Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 3 Mar 2015 01:10:51 +0000 | Subject | Re: [proposal] delegating cgroup manager to non-PID1 | From | Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <> |
| |
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:13 AM, David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote: > On Sun, 1 Mar 2015, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > >> in recent discussions about PID-1 alternatives (sysvinit, openrc, >> systemd, depinit) i was alerted to the idea that PID1 is to become the >> sole exlcusive process permitted to manage cgroups. given that, just
> There is less agreement on the idea that PID1 will have exclusive control > over cgroups than some of the posts make it seem.
david, small favour to ask you (for archival purposes as well as convenience) - finding posts, or even the mailing lists themselves, on which the discussions you mention may be found, turns out to be um rather challenging if you happen not to have subscribed to those lists, such that every day you've seen all the discussions and know what to look for, and where.
would you therefore be so kind as to publish some hints - specific keyword phrases more general than "PID1 cgroups" which is about the limit of what i can think might apply (which ironically comes up with every archive linking to *this* thread.... *sigh*), or better perhaps some specific references to specific mailing lists.
many many thanks,
l.
| |