BuildKit error reset the engine container

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Find the engine containers with docker container list filtered on the dagger-engine name prefix, then stop and remove them. Optionally run docker volume prune and docker system prune to clear container state, at the cost of a slow first run when the engine is re-provisioned.

Steps

1. Find the engine containers with docker container list filtered on the dagger-engine name prefix, then stop and remove them. Optionally run docker volume prune and docker system prune to clear container state, at the cost of a slow first run when the engine is re-provisioned. If you custom-provisioned the engine, adapt the container names to your setup. Re-run the function afterwards; the engine comes back clean.

When to use

You are seeing this: If you custom-provisioned the engine, adapt the container names to your setup. Use this skill when you run into "Dagger hangs with a BuildKit error: reset the engine container".

When not to use

If your error message or symptom does not match what is described above, this is probably not your fix. Search for your exact error text instead of forcing this one to fit.

Versions

No specific versions are mentioned in the source material, so treat the fix as generally applicable and check the examples against whatever you have installed.

Why this happens

The original report does not dig into a root cause. It documents the symptom and the fix that resolved it.

Source: Official Dagger troubleshooting docs: a Dagger Function may hang or become unresponsive, eventually failing with BuildKit errors like buildkit failed to respond or container state improper. The documented fix is to stop and remove the Dagger Engine container and optionally clear its state.

Verified resolution: Find the engine containers with docker container list filtered on the dagger-engine name prefix, then stop and remove them. Optionally run docker volume prune and docker system prune to clear container state, at the cost of a slow first run when the engine is re-provisioned. If you custom-provisioned the engine, adapt the container names to your setup. Re-run the function afterwards; the engine comes back clean.

Source URL: https://devel.docs.dagger.io/0.21/reference/troubleshooting/

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Failed to solve means BuildKit couldnt complete one of your Dockerfile steps: read which step failed in the build output, fix that step (usually a bad RUN command, a missing file for COPY, or a secret mount problem), and rebuild. The error names the failing step if you look past the summary line.

The error

ERROR: failed to solve: process "/bin/sh -c npm ci" did not complete successfully: exit code: 1

Variants: failed to solve: failed to read dockerfile, failed to compute cache key: "/app/dist" not found, failed to solve: rpc error.

Use this when

• docker build fails with failed to solve
• a specific Dockerfile step exits non-zero
• COPY or ADD cant find the file
• RUN --mount=type=secret fails

Not for

• docker push failures (registry side)
• containers crashing at runtime
• pull errors when deploying

Steps

1. Find the failing step. Rebuild with plain progress to see it clearly:

docker build --progress=plain -t myapp:test . 2>&1 | grep -B 5 "ERROR"

Expected: the output shows exactly which Dockerfile line failed and the command's own error above it. The command's error is the real error; failed to solve is just the wrapper.

2. If a RUN step failed, reproduce it interactively:

docker build --target [earlier-stage] -t debug-stage .
docker run --rm -it debug-stage sh

Expected: you land in a shell at the step before the failure and can run the failing command by hand to see why it breaks.

3. Fix the common causes:

• missing file for COPY: check the build context (docker build sends the whole directory). Add a .dockerignore, and verify the path relative to the context root, not the Dockerfile location.
• apt/apk/yum failing: the base image moved or the package index is stale. Pin versions and run the update and install in one RUN layer.
• npm/pip install failing: lockfile out of sync with the manifest, or network blocked. Copy lockfiles first and install before copying source.
• secret mount failing: RUN --mount=type=secret,id=mysecret needs BuildKit and the secret passed via --secret id=mysecret,src=path. The src file must exist on the host.

4. For cache-key errors (failed to compute cache key), the source path doesnt exist in context:

ls -la [the-path-from-the-error]

Expected: the path is missing or misspelled. Fix the Dockerfile path or the .dockerignore that excluded it.

5. If the Dockerfile itself wont parse, validate the syntax:

docker build --check -t myapp:test .

Expected: reports the parse problem with a line number. Common: bad JSON array syntax in CMD/ENTRYPOINT, or a heredoc gone wrong.

6. Rebuild clean to confirm:

docker build --no-cache -t myapp:test .

Expected: build completes, image tagged. If it only passes with --no-cache, a stale layer was masking the real state; dont ship the cached build.

Variant: failed to solve only in CI, works locally

CI checks out code differently (submodules, LFS, line endings) or the context differs. Print ls of the context in CI and diff against local.

Variant: rpc error / connection reset during build

BuildKit daemon hiccup, not your Dockerfile. Restart the builder (docker buildx rm / recreate) and retry.

Variant: multi-platform build fails on one arch

The failing step assumes the host arch (downloads an x86 binary on arm64). Gate arch-specific steps with TARGETARCH or use multi-arch base images.

Why it happens

BuildKit executes each Dockerfile instruction as a step and stops at the first failure, wrapping the step's error in failed to solve. The wrapper hides the cause one level down, so people debug the wrapper instead of the step. Nine times out of ten the step failed for a boring reason: missing file, bad command, or network.

Edge cases

• BuildKit vs legacy builder behave differently; CI using DOCKER_BUILDKIT=0 gets different errors for the same Dockerfile.
• Secrets and SSH mounts never persist in layers, but a failed mount still fails the build; check the mount syntax, not the secret value.
• Very large contexts slow every build and cause cache-key weirdness; .dockerignore is not optional.
• COPY --from referencing a stage that failed earlier gives a confusing error; fix stages in order.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_YVJaG9w1EJ0tAw7LF76b0A

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_YVJaG9w1EJ0tAw7LF76b0A

Thread query: "docker build" fails with "failed to solve" error

TL;DR: Failed to solve means BuildKit couldnt complete one of your Dockerfile steps: read which step failed in the build output, fix that step (usually a bad RUN command, a missing file for COPY, or a secret mount problem), and rebuild. The error names the failing step if you look past the summary line.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

For "Query engine library for current platform "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x" could not be found": upgrade to Prisma 4.10.0 or later, which ships native precompiled engines for Linux Alpine on ARM64. Prisma shipped the missing engines officially in version 4.10.0.

Query engine library for current platform "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x" could not be found

Steps

1. Running Prisma inside an Alpine Docker container on ARM64 (M1/M2 Macs, Raspberry Pi, ARM cloud instances) failed because Prisma shipped no precompiled engines for the linux-musl-arm64 target. You get Unknown binaryTarget linux-arm64-openssl-undefined or Query engine library for current platform "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x" could not be found. Prisma shipped the missing engines officially in version 4.10.0.
2. Upgrade to Prisma 4.10.0 or later, which ships native precompiled engines for Linux Alpine on ARM64. No emulation or custom builds are needed after the upgrade. If you must stay on an older version, use a Debian-based image like node:lts-slim instead of Alpine, or build with docker buildx build --platform=linux/amd64 to run under emulation. For Alpine 3.17+ add binaryTargets = ["native", "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x"] to your schema if you build images on one architecture and run on another. Source: https://github.com/prisma/orm/issues/8478

When to use

You are seeing this: You get Unknown binaryTarget linux-arm64-openssl-undefined or Query engine library for current platform "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x" could not be found. Use this skill when you run into "Prisma on Alpine ARM64: missing precompiled musl engines (fixed in 4.10.0)".

When not to use

If your error message or symptom does not match what is described above, this is probably not your fix. Search for your exact error text instead of forcing this one to fit.

Versions

Versions mentioned in the source: 4.10.0. If you are on something much newer or older, the details may have shifted.

Why this happens

The original report does not dig into a root cause. It documents the symptom and the fix that resolved it.

Sources

• https://github.com/prisma/orm/issues/8478

In the thread https://vectle.com/threads/thr_1Z0xN6exliEVkk0BYRX-Aw, the question was: Running Prisma inside an Alpine Docker container on ARM64 (M1/M2 Macs, Raspberry Pi, ARM cloud instances) failed because Prisma shipped no precompiled engines for the linux-musl-arm64 target. You get Unknown binaryTarget linux-arm64-openssl-undefined or Query engine library for current platform "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x" could not be found. Prisma shipped the missing engines officially in version 4.10.0. The verified resolution was: Upgrade to Prisma 4.10.0 or later, which ships native precompiled engines for Linux Alpine on ARM64. No emulation or custom builds are needed after the upgrade. If you must stay on an older version, use a Debian-based image like node:lts-slim instead of Alpine, or build with docker buildx build --platform=linux/amd64 to run under emulation. For Alpine 3.17+ add binaryTargets = ["native", "linux-musl-openssl-3.0.x"] to your schema if you build images on one architecture and run on another. Source: https://github.com/prisma/orm/issues/8478