Michael H. Warfield
2012-10-26 13:32:17 UTC
Adding in the lxc-devel list.
comments about "pre mount hooks". Where is the documentation about this
feature and how I might use / implement it? Some examples would
probably suffice. Is there a require release version of lxc-utils?
http://www.mail-archive.com/lxc-devel at lists.sourceforge.net/msg01490.html
I'll play with it and report back.
Also the "Lifecycle management hooks" section in
https://help.ubuntu.com/12.10/serverguide/lxc.html
This isn't working...
Based on what was in both of those articles, I added this entry to
another container (Plover) to test...
lxc.hook.mount = /var/lib/lxc/Plover/mount
[root at forest ~]# lxc-start -n Plover
lxc-start: unknow key lxc.hook.mount
lxc-start: failed to read configuration file
I'm running the latest rc...
[root at forest ~]# rpm -qa | grep lxc
lxc-0.8.0.rc2-1.fc16.x86_64
lxc-libs-0.8.0.rc2-1.fc16.x86_64
lxc-doc-0.8.0.rc2-1.fc16.x86_64
Is it something in git that hasn't made it to a release yet?
nm... I see it. It's in git and hasn't made it to a release. I'm
working on a git build to test now. If this is something that solves
some of this, we need to move things along here and get these things
moved out. According to git, 0.8.0rc2 was 7 months ago? What's the
show stoppers here?
While the git repo says 7 months ago, the date stamp on the
lxc-0.8.0-rc2 tarball is from July 10, so about 3-1/2 months ago.
Sounds like we've accumulated some features (like the hooks) we are
going to need like months ago to deal with this systemd debacle. How
close are we to either 0.8.0rc3 or 0.8.0? Any blockers or are we just
waiting on some more features?
can adjust.
Mike
--
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 | mhw at WittsEnd.com
/\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0x674627FF | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-devel/attachments/20121026/a9c90afb/attachment.pgp>
Hey Serge,
...Oh, sorry - I take back that suggestion :)
Note that we have mount hooks, so templates could install a mount hook to
mount a tmpfs onto /dev and populate it.
Ok... I've done some cursory search and turned up nothing but someNote that we have mount hooks, so templates could install a mount hook to
mount a tmpfs onto /dev and populate it.
comments about "pre mount hooks". Where is the documentation about this
feature and how I might use / implement it? Some examples would
probably suffice. Is there a require release version of lxc-utils?
I'll play with it and report back.
https://help.ubuntu.com/12.10/serverguide/lxc.html
Based on what was in both of those articles, I added this entry to
another container (Plover) to test...
lxc.hook.mount = /var/lib/lxc/Plover/mount
[root at forest ~]# lxc-start -n Plover
lxc-start: unknow key lxc.hook.mount
lxc-start: failed to read configuration file
I'm running the latest rc...
[root at forest ~]# rpm -qa | grep lxc
lxc-0.8.0.rc2-1.fc16.x86_64
lxc-libs-0.8.0.rc2-1.fc16.x86_64
lxc-doc-0.8.0.rc2-1.fc16.x86_64
Is it something in git that hasn't made it to a release yet?
working on a git build to test now. If this is something that solves
some of this, we need to move things along here and get these things
moved out. According to git, 0.8.0rc2 was 7 months ago? What's the
show stoppers here?
lxc-0.8.0-rc2 tarball is from July 10, so about 3-1/2 months ago.
Sounds like we've accumulated some features (like the hooks) we are
going to need like months ago to deal with this systemd debacle. How
close are we to either 0.8.0rc3 or 0.8.0? Any blockers or are we just
waiting on some more features?
Note that I'm thinking that having lxc-start guess how to fill in /dev
is wrong, because different distros and even different releases of the
same distros have different expectations. For instance ubuntu lucid
wants /dev/shm to be a directory, while precise+ wants a symlink. So
somehow the template should get involved, be it by adding a hook, or
simply specifying a configuration file which lxc uses internally to
decide how to create /dev.
I agree this needs to be by some sort of convention or template that weis wrong, because different distros and even different releases of the
same distros have different expectations. For instance ubuntu lucid
wants /dev/shm to be a directory, while precise+ wants a symlink. So
somehow the template should get involved, be it by adding a hook, or
simply specifying a configuration file which lxc uses internally to
decide how to create /dev.
can adjust.
Personally I'd prefer if /dev were always populated by the templates,
and containers (i.e. userspace) didn't mount a fresh tmpfs for /dev.
But that does complicate userspace, and we've seen it in debian/ubuntu
as well (i.e. at certain package upgrades which rely on /dev being
cleared after a reboot).
-serge
Regards,and containers (i.e. userspace) didn't mount a fresh tmpfs for /dev.
But that does complicate userspace, and we've seen it in debian/ubuntu
as well (i.e. at certain package upgrades which rely on /dev being
cleared after a reboot).
-serge
Mike
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 | mhw at WittsEnd.com
/\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0x674627FF | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-devel/attachments/20121026/a9c90afb/attachment.pgp>