Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH] lxc-fedrora: New patch for systemd detection and init configuration.

2013/8/16 Serge Hallyn : > Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com): >> Ok all... >> >> Satoshi Matsumoto certainly had the right idea and in spotting a bug in >> the lxc-fedora template for systemd detection. Heart was in the right >> spot but patch was not what we needed. >> >> I've looke

[lxc-devel] [PATCH] install attach_options.h into /usr/include/lxc

Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur --- src/lxc/Makefile.am | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/src/lxc/Makefile.am b/src/lxc/Makefile.am index 9d6b5b4..d338ddd 100644 --- a/src/lxc/Makefile.am +++ b/src/lxc/Makefile.am @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ pkginclude_HEADERS = \ log.h \

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH] Add subdir-objects option to AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE

Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com): > On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 03:38:04 +0800 > Alexander Vladimirov wrote: > > > It seems to build fine on older Arch Linux machine with automake 1.13 > > Also worked for me with: > > autoconf-2.63-5.1.el6.noarch > automake-1.11.1-4.el6.noarch > > but I

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH] Add subdir-objects option to AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 03:38:04 +0800 Alexander Vladimirov wrote: > It seems to build fine on older Arch Linux machine with automake 1.13 Also worked for me with: autoconf-2.63-5.1.el6.noarch automake-1.11.1-4.el6.noarch but I don't know what versions the curl folks were having issues with. > 20

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH] Add subdir-objects option to AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE

It seems to build fine on older Arch Linux machine with automake 1.13 2013/8/16 Serge Hallyn : > Quoting Alexander Vladimirov (alexander.idkfa.vladimi...@gmail.com): >> Fix build with automake 1.14 and newer, since it requires explicit >> setting now. > > Will this break anything with older automa

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH] lxc-fedrora: New patch for systemd detection and init configuration.

Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com): > Ok all... > > Satoshi Matsumoto certainly had the right idea and in spotting a bug in > the lxc-fedora template for systemd detection. Heart was in the right > spot but patch was not what we needed. > > I've looked the patch code over for system

[lxc-devel] [PATCH] lxc-fedrora: New patch for systemd detection and init configuration.

Ok all... Satoshi Matsumoto certainly had the right idea and in spotting a bug in the lxc-fedora template for systemd detection. Heart was in the right spot but patch was not what we needed. I've looked the patch code over for systemd support and init/upstart support and modified the logic appro

[lxc-devel] [PATCH 2/2] bdev: support -B best and -B lvm,dir

-B dev will check whether btrfs, zfs, or lvm can be used, in that order, and fall back to dir. -B lvm,btrfs will try lvm first, then btrfs, then fail. Signed-off-by: Serge Hallyn --- src/lxc/bdev.c | 48 ++-- src/lxc/lxccontainer.c | 5 -

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH] Add subdir-objects option to AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE

Quoting Alexander Vladimirov (alexander.idkfa.vladimi...@gmail.com): > Fix build with automake 1.14 and newer, since it requires explicit > setting now. Will this break anything with older automake? (I ask because some threads in the curl m-l seemed to imply it might...) > Signed-off-by: Alexand

[lxc-devel] [PATCH 1/2] bdev_create: don't default to btrfs if possible

Ideally it would be great to default to a btrfs subvolume for each new container created. However, this is not as we previously thought without consequence. 'rsync --one-file-system' will not descend into btrfs subvolumes. This means that 'lxc-create -B _unset' will cause different behavior for

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH 0/8] lxc-attach rewrite, attach API

Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de): > Hi there, > > This patch set can also be found on my local github tree at: > > > It contains the following main parts: > > - move attach functionality to attach.c, rewrite it in such a way

Re: [lxc-devel] [PATCH 8/8] attach: implement remaining options of lxc_attach_set_environment

Quoting Christian Seiler (christ...@iwakd.de): > 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 > >> def