Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > Ferenc Wagner [[email protected]] wrote: > | Sukadev Bhattiprolu <[email protected]> writes: > | > | > Daniel Lezcano [[email protected]] wrote: > | > > | >>> Besides a realistic container-init would block such signals, in which > case > | >>> the complexity in the kernel could be viewed as unnecessary. > | >> > | >> I am not sure it is good to have the pid 1 immune against signals sent > | >> from outside of the container. > | > > | > cinit is only immune to unhandled signals that terminate/stop the cinit. > | > If a handler is defined for SIGINT, a SIGINT from parent-ns will still be > | > delivered but a SIGINT from a descendant of cinit will be ignored. > > Sorry. Bad sentence. > > Yes, if a handler is defined, the signal will be delivered regardless of > sender's namespace. > Thanks Suka for the clarification.
-- Daniel _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
