[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: FYI: upstream’s take



On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 11:51:37AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) [131029 03:15]:
> > Michael Stapelberg <stapelberg@debian.org> writes:

> > > my apologies for not replying to any messages within the thread, but I
> > > think my mail is orthogonal to the other messages.

> > > Lennart Poettering wrote about the systemd upstream point of view on the
> > > discussion we are currently having:
> > > https://plus.google.com/115547683951727699051/posts/8RmiAQsW9qf

> > This is a valuable post.  Thank you for the pointer!  I would be
> > interested in seeing the two core technical arguments there (cgroup
> > handling and how D-Bus services are handled) addressed by the upstart
> > position paper, particularly if there are plans that Lennart isn't aware
> > of for how that functionality will be provided.

> I'm wondering how much libcgroup matches (or not) the role of cgroup
> handling - I use that in a different environment quite successfully,
> but that might be just me and not the full answer for everybody.

It does not.  The impending kernel transition is that there should be a
single process managing the cgroup heirarchy on behalf of userspace; the
existing libcgroup is a library that lets individual processes interface
with /sys/fs/cgroup, not an implementor of the userspace cgroup manager
service.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: