Skip to content

Add support for Containerfile named files for sandbox creation. #2420

Closed as not planned

Description

@iamkirkbater

Problem Statement

I don't personally use Docker. I don't have it installed on my machines.

I am explicitly passing a file named Containerfile to the sandbox create command, which I would expect to work.

openshell sandbox create --from ./Containerfile

However, I'm greeted with an error:

Error:   × local --from file is not a Dockerfile: ./Containerfile

If I rename this file to Dockerfile it runs without issue.

To be perfectly frank, the --from command shouldn't care what the file is named. I should be able to name it myFile.xyz and so long as it's a valid set of container build instructions it should be able to build the sandbox from this, and if it's not a valid set of build instructions the build tool should spit out the native error as one would expect it to.

Proposed Design

Remove any filename-specific conventions for the --from argument.

Alternatives Considered

Allow Containerfile - while this would solve the immediate issue, it wouldn't allow for any future expansion to other file naming conventions, or it would not allow other custom files to be passed.

Agent Investigation

No response

Checklist

  • I've reviewed existing issues and the architecture docs
  • This is a design proposal, not a "please build this" request

Activity

  1. removed
    state:triage-neededOpened without agent diagnostics and needs triage
    on Jul 22, 2026
  2. tirthpatel90 commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @tirthpatel90

    Hi @drew,

    I would love to work on this!

    I can update the CLI argument validation logic for --from so it doesn't strictly restrict files to being named Dockerfile (allowing Containerfile and other custom file names to be passed smoothly).

    Could you please assign this issue to me? I'll set up the dev environment and submit a PR soon. Thanks!

  3. github-actions commented on Aug 6, 2026

    @github-actions

    This issue has had no activity for 14 days and is now marked stale. It may be closed in 7 days if there is no further activity. Comment or remove the state:stale label to keep it open.

  4. github-actions commented on Oct 13, 2026

    @github-actions

    Closing this issue after 14 days with no activity since it was marked stale. Reopen it if the work is still relevant.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

state:staleInactive item at risk of automatic closure.

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions