Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com): > On 2013/9/17 21:41, Serge Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com): > >> On 2013/9/17 11:27, Serge Hallyn wrote: > >>> Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com): > >>>> On 2013/9/16 12:23, Stéphane Graber wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:37:02AM +0800, Qiang Huang wrote: > >>>>>> Sometimes we use: > >>>>>> lxc-create -n xxx -f config > >>>>>> to copy config to the default lxcpath with the rootfs already > >>>>>> exist. > >>>>>> But we will get error right now, so fix this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Hmm, I'm not sure I understand. > >>>>> > >>>>> Running "lxc-create -n xxx -f config" when xxx already exists is an > >>>>> error and should return an error code so the current code seems > >>>>> perfectly right to me. > >>>> > >>>> Well, it did works this way in the former lxc_create version. > >>>> > >>>> We used to use LXC this way: > >>>> - We made a template(rootfs, config and fstab) manually. > >>> > >>> >From here, can you just write a script 'lxc-homebrew' which > >>> copies the rootfs+config+fstab into place, and call > >>> > >>> lxc-create -t homebrew -n c1 > >>> > >>> ? > >>> > >>> If you want to just copy the stuff in by hand, you can > >>> do that. You don't *have* to run lxc-create if you've done > >>> everything by hand. > >> > >> OK, thanks Serge. > >> > >> So we are still not supposed to use lxc-create without -t option? > > > > I just don't see the point, and I worry that people using the > > common case will end up accidentally deleting existing container > > data. > > > > Well, the current code says > > > > /* container is already created if we have a config and rootfs.path > > is accessible */ > > if (lxcapi_is_defined(c) && c->lxc_conf && c->lxc_conf->rootfs.path > > && access(c->lxc_conf->rootfs.path, F_OK) == 0) > > goto out; > > > > Maybe what we want to do is add a '&& access(c->configfile, F_OK) to that > > test? I think that would give you what you want, and I think it's what > > I really meant to say. > > Yes, add a '&& access(c->configfile, F_OK) to that test will make the > lxc-create -n xxx -f config > successful, but I don't quite understand the logic here, in what situation > will this test fail?
I meant file_exists(c->configfile). It'll "fail" if the container has not yet been created, but only the rootfs path exists. Which is exactly what you want. -serge ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60133471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
