# Support for the new CPU architecture names in Dockerfile.template

**URL:** <https://forums.balena.io/t/support-for-the-new-cpu-architecture-names-in-dockerfile-template/5077>\
**Category:** Product support\
**Tags:** dockerfile\
**Created:** [January 24, 2019, 3:39pm UTC](https://forums.balena.io/t/support-for-the-new-cpu-architecture-names-in-dockerfile-template/5077 "2019-01-24T15:39:30Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![UncleSam](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/balena/user_avatar/forums.balena.io/unclesam/32/965_2.png) [@UncleSam](https://forums.balena.io/u/UncleSam)\
**Post date:** [January 24, 2019, 3:39pm UTC](https://forums.balena.io/t/support-for-the-new-cpu-architecture-names-in-dockerfile-template/5077/1 "2019-01-24T15:39:30Z")

</div>

As far as I can see, currently you only support %%BALENA\_MACHINE\_NAME%% and %%BALENA\_ARCH%% replacements in Dockerfile.template (see [here](https://www.balena.io/docs/learn/develop/dockerfile/#dockerfile-templates)).

For the RaspberryPi 3 these are “raspberrypi3” and “armv7hf” respectively

Docker Hub seems to prefer the armXXvN notation (e.g. arm32v7); their reasoning can be found here:

> **[docker-library/official-images](https://github.com/docker-library/official-images#architectures-other-than-amd64)**
>
> Primary source of truth for the Docker "Official Images" program - docker-library/official-images

Is there any plan to have an additional macro for this distinction?

My concrete example is haproxy:  
I need “arm32v7/haproxy” and would prefer to write “%%BALENA\_CPUARCH%%/haproxy” (or similar) in my Dockerfile.template. After all, that’s the idea of docker file templates.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pdcastro](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/balena/user_avatar/forums.balena.io/pdcastro/32/1264_2.png) [@pdcastro](https://forums.balena.io/u/pdcastro)\
**Post date:** [January 24, 2019, 8:10pm UTC](https://forums.balena.io/t/support-for-the-new-cpu-architecture-names-in-dockerfile-template/5077/4 "2019-01-24T20:10:11Z")

</div>

> _Is there any plan to have an additional macro for this distinction?_

We agree it’s a good idea and it is indeed something that had already found its way in our backlog of feature requests. To preserve backwards compatibility, the idea is to have a new variable such as `%%DOCKER_CPUARCH%%`. Unfortunately I cannot provide an estimate at the moment of when it will be implemented, but we bump feature requests up in priority whenever a customer asks for them. So thank you for bringing this up, it does make a difference!