guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 08/15] gnu: build: Add Linux container module.


From: Thompson, David
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/15] gnu: build: Add Linux container module.
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 08:56:02 -0400

On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
> "Thompson, David" <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>>>> +(test-assert "call-with-container, pid namespace"
>>>> +  (zero?
>>>> +   (call-with-container '()
>>>> +     (lambda ()
>>>> +       (match (primitive-fork)
>>>> +         (0
>>>> +          ;; The first forked process in the new pid namespace is pid 2.
>>>> +          (assert-exit (= 2 (getpid))))
>>>
>>> But its parent doesn’t sees itself as PID 1?
>>
>> Only if it were to 'exec'.  The reason being that PID namespaces are
>> special in how they treat the process that created the new namespace.
>> It's somewhat confusing.
>
> Hmm, indeed.  :-)
>
>> From 83943ab47145180f13d3c08490a9ae09fccf3b92 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: David Thompson <address@hidden>
>> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 21:58:15 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] build: file-systems: Import (guix build syscalls) for
>>  non-static Guiles.
>>
>> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm: Import (guix build syscalls) when 'mount' is 
>> not
>>   defined.
>> * gnu/system.scm (operating-system-activation-script): Include (guix build
>>   syscalls) module in derivation.
>
> LGTM.
>
>> From 72705fd6a8cd7b60bd727221897dc8bb79e3e4d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: David Thompson <address@hidden>
>> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 08:48:16 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: build: Add Linux container module.
>>
>> * gnu/build/linux-container.scm: New file.
>> * gnu-system.am (GNU_SYSTEM_MODULES): Add it.
>> * .dir-locals.el: Add Scheme indent rules for 'call-with-clone', 
>> 'with-clone',
>>   'call-with-container', and 'container-excursion'.
>> * tests/containers.scm: New file.
>> * Makefile.am (SCM_TESTS): Add it.
>
> OK!

I found and fixed the race condition in the 'container-excursion' test. Pushed!

- Dave



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]