[lxc-devel] [PATCH] introduce lxcapi_rename for renaming containers

[Serge Hallyn]

Quoting S.Çağlar Onur (caglar at 10ur.org):
> Hey Serge,
> 
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > Quoting S.Çağlar Onur (caglar at 10ur.org):
> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >> > Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgraber at ubuntu.com):
> >> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 02:37:11PM -0500, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> >> >> > Hi Serge,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >> >> > > Quoting S.Çağlar Onur (caglar at 10ur.org):
> >> >> > >> lxcapi_rename implemented as a convenience function as lately
> >> >> > >> I find myself in a need to rename a container due to a
> >> >> > >> typo in its name. I could have started over but didn't want
> >> >> > >> to spend more time (to installing extra packages and changing
> >> >> > >> their configuration) on it.
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> c->clone() followed by c->destroy() did the trick for me and I
> >> >> > >> though it could be helpful to the other people, so here it is.
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur <caglar at 10ur.org>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Looks ok, but should you be specifying LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS |
> >> >> > > LXC_CLONE_KEEPMACADDR  as clone flags?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I thought I should to be keeping the container intact as much as I
> >> >> > can, assuming something might be using those values (like
> >> >> > redhat/centos/fedora ifcfg-* files where you could specify HWADDR)
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not sure about LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS but LXC_CLONE_KEEPMACADDR should
> >> >> actually go towards your goal of having the copy be as close to the
> >> >> original as possible (without it, the mac address would be changed).
> >> >
> >> > Yeah.  Çağlar, lemme know if you agree.
> >>
> >> Sure, you can drop LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS or alternatively I can send a
> >> new patch tomorrow (I'll be offline rest of the day)
> >
> > Gah, I'm sorry.  Firstly I missed that you were already doing those.
> 
> Ah that's OK, I thought you are asking why I'm passing those :)
> 
> > Secondly, my delay has kept api_rename out of the beta1.  I've pushed
> > it as is.  I'm still undecided about copyhooks, but the real answer
> > there is that lxcapi_clone should copy any hooks which are under
> > the container's directory unconditionally.
> 
> Yeah it makes sense, and in that case I guess we can remove
> LXC_CLONE_COPYHOOKS completely (including lxc-clone).

Note I'm not currently working on that, but it should be pretty simple
if anyone else wants to...