ah yea that's true, so move the interface into the docker container itself. thanks, that should work and does avoid the need for a separate script layer (assuming I can pass the arg into

pants run Dockerfile

). In the ideal case I guess I would like to conceptualize the docker image as a configurable env for the pex binary vs. the docker image having awareness/ownership of the pex binary, and avoid the overhead of maintaining a list of binaries in the Dockerfile vs. only directly configuring the build rules. just brainstorming ways to get away with

pants run <pex binary>

as the definitive running command for a target regardless of whether you want to run it in a container or directly on your machine, but I can file a feature request 😃