On 10/08/2010 05:13 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: > Stefan Tomanek wrote: > >> Dies schrieb Daniel Lezcano (daniel.lezc...@free.fr): >> >> >>> Are we sure, we want to add these hooks (pre and post) ? I am not >>> against adding them, but IMO it is more sane to add them if needed >>> rather than adding something which may not be used. >>> >> Well, until now, there was not a single hook, although I desperately >> needed one. And there are probably people out there who might use >> these hooks and are not able to add them for themselves. >> >> >>> Wouldn't preferable to have these two hooks: >>> >>> lxc.network.script.up >>> lxc.network.script.down >>> >>> (script parameter will need 'name', 'conf section' 'up' | 'down' ... >>> >> I still advise to split the hooks into generic ones and those specific >> to the network type. The parameters passed to a script configuring a veth >> device will be completely different than those passed to a macvlan device; >> generic commands can then be placed in a different script, while special >> commands can be handled in specific scripts. >> > Note that the script may receive other parameters, depending on the > type of the network device, just the first 3 are fixed. THere's also > $ENVIRONMENT $VARIABLES for us. > > >> I'd at least propose to use two hooks for setting up the interface, on being >> called >> in instanciate_* (.up?), passing the arguments suitable to that network >> type, as well as >> one generic (.post-up?) >> > If there's a need, the "specific" script may call some common > code/script by its own, or the reverse. There's no need to do > that in lxc. Of if we do, how about adding a _set_ of scripts > for each "stage" ? :) > > >>> If there is a need for a pre or post hook, we can easily add later: >>> >> Sure, _we_ probably can, but not the person who might need the patch. There >> are quite >> many sysadmins who are masters at shell scripting, but are unable to add >> such a hook >> to a C codebase. Not being able to extend the system in an easy fashion >> would be a huge >> show stopper for them, just as the lack of scripting was to me. >>
I am not a sysadmin, may be you are right, having the hooks available is good, but I am still not convinced they are needed. I am heavily using kvm, and with the two scripts qemu-ifup and qemu-ifdown I am quite happy :) Anything to be done before or after falls in /etc/network/interfaces. > There IS a trivial way to extend system already (when > just ONE hook is implemented) - chain your scripts. > There's no need to re-implement shell in lxc. > Michael, I am not sure I get the idea. Can you elaborate a bit ? In our case, we need the veth name which is available in instanciate_veth, no ? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb _______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
