On Mon, 08.04.13 13:34, Luca Giuzzi ([email protected]) wrote: > Dear List, > I need to run some services in a private uts namespace, even if they > do not require full isolation. > I have seen that "PrivateNetwork" is available (per systemd.exec), > but it not what I want; likewise systemd-nspawn is not what I am > looking for. > I can do some "tricks" with scripts, but I am actually looking for a > "clean" way to instantiate and attach to a uts namespace (a > "PrivateUTS" keyword or the like) > Even a cursory look at the source did not suggest this to be implemented. > Is there something I am missing? > Otherwise, is this sort of functionality being planned at all?
This isn't planned right now. UTS namespaces really sound like something one would want for containerizing full OSes (which we have systemd-nspawn for), and not so much for running services? Can you make a good case why UTS namespacing for services is a useful thing? May I ask what your specific usecase is? If this is generally useful it shouldn't be too hard to add.. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
