[Proof of concept] Add Windows fields #504
Conversation
| @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ type Spec struct { | |||
| Linux Linux `json:"linux" platform:"linux,omitempty"` | |||
| // Solaris is platform specific configuration for Solaris containers. | |||
| Solaris Solaris `json:"solaris" platform:"solaris,omitempty"` | |||
| // Windows is the platform specific configuration for Windows based containers. | |||
| Windows Windows `json:"windows" platform:"windows,omitempty"` | |||
|
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 04:47:42PM -0700, John Howard wrote:
I left a few nits as inline comments, but the general approach you |
Signed-off-by: John Howard <John.Howard@microsoft.com>
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Networking contains the network configuration for Windows based containers. | ||
| type Networking struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should probably be renamed once we determine if this is necessary.
| type User struct { | ||
| // UID is the user id. (this field is platform dependent) | ||
| UID uint32 `json:"uid" platform:"linux,solaris"` | ||
| // GID is the group id. (this field is platform dependent) | ||
| GID uint32 `json:"gid" platform:"linux,solaris"` | ||
| // AdditionalGids are additional group ids set for the container's process. (this field is platform dependent) | ||
| AdditionalGids []uint32 `json:"additionalGids,omitempty" platform:"linux,solaris"` | ||
| // User is the user name. (this field is platform dependent) | ||
| User string `json:"user" platform:"windows"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any specific reason why it's not username, and can we expect a groupname in the future ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a proof-of-concept PR. In the actual PR (now in master), it's username. https://github.com/opencontainers/runtime-spec/blob/master/specs-go/config.go#L65. There are no plans for groups in the future (it's not really something that makes sense on Windows).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool, was just curious. Thanks.
|
Closing this proof-of-concept PR now there are multiple PRs out to add support for Windows and address other comments in this PR. |
Signed-off-by: John Howard John.Howard@microsoft.com
Would like some feedback on this approach. This is the first step in removing the 'frankenstein' version of the spec used by Docker on Windows (https://github.com/docker/docker/blob/master/libcontainerd/windowsoci/oci_windows.go), which was based on a slightly earlier version of the OCI runtime spec (circa March 2016).
In particular, I'd like to get feedback on the best approach to have common structure names (eg Resources, CPU, Memory, Network etc) which are actually quite different in their contents between Windows and other platforms. I noticed that since I first took a cut of the OCI spec for use in Docker, the Solaris additions have been made, so I followed the same pattern for adding a Windows structure to the main
Specstructure.However, for those common structures, I modified it to be platform specific by prefixing the structure name with the platform. Hence
Resourcesis renamedLinuxResources, and a newWindowsResourcesstructure has been added, as an example.For structures which are very similar, I just added Windows specific fields, which is a pattern which already exists in the spec.
Hopefully that's there is concurrence in the above approach 😄