[bug#28128] [PATCH] scripts: system: Add support for container network sharing.

[Arun Isaac <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1798 bytes --]


I need this feature and I'd like to see this patch completed. And, I'm
willing to adopt it if Christopher Baines is unable to find time for
it. May I?

> “wait, it doesn’t feel right to pass that argument around
> everywhere!”.  :-)
> 
> We already have that with #:container?, and I think that’s a bit of a
> problem.

Yes, it doesn't feel right to pass the #:container? and
#:container-shared-network? argument around everywhere. We should do
something more elegant.

> The ‘linux-bare-metal’ service addresses it somewhat in a
> more elegant way, I think.
> 
> What about this:
> 
>   1. Remove from ‘operating-system-etc-service’ all the
>   shared-network-related files;
> 
>   2. Add a ‘shared-network-service’ that simply adds those file to
>   /etc;
> 
>   3. Add a ‘containerized-operating-system’ that removes it.
> 
> There’s the problem, though, that /etc/hosts can only be added from
> ‘essential-services’.

I tried the above, but since /etc/hosts can only be added from
essential-services, we still have to pass around the
#:container-shared-network? argument a lot.

What if, instead of a flag to `guix system', we introduced two fields --
container? and container-shared-network? -- in the <operating-system>
record type? This way, all the information would be bundled into the
`os' argument of essential-services and other functions. We wouldn't
need additional keyword arguments like #:container? and
#:container-shared-network?. In the interest of backward compatibility
and convenience, we could also retain the existing flags to the `guix
system' script. When the script sees the flag, it could modify the
operating-system record accordingly before passing it on for further
processing.

Thoughts?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]