From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37905) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h4Wll-0006Ki-Pa for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:16:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h4Whu-0000LW-4J for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:12:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:58789) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h4Whu-0000LR-0E for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:12:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h4Wht-0000Oc-Ng for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:12:01 -0400 Subject: [bug#28128] [PATCH 2/2] scripts: system: Support container network sharing. Resent-Message-ID: From: Arun Isaac In-Reply-To: <87va0n80u5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20190313093610.1071-1-arunisaac@systemreboot.net> <20190313093610.1071-3-arunisaac@systemreboot.net> <87va0n80u5.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 01:41:25 +0530 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" 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: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 28128@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> +(define shared-network-service-type >> + (service-type (name 'shared-network) >> + (extensions (list (service-extension etc-service-type i= dentity))) >> + (compose concatenate) >> + (extend append) >> + (default-value '()))) > > I=E2=80=99d encourage you to add a =E2=80=98description=E2=80=99 field as= well. :-) Sure, will do. > 1. =E2=80=98service-type-name=E2=80=99 exists for debugging purposes, a= nd I think we > shouldn=E2=80=99t rely on it at all in our code. Instead, we should > compare service types by identity, as in: > > (eq? (service-kind service) foo-service-type) Sure, will do. > 2. The notion of =E2=80=9Cshared network=E2=80=9D is very much a contai= ner (or VM) > thing, so somehow it still doesn=E2=80=99t feel right to me that (gnu > system) has to be aware of these special cases. > > I think the =E2=80=98host-database-service-type=E2=80=99 wouldn=E2=80=99t= have this problem, but > maybe it has other issues. I guess this needs more experimentation, > sorry for not coming up with clearer ideas! If these services (the shared-network service, the hosts-database service or indeed any other service) had access to the operating-system object `os', then they would be able to operate independently without having to be extended by `essential-services'. Is this possible somehow? Is it a good idea to give services access to the os fields? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEf3MDQ/Lwnzx3v3nTLiXui2GAK7MFAlyKtW0ACgkQLiXui2GA K7NtQwf+NtNivmBHegaOXNbnUQT65t2hQOkWHi7kTGiUlKiGhYbMjLj4ReQgqHRM dOJKo2hjyYxs4rcTuz1+vU+9b7PkWji84xjjgkpQ+sYUZ1tZfc/aPlYld0G3TC1V lMwu0xi/CVmPD8t/gT18Bo4bdVlt5fsEZiHrblxq/CAYnVJ63KJ/S2xnhWiNlUFv G8pKCk1FXjB8UPb1ortezgM05/c82aigOx9ZymFBbCdc6YFDqnPRGLaPh9Z/o0Pq VbR+mXaMwechkv7WigqCFLscDPJHIXASBB1wS538IgTzew0GV+yiCkLrqYup484P JUAhYXgmVVKZ/0HSLSGQKNK6n1HtnQ== =kXIC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--