[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-04-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
** Changed in: lxc (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed = Won't Fix -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/925513 Title: plymouth should not run in container To manage

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Michael Adam
@Serge, Could you explain why use of --path can lead to X crashing where lxc-create without --path is not? My motivation was: I don't want lxc-create to create the rootfs under /var/lib/lxc. I need the stuff to be stored elsewhere. I thought that the --path option in the template was made

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Michael Adam
Confirmed: running the same lxc-create command with --trim creates a directly usable container. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/925513 Title: plymouth should not run in

Re: [Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
Quoting Michael Adam (ob...@samba.org): @Serge, Could you explain why use of --path can lead to X crashing where lxc-create without --path is not? After creating such a container, look at /var/lib/lxc/container/config and provided-path/config. My motivation was: I don't want lxc-create to

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
@Michael (and @Steve) So plymouth must do stuff over netlink. Instead of using --trim, you can simply add the lines from /etc/lxc/lxc.conf to the config file in your custom path. By not having those lines, you are telling lxc not to create a new network namespace. That means the container is

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
Sorry, I said netlink, but a unix socket is more likely. same root cause -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/925513 Title: plymouth should not run in container To manage

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Michael Adam
@Serge, thanks for your comments. I have experimented a little more. And I found that --path is indead at the very least misleading: If I don't use --path, then the config (snippet) given to lxc-create by -f is merged with the config that the template creates. If i do use paht, then the -f file

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
@Steve, regarding whether disabling plymouth is the right fix: I don't know the mechanisms plymouth uses. 1. for system log entries, the right fix will be a syslog namespace, which doesn't yet exist. 2. if it uses proc files, we may be able to use apparmor to protect from plymouth, though that

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Michael Adam
@Serge, I might have misready your statement about network config. I do add nettwork config (veth0, dev=virbr0, etc) manually. There is no /etc/lxc/lxc.conf in my system. The reason I used a config file snipped for lxc-create was exactly to get this network virtualization layer into the container

Re: [Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
Quoting Michael Adam (ob...@samba.org): @Serge, I might have misready your statement about network config. I do add nettwork config (veth0, dev=virbr0, etc) manually. What do you mean by adding it manually? Have you added it to the /data/lxc/ubuntu1/config? If there is no

Re: [Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:25:36PM -, Serge Hallyn wrote: regarding whether disabling plymouth is the right fix: I don't know the mechanisms plymouth uses. Well, I'm happy to answer questions you have on this, but I don't understand what issue you're trying to address by disabling

Re: [Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Serge Hallyn
Quoting Steve Langasek (steve.langa...@canonical.com): On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:25:36PM -, Serge Hallyn wrote: regarding whether disabling plymouth is the right fix: I don't know the mechanisms plymouth uses. Well, I'm happy to answer questions you have on this, but I don't

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-16 Thread Steve Langasek
Does it write it straight to /var/log/boot.log, or does it do it through syslog(2) or syslog(3)? If it writes straight to /var/log/boot.log then there should be no problem. Yes, it's straight to the log file. /dev/console and /dev/tty{1-4} are bind-mounted pty devices, and are ok for it to

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-15 Thread Michael Adam
Hi, plymouth running in the container prevents me from using the container at all, it kills my X instead: I created a 11.10 container with the following lxc-create command on freshly installed 11.10: sudo lxc-create -n ubuntu1 -f ./ubuntu1-template.conf -t ubuntu -- --release=oneiric

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-15 Thread Steve Langasek
I understand how plymouth currently running in the container might cause problems. My doubt is that disabling plymouth in the container is the right fix. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-15 Thread Serge Hallyn
@Michael, your problem with X crashing is actually due to your using the '--path' option. Please don't use that. It is only meant to be specified by lxc-create to the template. We've specifically removed --path from the help output because it does the wrong thing when used by hand and is

[Bug 925513] Re: plymouth should not run in container

2012-02-08 Thread Steve Langasek
I'm having trouble sussing out the underlying principle here that warrants special-casing plymouth in a container. Plymouth is the standard boot-time I/O multiplexer; any upstart jobs that need to interact with the user at boot time should be using plymouth. Now for the most part, this currently