Make the user explicit in the ssh command about footloose HOT 5 CLOSED

Looking at it , I think it needs a bit of redesign, because the user home directory is involved also in the ssh key creation:

const initScript = `
set -e
rm -f /run/nologin
sshdir=/root/.ssh
mkdir $sshdir; chmod 700 $sshdir
touch $sshdir/authorized_keys; chmod 600 $sshdir/authorized_keys
`

and

publicKey, err := c.publicKey()
if err != nil {
	return err
}
if err := copy(name, publicKey, "/root/.ssh/authorized_keys"); err != nil {
	return err
}

from footloose.

yes, you are right! I think there are two different things:

1. Allow the creation of arbitrary users when creating the container (this idea wasn't really properly captured yet, filed #43)
2. The syntax of the ssh command (which is the subject of this issue and is a much smaller change). I believe the ssh command syntax should follow what the real ssh does:

$ footloose ssh node0
-> try to login with the current user

$ footloose ssh root@node0
-> try to login with the root user

Of course the first thing will not work until we can provision new users into the containers.

There is a detail that needs to be taken into consideration as well: it'd be great to be able to mirror the current user inside the container (name, id, gid) so we can mount part of the filesystem in the container and still end up with the right id/gid for the files we create from inside the container: #11.

from footloose.

Just to be clear, I think it's fine to just address the point 2. above separately from the more general problem of user creation.

from footloose.

We could also say that user provisioning is not the domain of machine creation and is best left to other tools such as ansible. We could still install the ssh key for the root user tough, to bootstrap the other tools.

That may be fair game.

from footloose.

Fixed by #44

from footloose.