Hey Serge, On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Serge Hallyn <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting S.Çağlar Onur ([email protected]): >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Serge Hallyn <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Quoting Stéphane Graber ([email protected]): >> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 02:37:11PM -0500, S.Çağlar Onur wrote: >> >> > Hi Serge, >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Serge Hallyn <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > Quoting S.Çağlar Onur ([email protected]): >> >> > >> lxcapi_rename implemented as a convenience function as lately >> >> > >> I find myself in a need to rename a container due to a >> >> > >> typo in its name. I could have started over but didn't want >> >> > >> to spend more time (to installing extra packages and changing >> >> > >> their configuration) on it. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> c->clone() followed by c->destroy() did the trick for me and I >> >> > >> though it could be helpful to the other people, so here it is. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur <[email protected]> >> >> > > >> >> > > Looks ok, but should you be specifying LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS | >> >> > > LXC_CLONE_KEEPMACADDR as clone flags? >> >> > >> >> > I thought I should to be keeping the container intact as much as I >> >> > can, assuming something might be using those values (like >> >> > redhat/centos/fedora ifcfg-* files where you could specify HWADDR) >> >> >> >> I'm not sure about LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS but LXC_CLONE_KEEPMACADDR should >> >> actually go towards your goal of having the copy be as close to the >> >> original as possible (without it, the mac address would be changed). >> > >> > Yeah. Çağlar, lemme know if you agree. >> >> Sure, you can drop LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS or alternatively I can send a >> new patch tomorrow (I'll be offline rest of the day) > > Gah, I'm sorry. Firstly I missed that you were already doing those.
Ah that's OK, I thought you are asking why I'm passing those :) > Secondly, my delay has kept api_rename out of the beta1. I've pushed > it as is. I'm still undecided about copyhooks, but the real answer > there is that lxcapi_clone should copy any hooks which are under > the container's directory unconditionally. Yeah it makes sense, and in that case I guess we can remove LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS completely (including lxc-clone). > -serge > _______________________________________________ > lxc-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel Best, -- S.Çağlar Onur <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ lxc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel
