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

Removing docker.userEmulation from config #25

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Lfulcrum
Copy link
Contributor

It looks like docker.userEmulation is no longer supported from nextflow 24.01.0.

There was some discussion on what to do about this here:
https://nextflow.slack.com/archives/C02T98A23U7/p1709049357728229

It looks like our options are to either remove it or to add settings similar to what docker.userEmulation achieved via docker.runOptions or process.containerOptions (less desirable).

According to https://nextflow.slack.com/archives/C02T98A23U7/p1696591307155289?thread_ts=1696590982.727319&cid=C02T98A23U7, it apparently used to add the following arguments to the docker invocation:

-u $(id -u) -e "HOME=${HOME}" -v /etc/passwd:/etc/passwd:ro -v /etc/shadow:/etc/shadow:ro -v /etc/group:/etc/group:ro -v $HOME:$HOME

I'm suggesting that we just remove it in the hope that it was never truly required by any of our pipelines. That said, according to the discussions above, it could be that GATK requires:

docker.runOptions = '-u $(id -u):$(id -g)'

So we might need to test with a pipeline that users GATK if we want to be more confident that it's not required for that.

@Lfulcrum Lfulcrum requested review from flass, bethsampher and SamD28 May 22, 2024 10:39
@Lfulcrum Lfulcrum self-assigned this May 22, 2024
@Lfulcrum
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not so urgent I think - the user will only get a warning like:

WARN: Undocumented setting `docker.userEmulation` is not supported any more - please remove it from your config

when running a pipeline via nextflow >24.01.0

@flass
Copy link
Contributor

flass commented May 22, 2024

hmm I think we need to think this a bit more carefully so I suggest we park this until next week when we are all in to assess

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants