On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 15:40:39 -0800 Paul Menage <men...@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Harald Braumann <ha...@unheit.net> > wrote: > > > > So, what's the problem with /dev/cgroups then? If shm/ and pts/ > > are allowed under /dev, wouldn't it be discriminating against > > cgroups/, to not allow it there? > > Right, that's what I proposed a couple of emails earlier in this > thread. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you'd be against it, on the contrary, I took your explanation as another argument for using /dev and against /sys (/cgroups should not even be considered, IMHO). The question was targeted at those, who oppose it. Cheers, harry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
