On Fri, 23.10.15 00:59, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
>
>
> Am 23.10.2015 um 00:39 schrieb Ivan Shapovalov:
> >On 2015-10-22 at 23:12 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >>[...]
> >>and why not simply "timedatectl -H user@host[:port]" since host:port
> >>is
> >>a well known protocol agnostic way to specify a non-default port?
> >
> >Because the syntax of -H parameter is "[user@]host[:container]"
> >and it does not allow specifying an explicit port number.
>
> [user@]host[:container][:port]
> [user@]host[:port][:container]
>
> nothing unusual
Nope. The idea is that
foo:bar:baz:waldo
is kind of "path": connect to host "foo", enter its container "bar",
and from there connect to "bar"'s container "baz" and then further
down into "baz"'s container "waldo"... Containers are stackable after
all.
(Not saying that's actually stacking containers is a great idea, but I
think the basic concepts should cater for that. Also, currently nspawn
can be stacked as a matter of fact...)
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
