On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > OK, let's add that then. >
While it's an alternative, I feel like going down that path is hasty and for my use case I will probably just patch our local fork of OpenvSwitch. Why so hostile towards this change? Is there a better forum I can explain why I believe this problem should be reconsidered? Is there really anyone that can justify the way socket paths are created should contain the PID? You clearly saw the problem with it in the Windows code base, but yet pushed on to keep it in the Linux one. I simply do not see why you're not taking this patch as a way to encourage people to migrate towards a saner default, and somewhere down the line maybe even switch the default behavior. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
