Push linux/amd64 Docker image

[thc202]

The latest Docker image pushed is now linux/arm64 which makes it very slow when running from linux/amd64, so much that the initial start up is longer than 1 minute and breaks our tests, e.g.: https://github.com/zapbot/zap-mgmt-scripts/actions/runs/8370459364/job/22917853473#step:3:1

We can increase the wait time but it would be better if it was still provided linux/amd64 as before, which is the most common.

[thc202]

We ended up disabling the scans in CI it takes too long to start.

[davewichers]

I'm happy to fix it if you explain how. The Docker file is build using these two files in the VMs folder: Dockerfile and buildDockerImage.sh. How do I change this to use linux/amd64 rather than linux/arm64? Or, I could create a different Docker file for ZAPs use to use amd64. I'd like to track down who/when this was changed and if it was a 'contribution' ask them author why. Or maybe the latest ubuntu is now arm64??

[thc202]

You can create the image with different architectures: https://docs.docker.com/build/building/multi-platform/
I'd suggest that as it would be faster when running in both amd64 and arm64. You could also create a GitHub workflow to build/publish the images (e.g.: https://github.com/zaproxy/zaproxy/blob/59a6ccab8b210b953e0348bfb337b3416e6c4329/.github/workflows/release-main-docker.yml).

I think a different host was used (with different processor) to build/publish the image.

[davewichers]

@thc202 - Please try to the new Docker image I pushed out. It should be specific to AMD64. I'm working on pushing out an ARM64 version too, but need permission to create/push a new Docker image at docker.io.

[thc202]

A separate image should not be needed, the same image can have different architectures.

[davewichers]

@thc202 - you said that before but I couldn't figure out how to do that. If you know how, and can implement via a pull request, that would be great. Regardless, did you confirm the AMD64 image works for you?

[thc202]

What type of changes are you looking for? A workflow to publish them?

I did not yet, will do that in the following days.

[davewichers]

@thc202 - no, the command line commands required to create one docker image that supports BOTH architectures. I can then publish that one image to docker.io like I do now.