| Message ID | 20170724182751.18261-36-f4bug@amsat.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> writes: > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> > --- > scripts/dockershell | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+) > create mode 100755 scripts/dockershell > > diff --git a/scripts/dockershell b/scripts/dockershell > new file mode 100755 > index 0000000000..f6a2276172 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/scripts/dockershell > @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ > +#! /bin/sh > + > +# This script starts a docker shell with QEMU directory mounted > +# > +# Copyright (C) 2017 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé. GPLv2+. > +# > +# Usage: > +# ./scripts/dockershell qemu:debian-bleeding-dev <snip> This isn't appropriate for 2.10 now we are feature frozen. That said I have pondered a helper script for this sort of thing before. As it stand I just rely on my shell to remember the correct invocation for me. This is the sort of functionality we would need for maybe cross compiling tests using docker. -- Alex Bennée
> This isn't appropriate for 2.10 now we are feature frozen. That said I Surely. From the cover: "... provided at the end of this series as RFC for people wanted to give a try (also include 'dockershell' script and a fix in ./configure). These RFC patches (33-35) are not expected to enter 2.10." Peter also commented on the "./configure" patch, so I probably mis-titled "RFC" those patch http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-07/msg07584.html: "I prefixed this patch 'RFC' to not consider it but provide it if someone wanted to reproduce the analysis. Maybe I should prefix it 'XXX' next time or 'NOT FOR MERGE'." better "NOT FOR REVIEW" or "!RFC"? :p > have pondered a helper script for this sort of thing before. As it stand > I just rely on my shell to remember the correct invocation for me. > > This is the sort of functionality we would need for maybe cross > compiling tests using docker. This script is way incomplete and far being finished. Regards, Phil.
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> writes: >> This isn't appropriate for 2.10 now we are feature frozen. That said I > > Surely. From the cover: > > "... provided at the end of this series as RFC for people wanted > to give a try (also include 'dockershell' script and a fix in > ./configure). These RFC patches (33-35) are not expected to enter > 2.10." My mistake - I hadn't gone over the cover letter. I would usually expect a series with [PATCH for 2.10] just to contain stuff being considered for the immediate future. > > Peter also commented on the "./configure" patch, so I probably > mis-titled "RFC" those patch > > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-07/msg07584.html: > "I prefixed this patch 'RFC' to not consider it but provide it > if someone wanted to reproduce the analysis. Maybe I should prefix it > 'XXX' next time or 'NOT FOR MERGE'." > > better "NOT FOR REVIEW" or "!RFC"? :p Better to post a logically separate series. It's fine to make an in-flight series a pre-requisite though (not that I think you need it here). >> have pondered a helper script for this sort of thing before. As it stand >> I just rely on my shell to remember the correct invocation for me. >> >> This is the sort of functionality we would need for maybe cross >> compiling tests using docker. > > This script is way incomplete and far being finished. > > Regards, > > Phil. -- Alex Bennée
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote: > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> writes: >>> This isn't appropriate for 2.10 now we are feature frozen. That said I >> >> Surely. From the cover: >> >> "... provided at the end of this series as RFC for people wanted >> to give a try (also include 'dockershell' script and a fix in >> ./configure). These RFC patches (33-35) are not expected to enter >> 2.10." > > My mistake - I hadn't gone over the cover letter. I would usually expect > a series with [PATCH for 2.10] just to contain stuff being considered > for the immediate future. Ah I see, I used --subject-prefix='PATCH for 2.10' thinking "I'v to remember to mark the 3 last patches as "RFC" and when I prefixed with "RFC" I forgot to remove the "for 2.10" suffix. My bad!
diff --git a/scripts/dockershell b/scripts/dockershell new file mode 100755 index 0000000000..f6a2276172 --- /dev/null +++ b/scripts/dockershell @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +#! /bin/sh + +# This script starts a docker shell with QEMU directory mounted +# +# Copyright (C) 2017 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé. GPLv2+. +# +# Usage: +# ./scripts/dockershell qemu:debian-bleeding-dev + +if [ $# -lt 1 ]; then + echo + echo "error: missing image name" + echo + docker images qemu --no-trunc --format="- {{.Repository}}:{{.Tag}}" + exit 1 +fi + +SDIR=$(cd "$(dirname "$0")/.." && pwd -P) +CDIR=$(pwd -P) + +VOLS="-v /tmp:/tmp" +if [ "${SDIR}" = "${CDIR}" ]; then + VOLS="${VOLS} -v ${SDIR}:${SDIR} -w ${SDIR}" +else + VOLS="${VOLS} -v ${SDIR}:${SDIR}:ro -v ${CDIR}:${CDIR} -w ${CDIR}" +fi + +docker run --rm -it ${VOLS} \ + -u $(id -u) \ + $1
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> --- scripts/dockershell | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+) create mode 100755 scripts/dockershell