|
Been 3 hours so you need to post the answer now.
|
|
|
|
|
Rules say 4 hours, so not til 1:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Old rules were 3 hours, so yeah 1pm is good.
|
|
|
|
|
Nice clue. I was nowhere near it!
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
IN fairness, it's a pretty obscure word! But you 'orrible lot got my last efforts too easily, so... 
|
|
|
|
|
Have to agree - I was nowhere near! Nice one!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Docker! More specifically, testing out the .NET Framework 4.7 image.
So first I had to enable Hyper-V. No problem, methinks. Riiight. After rebooting the computer, my multimonitor setup is totally trashed, thrashes, and ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) 'ed. As are my Fences icons. And there's these extra monitors suddenly showing up. 
Get that finally squared away, download the image (the instructions on the github repo are fubar'd) and launch VS2017.
Where is it? I get the VS2017 splash screen, then nothing. me, it looks like VS2017 & VS2015 are blown away. Uninstall both, reinstall both.
Same. ing. Behavior.
Just by chance, I hit Alt-Tab and I see Visual Studio is one of the running applications. Where the is it??? So I think, maybe it's on one of those weird extra monitors I saw. So I poke around, and there's this "disconnect monitor" option in the display settings. So I try that for one of the "ghost" monitors. OMFG. Suddenly VS appears.
Next, I discover the BS that is Microsoft's attempt at bringing .NET onto Docker. Oh sure, there's .NET Core (or is .NET Standard or is it .NET Creator or is it .NET Next Gen???) but no, I wanted to try the full blown .NET Framework 4.7, because that's what I write in, and I don't want any of this "Core" BS.
So there's this image. OK. Docker tells me it's downloading some 10 GIGA (yes, that's GIGA) bytes of data for the image. 
When all is said and done, my poor little 256GB SSD only has 1.4GB free (it was pretty stuffed already) but it turns out the whole Docker/Windows/.NET thing sucks up 17GB of disk space uncompressed (then again, maybe those compressed files are still lying around somewhere???)
Well, at least the stupid demo Microsoft gives you compiled.
Oh, but I forgot to tell you, you need to switch to "Windows containers" in the Docker applet. Oh, and what I really forgot to tell you was the three install attempts for Docker for Windows because I had a previous "Docker Toolbox" installation (which I did uninstall before doing anything!!!) but that left various breadcrumbs - PATH entries (I might have added those), and a ".docker" folder in the Users\Marc folder. All of which caused Docker For Windows to be "No Docker For You". Two separate SO posts resolved those issues.
So, we finally get to compiling. Fine. Then we get to running.
And We wait (at this point, it's the royal WE)
And We Wait
await Marc;
And We Wait
And it ran! There's the output of the stupid "bot" in the console window.
So, it takes something like 15 seconds on my 8 core 16GB fast machine to spin up the container, undoubtedly because I'm running a near full instance of Windows.
So I decide to try a few other things, all of which work, and finally landing on "let's write a simple HttpListener" as a container. Great, 20 lines of code later and I have something that works in Windows. Let's see if it works in the container.
Nope. Sesame Street time: One of these things (or most of these things) doesn't belong: http://localhost, http://127.0.0.1, http://0.0.0.0, http://*
The last one, http://*:5001/ seemed to help. I haven't tried localhost again. Who knows. So I go to my browser, to "localhost:5001" and...
nothing.
Hours later, I discover some interesting things. By now, after fussing with Dockerfile EXPORT and that http://*:5001, I discover that entering the container's local IP into my browser works. But that's container's local IP, which changes every time the container is fired up, for each container that is fired up, all hail Mary to the container that never rules anything.
Various posts say you can't access a container from the host. Some posts say you're not using a container correctly if you're doing this, you should use a VM instead (and indeed, I had a VM of this working with Python.) Some say other BS, but at the end of the day, they're all saying BS, but I still can't figure out the problem.
I make a post on the Docker forum. I refuse to give up. The oxygen tank is redlining, but I refuse to give up. And then I find it.
[GitHub - Kymeric/DockerProxy: Proxy localhost for Docker Windows Containers(https://github.com/Kymeric/DockerProxy)
Indeed you can't access the container through the host's localhost unless you proxy localhost:port to [containerIP:port], and that's what that little gem above does.
Sweet. Everest has been vanquished. No s where harmed in this post.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been ripping old VHS tapes to digital.
|
|
|
|
|
I binge-watched stranger things S2 ... or is it strangerer things? 
modified 19-Nov-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely "strangerer".
"'Do what thou wilt...' is to bid Stars to shine, Vines to bear grapes, Water to seek its level; man is the only being in Nature that has striven to set himself at odds with himself."
—Aleister Crowley
|
|
|
|
|
Tine Svete wrote: I binge-watched stranger things S2
 Did that last week.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Next, I discover the BS that is Microsoft's attempt at bringing .NET onto Docker
Fully accept I'm speaking form ignorance here, but why is it Microsoft's problem to bring .NET onto Docker? Docker is not a product I'm familiar with, but on the face of it, I'd have assumed it was Docker's problem to bring .NET onto it.
|
|
|
|
|
It is all about 'be-cool'... All those 'fashion' things we have to deal with in the last decade...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
You lucky devil. I had to take the wife out shopping!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
xiecsuk wrote: You lucky devil. I had to take the wife out shopping!!!!
Normally, that's what would have happened also (my girlfriend, not your wife), but she had a bucketload of work to catch up on, so she was quite busy herself!
|
|
|
|
|
Summary of this post : there is an elephant emoticon ! 
|
|
|
|
|
I read the first line, then the rest just looked like "TL;DR material"...
You're supposed to convince me that Docker is a good thing and make me want to look into it. Seeing a few paragraphs that looked like a semi-rant had the opposite effect... 
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: You're supposed to convince me that Docker is a good thing and make me want to look into it.
Really?
Read the followup.
My experience using Docker Toolbox (which uses Oracle's Virtual Box instead of Hyper-V) is pretty good, and as long as you stay in the Linux world, it's actually pretty cool. But I really would like to get to a place where I can use C# in a Linux Docker container, so the next rabbit hole is .NET Core (or is it standard?) And then discovering how much of my core code base that I want to use doesn't work. Maybe there's a reason why Python is ranked so high.
|
|
|
|
|
Which is heavier? 200Kg of bricks, or 200Kg of feathers?
The feathers: 200Kg of bricks is just a pile of bricks, but if you carry 200Kg of feathers, you also have to carry the weight of what you did to those poor birds.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
The bricks: you also have to add in the CO2 the manufacturing adds to the atmosphere (even if indirectly from electric power). Seeing as more people are concerned with greenhouse gasses than animal welfare the weight of guilt is also higher on the bricks.
Installing Signature...
Do not switch off your computer.
|
|
|
|
|
The feathers would have come from animals that lived and breathed, so they too would have contributed to CO2 levels.
|
|
|
|
|
Very good!
Alternative answer: 200 kg of standard bricks is approx. 60-odd, so you could, assuming you’re strong enough, make pile say 4x4x15 high and carry them all at once.
I’d like to see anyone carry 200kg of feathers without them being in some sort of container (or maybe held together by some sort of adhesive) – no matter how light it is, that’d make the total weight you have to carry greater than the bricks!
|
|
|
|
|
Are the feathers still attached to the bird(s)?
|
|
|
|
|
African or European Swallow feathers?
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
