Fix build with automake 1.14 and newer, since it requires explicit
setting now.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Vladimirov
---
configure.ac | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index cdf5290..245df30 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
Hi Serge,
>>> The freeing seems unnecessary as you're about to rexit(-1), right?
>>
>> in the current flow, yes. However, this function may be useful from
>> other places where one does not exit if it fails, so I'd rather be a bit
>> defensive in the programming style, if possible.
>
> In that ca
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> >> + if (!extra_keep_store[i]) {
> >> + SYSERROR("failed to allocate
> >> memory for storing current "
> >> +
Hi Serge,
>> +if (!extra_keep_store[i]) {
>> +SYSERROR("failed to allocate
>> memory for storing current "
>> + "environment variable
>> values that will be kept");
Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> Thanks, I'll aim to review this later today.
Ok, I'm going to wait until tomorrow for any more comments, then
I'll push to staging.
Thanks!
-serge
--
Get 100% visibility
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> This patch implements the extra_env and extra_keep options of
> lxc_attach_set_environment.
>
> The Python implementation, the C container API and the lxc-attach
> utility are able to utilize this feature; lxc-attach has gained two new
> command lin
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Add methods attach() and attach_wait() to the Python API that give
> access to the attach functionality of LXC. Both accept two main
> arguments:
>
> 1. run: A python function that is executed inside the container
> 2. payload: (optional) A paramete
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> convert_tuple_to_char_pointer_array now also accepts lists and not only
> tuples when converting to a C array. Other fixes:
>
> - some checking that it's actually a list/tuple before trying to
>convert
> - off-by-a-few-bytes allocation error
>
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
> ---
> src/lxc/lxccontainer.c | 124
>
> src/lxc/lxccontainer.h |8 +++-
> 2 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>
>
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
> ---
> src/lxc/apparmor.c |3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/lxc/apparmor.c b/src/lxc/apparmor.c
> index a2d6476..cb81464 100644
> --- a/s
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Hi Serge,
>
> Thanks for reviewing!
>
> >> + /* load apparmor profile */
> >> + if ((options->namespaces & CLONE_NEWNS) && (options->attach_flags &
> >> LXC_ATTACH_APPARMOR)) {
> >> + ret = attach_apparmor(init_ctx->aa_profile);
> >> +
Hi Serge,
Thanks for reviewing!
>> +/* load apparmor profile */
>> +if ((options->namespaces & CLONE_NEWNS) && (options->attach_flags &
>> LXC_ATTACH_APPARMOR)) {
>> +ret = attach_apparmor(init_ctx->aa_profile);
>> +if (ret < 0) {
>> +shutdown(
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
Ideally the conversion of lxcapi_startl would have been a part of
this patch rather than the next one, but I'm being nit-picky.
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
> ---
> src/lxc/utils.c | 46 +++
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
No objection to pushing the patch as is, so
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
but one question:
> + /* load apparmor profile */
> + if ((options->namespaces & CLONE_NEWNS) && (options->attach_flags &
> LXC_ATTACH_APPARMOR)) {
> + ret
Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de):
> Signed-off-by: Christian Seiler
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
> ---
> src/lxc/utils.c | 14 +++---
> src/lxc/utils.h |6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/lxc/utils.c b/src/lxc/utils.c
>
Hey Serge,
On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 07:13 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com):
> > On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 20:57 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > The current code is testing for systemd on the host. That's not right.
> > > You're right that checking for the r
Thanks, I'll aim to review this later today.
--
Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite!
It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production.
Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <
Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com):
> On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 20:57 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > The current code is testing for systemd on the host. That's not right.
> > You're right that checking for the running systemd in the guest isn't
> > right either :)
> >
> > So I'd say th
18 matches
Mail list logo
