[lxc-devel] Cherry-picking to stable-1.0

Thu Jun 5 19:09:27 UTC 2014

On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 10:10:39AM -0400, Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 19:04:03 -0400
> "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw at WittsEnd.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 17:41 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 05:32:37PM -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 15:47 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > > I intend to release 1.0.4 next week and am currently going
> > > > > through all the commits in master which should be included in
> > > > > the bugfix release.
> > > > 
> > > > "Next week" came and passed but we've all been busy (especially
> > > > you). Any time frame on this?  I'm trying to position the Fedora
> > > > Project to move on 1.0.4 as soon as it releases and I'm walking
> > > > down their bugzilla list now.
> > 
> > > I'm slowly going through
> > > https://github.com/lxc/lxc/issues?milestone=7&page=1&state=open
> > > figuring out what we actually want fixed and what should be
> > > postponed.
> > 
> > > But things are starting to look good, I'm back home and so there's a
> > > good chance we'll have this out the door in the next week or so.
> > 
> > > > Will the startup initscript and lxc-autostarat changes that
> > > > Dwight and I worked out make it into 1.0.4 at this point?
> > 
> > > I didn't plan on including it as it felt a bit much for a stable
> > > release update though I didn't spend much time thinking about it
> > > and maybe it's fine after all. If you'd like it, I can give it some
> > > more thoughts and see exactly what bits may be controversial in
> > > there (potential breakage to existing setups mostly).
> 
> I understand about not wanting to break existing stuff, and I haven't
> thought hard about that but I would like to point out that the systemd
> unit file we shipped before was broken as what it pointed to didn't
> exist, so that part certainly seems like a worthwhile fix for stable.

Ok, so I just had a quick look and the change from master won't apply
cleanly anyway because we don't have the --ignore-auto/-A option in
stable's lxc-autostart.

I agree that in systemd's case, things can't really be much worse
compared to what we currently have in stable, so I'm fine with applying
the change in that regard. On the sysvinit/upstart side, the change
won't cause any user visible change of behaviour unless the user was
using "onboot" already for something else (doubtful).

So while I'm not thrilled getting that kind of big changeset into
stable, it's doable and I'll apply it if someone can get me a version of
the change which actually applies.

> > I tried pretty much to go out of my way to insure it wouldn't break
> > any pre-existing setup.  The only thing where that might be
> > questionable is if someone was already doing something weird with
> > groups but, even then, the startup behavior had been only the NULL
> > group before and now is configurable.
> > 
> > I'm pretty happy with it and Dwight seems pretty happy with it.  I
> > have it in production now.  I'd personally like to see it show up in
> > the next iteration of the Fedora package, which I may now have a hand
> > in...
> > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Mike
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Mike
> > 
> > > > > Most of them applied cleanly except for two:
> > > > >  - [PATCH] Convert punctuation marks in Japanese man pages
> > > > >    This one we thought was identical for both branches, this
> > > > > turned out to be wrong, so instead of cherry-picking from
> > > > > master, I applied the one from the stable-1.0 pull request I
> > > > > was sent.
> > > > >  - [PATCH] lxc-oracle: fix warnings/errors from some rpm
> > > > > scriptlets This one fails to apply on current stable-1.0,
> > > > > probably because of the changes done to the Oracle template to
> > > > > support installing from media. If those fixes should be
> > > > > backported to stable, I'd appreciate receiving a separate patch
> > > > > for that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I've also gone through all the patches that have been stacking
> > > > > in my mailbox, at the moment, the only unreviewed patches in
> > > > > there are the menuconfig change. If you submitted something
> > > > > else and it's not in master now, please re-send.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > lxc-devel mailing list
> > > > > lxc-devel at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> > > > > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 978-7061 |  mhw at WittsEnd.com
> > > >    /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/          | (678) 463-0932 |
> > > > http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9          | An
> > > > optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key:
> > > > 0x674627FF        | possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > lxc-devel mailing list
> > > > lxc-devel at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> > > > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > lxc-devel mailing list
> > > lxc-devel at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> > > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lxc-devel mailing list
> lxc-devel at lists.linuxcontainers.org
> http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel

-- 
Stéphane Graber
Ubuntu developer
http://www.ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-devel/attachments/20140605/507d3d78/attachment.sig>