Docker Community Forums

Share and learn in the Docker community.

Who maintains Synology Docker package?


#1

I found a bug with the UI where paths are defined in UI relative to shared folder (e.g. /shared folder/path but written to configure file as absolute path. /volume/shared folder/path. This is fine until you move the folder to another volume at which point docker can’t find the files and the UI doesn’t let you change the path. The workaround is to flip the status of r/w save, flip back, save again and it writes the right absolute path to the underlying files.

I bugged it with synology, the said docker is unsupported and I should go to synology.com (I suspect that’s the wrong thing).

1 is synology docker community maintained?
2 where do I log bugs and issues?


(Metin Y.) #2

Docker Inc. itself maintains:

Linux

Synology forked its own build from the open source project and added an additional easy to use UI Client that drives the docker deamon with rest calls. It is an official Synology package!

You have to address your concerns to Synology directly!


#3

thanks, that’s what I assumed, their support is claiming any docker issues be routed to docker

since posting i found how to dowload the package and I cracked open the SPK file and it is patently obvious to me now they created the install package, pulled in standard Linux binaries and wrapped it with their own install scripts, their own JS based UI (the files are even copyrighted sinology.)

however their support and their web site and their package in the UI claim that docker own the package, it is in the 3rd party section of their package manager, someone from docker I guess might want to have a word with sinology about that sort of mis-representation …

I am pushing hard on their support folks to man-up and take responsibility…

thanks for your insight.


(Metin Y.) #4

They did not, the standard Linux binary is not working on Synlogy. It needs to be cross compiled for their os, which I am confident, they did themself!


#5

@meyay wow, thanks so they are lying to me even more than I thought, thanks for the info. :slight_smile: time to go ballistic on support.


(Metin Y.) #6

The pakage holds following details:

Publisher: Synology
Developer: Docker

It is true that Docker is the developer of the upstream project.

But before Synology publish it, they forked and taylored the source code for their own needs.
They are the one beeing responsible to keep the package up to date! Why do you think the wrapped Docker-CE version is an edge (as in unstable) version from may 2017 while the Docker Inc. supported world has access to Docker-CE 18.09?

Did you ever execute docker info and see the missmatching versions for containerd, runc and init?

Actualy Synology Docker is crippled when it commes to advanced usage. Which realy is a pitty, because the UI is one of the easiest to use UIs for Docker.


#7

Yeah I understand I was just verifying before I went and pushed on synology. Here is what they said in email to me when I raised the UI bug (and note it is in their 3rd party section of package manager).

Thanks for contacting Synology technical support.

As Docker is a 3rd-Party application, we don’t have its configuration information and can’t change anything in its backend.

I would suggest you refer https://www.docker.com/ for its bug report detail.

Funny huh :slight_smile: also the usual reddit ‘I know more than you do’ folks keep trying to tell me I am wrong to be annoyed at synology https://www.reddit.com/r/synology/comments/ahhu6a/any_idea_who_maintains_the_synology_docker_package/

your help has been appreciated, you are the first person who has made sense on this issue.


#8

PS this is the info in the package file… just to make you sigh with more frustration at synology

package=“Docker”
version=“17.05.0-0395”
maintainer="Docker Inc."
maintainer_url="https://www.docker.com/"
distributor=“Synology Inc.”
distributor_url=“https://www.synology.com/
arch=“x86_64”
exclude_arch=“dockerx64”
firmware=“6.1-15163”
dsmuidir=“ui”
dsmappname=“SYNO.SDS.Docker.Application”


(Metin Y.) #9

Sadly, because I share your pain…

Docker on Synlogy could be so lovely, though the current solution is more of an half assed commitment to Docker. It is enough to permit them to advertise with “we support Docker”, but insufficient for serious (as in advanced) operations…


#10

yes it could be so lovely, it is great way to get started with docker, if only the updated, expanded to support say a few more options (like macvlan) it would be near perfect for their target audience. I originally thought they would be moving all their packages to docker containers like they did with the docviewer and DSM - I guess that initiative died a death, maybe the dev leading it left?

FYI they don’t advertise they ‘support it’ only it is on their NAS, in fact their T’s&C’s explicitly say packages in the 3rd party classification are not supported and not endorsed… those marketing pages look a huge endorsement to me. someone at synology is playing fast and loose :frowning:


#11

to be clear, if you unpack the UI files and scripts they are all clearly copyrighted synology lol


(Metin Y.) #12

(rofl) So they build a package and claim it beeing third party. Clever idea!

This is partialy true :wink: Like I wrote the upstream project IS in Dockers (or more likely the moby community procect) responsiblity. But the other half of the truth is that they made customizations, which I am sure is not merged back into the upstream project.

By that logic, Docker treats Synology as an orphent and QNAP is favored over it, since they have a way more recent version (and of course Docker made an entirely different closed source management UI for them as well). cough


(Metin Y.) #13

Actualy, even though the ui does not support macvlan, it does work from the command line… been there done that! From what I remember DockerDSM relies on it itself.

What doesn’t work is overlay network communication.


#14

@meyay thanks for giving me a good laugh at 2:47am, I have been fighting raid rebuilds, and expansions - I still don’t have a stable system after 17 days since an initial drive issue - to be fair the synology has coped with cascading disk failures quite well (though we did need a synology RMA in the middle too) and I have not lost any data. But my patience with them is wearing thin and making me cranky - I found slew of issues like you can’t move most apps from one volume to another when you get rid of old volume / storage pool. Couldn’t even move the homes folder through one UI code path (worked through another). Their VMM exported OVA image can not be imported on anything including a synology, VMware workstation and virtualbox. UI bugs. And icing on cake my nice new shiny volume I was making is now in trouble doing simple expansion. They definitely have quality issue and it seems to be getting worse.


#15

@meyay yes I got the macvlan working, unfortunately somewhere along the line I got an errant Bond0 interface that is preventing me from changing DHCP options… which I need to do because the synology DNS server isn’t running at the moment because it couldn’t be moved between volumes… that’s a job I will figure out once the rest of the disks are in a stable state.


(Metin Y.) #16

You are welcome :wink:

There is a german saying: laugh, if it is not enough to (make you) cry!

Good luck in your journey!


#17

Recently, I have published my comment on who maintains synology docker package but I now found it not so related so, I removed it.