On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 08:43 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com): > > This is my second of two requests for comments. This one applies to ALL > > the templates. > > > > I noticed, in working on the Fedora template, lxc-fedora, that the host > > name and utsname configuration value is set to the simple name of the > > container. IMHO, that's suboptimal. > > > > In practice, the hostname and utsname should be the FQDN (fully > > qualified domain name) of the system. Often, on installation of a new > > Fedora system, I find that it's derived from the DHCP information and I > > end up with something like "rasputin.local" on the install screens, > > which I generally change. > > > > I don't want to use the FQDN as the container name, but rather the > > simple name (or something different). Should we provide a separate > > (optional) option for the utsname which is then used for the hostname? > > > > Logic, maybe, as follows??? > > > > -n Container_Name > > -u UTS_Name > > > > (-u is just a thought - I want other thoughts there.) > > > > If UTS_Name is NULL, set UTS_Name to Container_Name > > > > If UTS_Name does not contain a domain (no "."), extract domain from host > > name of host and append domain to UTS_Name. > > > > Assign utsname and hostname of container to UTS_Name rather than > > Container_Name. > > > > This way, container "Rasputin" could be created with "-n Rasputin -u > > Rasputin.WittsEnd.com" and have the hostname set properly in the > > container and not have the container namespace polluted with multiple > > instantiations of "WittsEnd.com". Creating just "-n Rasputin" would > > cause the script to extract a ".WittsEnd.com" to be extracted from the > > host "Forest.WittsEnd.com" and appended for "Rasputin.WittsEnd.com", > > which is what I would want. > > > > Another thought would be to overburden -n with the concept that the > > container name would be a simple name (strip from the first "." to the > > end) but that would be too many changes in too many places and result in > > too many headaches, in my mind. > > > > Thoughts?
> On the one hand I fear adding too many options for the many things we > might want configured on the host. Concur > On the other hand what you're asking for makes sense... > Do you think it makes sense to have only the longname (--utsname or > --fqdn) and not use -u for this? Actually, not that you mention it, yeah that would make sense to just use a long name for an advanced option like that. And --fqdn might be a better choice as well (more descriptive in the doco). > -serge Regards, Mike -- Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 | m...@wittsend.com /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0x674627FF | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
_______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
