On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:24:39AM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 02:06:46PM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > Like the unshare command, which lets a user from the command line detach from
> > specific namespaces of the parent process, and execute a command, setns provides
> > a frontend to the setns(2) syscall, which allows a user to migrate a process to
> > the namespaces of other processes, prior to calling exec on a command.
>
> Do we really need a new command? Can't we extend unshare(1)?
>
> create a new namespace:
>
> unshare --{mount,ipc,...} <program> [<args>]
>
> move to already existing namespace:
>
> unshare --namespace <pid> --{ipc,...} <program> [<args>]
>
>
> From user's point of view in both cases the <program> will be unshared
> from the current namespace so the util name seems OK.
>
> IMHO it seems better then add a new command.
>
>
> If you really want to support direct namespace paths (/proc/<pid>/ns/<nsname>)
> then we can use
>
> unshare --namespace <path> <program> [<args>]
>
> anyway this way should be optional and not required. It's naive to
> expect that everyone remembers and understands all the /proc tricks.
>
Ok, fair enough, I can rewrite this to extend unshare
Neil
> Karel
>
> --
> Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> http://karelzak.blogspot.com
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
