> On July 7, 2016, 6:38 a.m., Guangya Liu wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/appc/runtime.cpp, line 265 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/49348/diff/6/?file=1437512#file1437512line265> > > > > Seems you are losing the logic to handle logic in row 2 when there are > > arguments? > > Gilbert Song wrote: > The logic seems fine to me here. That case is covered. > > Guangya Liu wrote: > Seems this will only cover line 1 but not line 2, comments? > > Gilbert Song wrote: > We dont need to do anything special to line 2. Could you verify? I can be > wrong.
@gyliu I fixed the comment. When command is absent, we first set exec[0] as the command and then we replace arguments with exec[1]... only when they are not present. I do not want to append the args after exec[1]... or vice versa. More common use case where first argument to a executable is the ip address then command exec[1] set in image as -host=localhost which user likely to replace with proper ip. > On July 7, 2016, 6:38 a.m., Guangya Liu wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/appc/runtime.cpp, lines 215-219 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/49348/diff/6/?file=1437512#file1437512line215> > > > > So for the case of sh=0,value=0,argv=1,Exec=1, what about the value of > > `Exec[1]...` etc? Should not it be `./Exec[0] Exec[1] ... argv` > > Gilbert Song wrote: > Thanks Guangya. Let's keep this open. > > It depends on whether or not users have the ability to overwrite. > > Guangya Liu wrote: > Yes, but I thin at least we need to clarify the behaviro in comments and > the document if there are multiple exec. > > Gilbert Song wrote: > Guangya, I think it is the right semantic to have the users able to > overwrite. Thanks for deep dive. > > @Srini, could you add comments on why we do it this way? I have added more information into the comments above the table. - Srinivas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/49348/#review141133 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 19, 2016, 9:11 p.m., Srinivas Brahmaroutu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/49348/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 19, 2016, 9:11 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos. > > > Bugs: MESOS-4778 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4778 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Added implementation to Appc Runtime Isolator. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/appc/runtime.cpp > 19c68e8a25d9ceedc5dfd562e287d6b6a56a9d3a > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/49348/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Srinivas Brahmaroutu > >
