feature: user configuration for cri manager #722
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #722 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 12.26% 12.24% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 97 97
Lines 5856 5865 +9
==========================================
Hits 718 718
- Misses 5087 5096 +9
Partials 51 51
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
16 tasks
allencloud
reviewed
Feb 11, 2018
daemon/mgr/spec_process.go
Outdated
| @@ -59,27 +58,20 @@ func setupProcessTTY(ctx context.Context, c *ContainerMeta, spec *SpecWrapper) e | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func setupProcessUser(ctx context.Context, c *ContainerMeta, spec *SpecWrapper) (err error) { | |||
| // The user option is complicated, now we only handle case "uid". | |||
| // TODO: handle other cases like "user", "uid:gid", etc. | |||
| if c.Config.User != "" { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you use
if c.Config.user == "" {
return nil
}
fields := strings.Split(c.Config.User, ":")
......
to reduce ident?
allencloud
reviewed
Feb 11, 2018
daemon/mgr/spec_process.go
Outdated
| fields := strings.SplitN(c.Config.User, ":", 2) | ||
| var u, g string | ||
| fields := strings.Split(c.Config.User, ":") | ||
| var u string | ||
| u = fields[0] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
u still has possibility of being empty string, just make c.Config.User to be :asdfghj. right?
YaoZengzeng
force-pushed
the
user-group
branch
from
2d046be to
89a3c14
Compare
Signed-off-by: YaoZengzeng <[email protected]>
YaoZengzeng
force-pushed
the
user-group
branch
from
89a3c14 to
03d0a3b
Compare
YaoZengzeng
commented
Feb 11, 2018
| user.UID = uint32(uid) | ||
| } else { | ||
| user.Username = u | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@allencloud it's OK if the user option ":group", we will get an empty spec.User{} and will not cause any bad influence.
|
LGTM |
pouchrobot
added
the
LGTM
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Signed-off-by: YaoZengzeng [email protected]
Ⅰ. Describe what this PR did
Actually the user option is so complicated in docker, it could be in format as follows:
"" | "user" | "uid" | "user:group" | "uid:gid" | "user:gid" | "uid:group"
Hmmm... It is hard to implement all of them in a short time.
With this PR, you could only specify user option with "uid", but in most cases, it is enough 😄
Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?
fixes part of #635
Ⅲ. Describe how you did it
Ⅳ. Describe how to verify it
Ⅴ. Special notes for reviews