> I was wondering if we shouldn't separate the "init-logger" features.
>
> For logging the container output, we can create a tty in lxc-start.c,
> map the slave endpoint to /dev/console and proxy the master to the real
> tty.
> That allows to:
> * solve the problem of the init process which stole the terminal tty,
> letting us in a terminal without the controling tty
> * we can redirect the master to file, a socket, a fifo, etc ...
> * we reuse most of the lxc-console code
>
> In this case, the "init-logger" becomes a
> "<process-allowing-to-enter-the container>" and we keep separated the
> feature.
>
> What do you think ?
Well, I always want both features:
- to be able to see the output of init is a must
- executing command inside the container (halt) is very convenient,
and a must for system containers.
So I am not sure if you gain anything from this code split.
In short, I think it makes no sense if you also implement
the "<process-allowing-to-enter-the container> feature, because
you can share most code there.
- Dietmar
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout its 18-year history, RSA Conference consistently attracts the
world's best and brightest in the field, creating opportunities for Conference
attendees to learn about information security's most important issues through
interactions with peers, luminaries and emerging and established companies.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsaconf-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Lxc-devel mailing list
Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
