[lxc-devel] [Lxc-users] Working LXC templates? EUREAKA! I think I've got it!

[Tony Su]

Michael,
Considering your substantial existing work, if you'd post on github,
I'd we willing to fork and contribute in that manner (of course, also
opens up ways for others to contribute).

I'd create the original repo myself except that your work should be
credited by you (and contributions managed by you as well).

Tony

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Tony Su <tonysu at su-networking.com> wrote:
> After some additional thought,
> If the goal is a template which will execute with minimal issues on
> non-Fedora HostOS,
>
> Besides my observations in my previous post to this,
>
> IMO the vaarious lines which "touch /etc/fstab" also would need to be
> modified since IMO the mount points of current, later versions of
> Fedora can be sometimes downright weird and wouldn't produce the
> desired result when executing that command on other distros.
>
> Tony
>
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Tony Su <tonysu at su-networking.com> wrote:
>> Hello Michael,
>>
>> First a comment on problems with systemd you descrbe.
>> I probably have run into many of the things you itemized, but since my
>> time is usually focused on something I'm trying to use LXC and not LXC
>> itself, I usually just drop any further attempts and move on to find a
>> workaround(eg consoles) or use a different technology(x server issue).
>>
>> Regarding many of the issues you describe though, I wonder if they
>> couldn't be addressed with more strict enforcement of using namespaces
>> (and less often cgroups). I've read how namespaces are supposed to be
>> an extremely powerful means of isolating processes and yet I don't see
>> any obvious indications it's being done consistently... by either
>> prepending to standard process or service names (if the goal is to
>> easily identify the namespace) or using a random string (if the goal
>> is better security so exploits can't anticipate commonly used
>> namespaces).
>>
>> In fact, I think I see this namespace issue in various parts of the
>> template you created. If I understand what is happening, there are
>> numerous places where you create special nodes on the HostOS instead
>> of
>> (a) using the existing HostOS nodes but using namespaces to isolate
>> Container processes
>> (b) creating nodes entirely within the Container which would make the
>> Container entirely portable but lose the benefit perhaps of the better
>> ways nodes are created and mounted today(eg tmpfs in RAM).
>>
>> Diving more into your template code, I applaud your effort, it's
>> significant and no minor effort.
>>
>> As of this moment, I've mainly been perusing what I might call "HostOS
>> Container Pre-Install," the part which precedes the actual
>> installation and relies on components running in the HostOS only. This
>> would be your script approx lines 0-410.
>>
>> 1. I like your method of identifying whether the OS is Fedora, and
>> additionally whether is ARM or not.
>>
>> 2. It looks like you're configuring networking binding directly to
>> eth0. I would recommend instead supporting the use of Linux Bridge
>> devices, make declaration of a bridge device name as one of the early
>> Global Parameters, then if exists to bind to that device by name. Your
>> code to bind to the physical interface is less flexible but can be a
>> default option if no bridge device is specified.
>>
>> 3. Interesting that you include an option for "nm controlled" yet at
>> least initially I don't see where your code might rely on this
>> setting.
>>
>> 4. mknod I'll have to take a closer look whether and why you appear to
>> be setting up various consoles, some /dev/ nodes, an explicit console
>> path, more. I've generally been under the impression that a full
>> install automatically creates these. Peeking a bit ahead of where I've
>> been reading your script, I notice your install method uses a
>> pre-built squashfs image, perhaps these are a special requirement
>> because your chosen squashfs image doesn't include these by default or
>> requires those nodes to already exist?
>>
>> 5. Your use of yum will work in the RH family plus various others like
>> openSUSE but I don't think it's native to distros like the Debian
>> family. IMO there is no special benefit to using a package manager
>> specific to the HostOS to download bootstrap images and packages, they
>> aren't too relevant to the overall apps running in the HostOS and I
>> think we should avoid installing non-native packages in any OS. For
>> that reason, I've been looking at pycurl, curl and wget which are
>> generic apps common to all distros which can accomplish the simple
>> task of retrieving the bootstrap objects. (See the template I included
>> as an attachment which uses pycurl and finds fedora repos rather than
>> installing a pre-built img)
>>
>> A small FYI -
>> Although the Fedora template distributed with openSUSE which I've
>> included as an attachment to this message <does not work as is> it
>> might be useful to see a different way of obtaining and installing
>> Fedora bootstrap packages so I've included it as an attachment to this
>> message.
>>
>> I've made the two following modifications
>> 1. line 33 - added "release=18"
>> The comments in this script describe passing the release number as an
>> option to "lxc-create" but is not supported in openSUSE. Despite
>> unable to pass as a command line option, passing within the template
>> with this line works. BTW - If no release is specified, Fedora
>> defaults to earliest release in the repos(which is 14) rather than
>> latest.
>> 2. Line 153 - The template hardcodes the RELEASE_URL string which is
>> created by appending a hardcoded string to the MIRROR_URL string, but
>> it appears that Fedora restructured their repos since this template
>> was created. Now, an "/f/" has to be inserted into the RELEASE_URL
>> (initial letter of the word "fedora").
>>
>> Additional - Especially when connecting to repos of a Distro different
>> than the HostOS, GPG authentication keys are not yet installed. Have
>> been investigating whether it's possible to simply download ahead of
>> time and install into the default Key Ring or something more is
>> required. If this approach is feasable, then this needs to be added
>> early to the template script, but maybe a better method is for the
>> User to be prompted for an interactive answer to confirm key
>> installation.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Tony Su <tonysu at su-networking.com> wrote:
>>> Cool.
>>>
>>> I'll block some significant time to look at what you built over the next 3
>>> days.
>>>
>>> Tony