@andrcuns commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2017): @diemol without the health check, if this is used in some sort of CI setup or more or less automated setup when something spools up container and starts executing tests towards it, there is no way to know when the emulator is ready to receive requests and tests will mostly fail. One could implement some check within his own build scripts but it is far less convenient. I doubt simple adb commands takes too much resources :)

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:30 +03:00

Author

Owner

@diemol commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

That is a good point @glazeus
I suggested to remove it since we did something similar in elgalu/docker-selenium since it was exhausting the grid, but this should not be the case here.

I only imagine that the script that reports the status to the health check has to be improved then :)

@diemol commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): That is a good point @glazeus I suggested to remove it since we did something similar in elgalu/docker-selenium since it was exhausting the grid, but this should not be the case here. I only imagine that the script that reports the status to the health check has to be improved then :)

kerem commented

2026-03-01 15:39:30 +03:00

Author

Owner

@budtmo commented on GitHub (Sep 26, 2017):

I can make it optional by passing the parameter on the fly to support both cases.

@budtmo commented on GitHub (Sep 26, 2017): I can make it optional by passing the parameter on the fly to support both cases.