Add multi build support

[juzuluag]

Work Item ID

Description

---

Enhance devcontainer CLI build command by adding an option to build multi-platform container images and to push them to a container registry.

devcontainer build command will be enhanced with the following arguments:
--platform value1, value2. Comma delimited string with platform types [string].
i.e. value: linux/amd64,linux/arm64
--push push to a container registry [boolean] [default: false]

PR Checklist

---

• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.
• My code follows the code style of this project.
• I ran the lint checks which produced no new errors nor warnings for my changes.
• I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.

Does this introduce a breaking change?

---

• Yes
• No

If this introduces a breaking change, please describe the impact and migration path for existing applications below.

Testing

• What OS was used for testing: Window and MacOS
• Which test sets were used: mocka and manual testing
• Description of test scenarios that you have tried.
  manual: Build images and upload them to container registry (docker hub)

Manual testing:

node devcontainer.js build --workspace-folder ../demo_container/  --platform linux/arm64,linux/amd64 --push --image-name dockerhubuname/test1:v1

[+] Building 1.9s (9/9) FINISHED                                                
 => [internal] load build definition from Dockerfile                       0.0s
 => => transferring dockerfile: 245B                                       0.0s
...
 => => pushing manifest for docker.io/dockerhubuname/test1:v1@sha256:00b62d3859  0.4s
 => [auth] dockerhubuname/test1:pull,push token for registry-1.docker.io         0.0s
 => [auth] dockerhubuname/test1:pull,push token for registry-1.docker.io         0.0s

List manifest from container registry

docker buildx imagetools inspect dockerhubuname/test1:v1
Name:      docker.io/dockerhubuname/test1:v1
MediaType: application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.list.v2+json
Digest:    sha256:00b62d385953096b5b09ba1458d0e2467b53b3c6d2409958a67eabd68f4fa0a0
           
Manifests: 
  Name:      docker.io/dockerhubuname/test1:v1@sha256:a18591ab9c4d416b9ee5b86c1b66c5ff9b89f8b8b522bc3d26db1395bd736f34
  MediaType: application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json
  Platform:  linux/arm64
             
  Name:      docker.io/dockerhubuname/test1:v1@sha256:4ae8b07ea9a8c61da4a06548d758fc27709408b79d52d293bdc0edb940041576
  MediaType: application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json
  Platform:  linux/amd64

---

Other information or known dependencies

---

n/a

[stuartleeks]

(disclaimer: I'm not on the VS Code team, so will defer to @chrmarti - my comments are those of an interested observer and someone who has made some contributions in similar areas of the code 😄)

Hi @juzuluag, this looks pretty cool - being able to create multi-platform dev container images would be really useful I think. Especially building them in CI and publishing so that they can be referenced in the cacheFrom in devcontainer.json (or the equivalent cache_from in docker-compose.yml) and then work across multiple platforms

There has been some recent work here that shifts to using BuildKit/buildx by default (if it is present) for Dockerfile-based dev containers (the work on docker-compose dev containers is still in-flight). Hopefully that will simplify the work to support multi-platform?

With the buildx work, I think that enableBuildx could be dropped in favour of the buildKitVersion checks?
Similarly, the buildxLoad looks like it could be removed as the current buildx path includes the --load argument when calling docker.

For the --push parameter, I'm curious whether there a particular benefit to adding the --push rather than the caller simply executing a docker push command after running the devcontainer build step?

I also think that it would be good to add some tests for the --platform option to make sure that future changes don't break the functionality. Maybe run a build and inspect the image metadata afterwards to check that the expected platforms are included?

[juzuluag]

Hi @chrmarti and @stuartleeks , any chance to look at the most recent changes? Thanks.

[jMac029]

+1 on this feature request, would be very helpful for my team and our tooling

[chrmarti]

Thanks @juzuluag. Added a few more comments.

[samruddhikhandale]

Could we be able to prioritize this PR? cc @chrmarti

I am working on devcontainers/images to create images based on features by using the devcontainers/cli. We are looking forward to publish these images, but can't yet as they need to be built with --progress flag which this PR targets

[chrmarti]

Looks good, thanks @juzuluag !