From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:59226) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h328F-0000gb-ES for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 13:21:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h328E-0007w5-R7 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 13:21:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:52948) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h328E-0007vo-Mp for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 13:21:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h328E-0003Lq-C1 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 13:21:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#28128] [PATCH] scripts: system: Add support for container network sharing. Resent-Message-ID: From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <20170817191334.26269-1-mail@cbaines.net> <87h8cisqs8.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 18:20:25 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Arun Isaac's message of "Fri, 08 Mar 2019 16:21:48 +0530") Message-ID: <87mum23aue.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Arun Isaac Cc: 28128@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Arun, Arun Isaac skribis: >> a. Add in (gnu services) an =E2=80=98hosts-database-service-type=E2=80= =99 that would >> take could be extended with IP/name pairs that it would put in >> /etc/hosts. >> >> b. Have =E2=80=98essential-services=E2=80=99 extend =E2=80=98hosts-dat= abase-service-type=E2=80=99. >> >> In the container-with-shared-network case we=E2=80=99d arrange to not ex= tend >> =E2=80=98hosts-database-service-type=E2=80=99, which would thus not prod= uce /etc/hosts. > > How would we arrange to not extend `hosts-database-service-type' in the > container-with-shared-network case? Wouldn't such an arrangement still > require us to pass #:container-shared-network? to `essential-services'? Oh, hmm, good point. Perhaps =E2=80=98essential-services=E2=80=99 could check whether =E2=80=98hosts-database-service-type=E2=80=99 is part of the =E2=80=98operating-system-user-services=E2=80=99. If it is, it would extend it; if not, it would do nothing. =E2=80=98hosts-database-service-type=E2=80=99 would be part of =E2=80=98%ba= se-services=E2=80=99, but in the container-with-shared-network case, we=E2=80=99d remove it (in a procedure similar to =E2=80=98virtualized-operating-system=E2=80=99.) How does that sound? Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.