Hi,
A couple of days ago I started to write the Go binding for LXC C API. IMHO
it reached to a point where I can announce it officially. So here it is;
Go (golang) Bindings for LXC (Linux Containers) [1]
You can install it via regular "go get" magic
go get github.com/caglar10ur/lxc
and checkou
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi there,
>
> > Can we easily move the clearenv() to an lxc-attach argument?
> > If so, I'd prefer we make it an option rather than remove it
> > entirely.
>
> Well, in my list that I posted earlier, I suggested adding an option to
> clear the env
Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> == Linux Plumbers 2013 ==
> The longer dev cycle for 1.0, also means that Linux Plumbers 2013 will
> be roughly at the middle of it, which is pretty good as we're currently
> working on a one-day LXC mini-summit over there.
>
> The current draft pro
Hi Serge,
> So for now we would introduce -c for clearenv, which we could always
> continue to support after introducing Christian's proposed semantics.
> That sounds good.
See my other mail, I had a similar idea, but a tiny bit more expansive.
Just a minor point: I wouldn't add a short option j
Hi there,
> Can we easily move the clearenv() to an lxc-attach argument?
> If so, I'd prefer we make it an option rather than remove it
> entirely.
Well, in my list that I posted earlier, I suggested adding an option to
clear the environment anyway, even if the (for post 0.9 more
complicated) de
Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> On 03/28/2013 11:52 AM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> In light of the fact that 0.9 is going to be here soon, any
> comments on
> this?
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, I was waiting to
On 03/28/2013 11:52 AM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
>> Hi there,
>>
In light of the fact that 0.9 is going to be here soon, any
comments on
this?
>>>
>>> Sorry, I was waiting to see if anyone else would comment. Note this
>>> kind of change i
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi there,
>
> >>In light of the fact that 0.9 is going to be here soon, any
> >>comments on
> >>this?
> >
> >Sorry, I was waiting to see if anyone else would comment. Note this
> >kind of change is not going to be non-trivial, so it's definately
>
Hi there,
>> In light of the fact that 0.9 is going to be here soon, any comments
>> on
>> this?
>
> Sorry, I was waiting to see if anyone else would comment. Note this
> kind of change is not going to be non-trivial, so it's definately
> (imo)
> 1.0 material
My problem is that the current pat
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi again,
>
> > - lxc-attach with shell
> > clear env + container=lxc only
> > when doing getent lookup logic,
> > default PATH just for getent call
> > BUT don't pass it to shell because it will
Hi again,
> - lxc-attach with shell
> clear env + container=lxc only
> when doing getent lookup logic,
> default PATH just for getent call
> BUT don't pass it to shell because it will
> probably read some defaults anyway
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
