On 2012-05-25 16:40, Christian Seiler wrote:
> I'd really prefer shutting down a container just worked out of the box
> without any strange modifications to /etc/inittab for sysvinit. I
> really think shutting down containers properly is a functionality that
> LXC should support out of the box.
De
By default we use mnt, but that means that lxc fstab entries do not work
when placed under the container's /mnt/.
Switching the default away from /mnt would work too, if noone
objects. (I see no downside, but figured I'd play it safe for now)
Signed-off-by: Serge Hallyn
---
templates/lxc-ubunt
Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> On 05/25/2012 11:24 AM, Christian Seiler wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Have you looked at the lxc-shutdown script we have in Ubuntu and the
> >> integration we have with upstart?
> >
> > No, not yet, but I'll look at it later.
> >
> >> lxc-shutdown send
On 25/05/12 11:28, Ward, David - 0663 - MITLL wrote:
On 25/05/12 10:40, Christian Seiler wrote:
Hi,
my lxc management script uses lxc-stop just for an emergency action
called "fored-stop" and it will be also applied, if a normal "stop"
(alias "halt") action will timeout after 5min. For this no
On 05/25/2012 11:24 AM, Christian Seiler wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Have you looked at the lxc-shutdown script we have in Ubuntu and the
>> integration we have with upstart?
>
> No, not yet, but I'll look at it later.
>
>> lxc-shutdown sends two different signals:
>> reboot => SIGINT
>> shutdown => SIG
On 25/05/12 10:40, Christian Seiler wrote:
Hi,
my lxc management script uses lxc-stop just for an emergency action
called "fored-stop" and it will be also applied, if a normal "stop"
(alias "halt") action will timeout after 5min. For this normal
shutdown (or reboot) of a container, I'm sending
Hi,
> Have you looked at the lxc-shutdown script we have in Ubuntu and the
> integration we have with upstart?
No, not yet, but I'll look at it later.
> lxc-shutdown sends two different signals:
> reboot => SIGINT
> shutdown => SIGPWR
>
> These are caught by upstart and will trigger a clean re
On 05/25/2012 07:56 AM, Christian Seiler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently, lxc-stop sends SIGKILL to the init process of the container,
> which causes all the other processes in the container to also receive
> a SIGKILL. I don't think that is a good course of action, since sending
> SIGKILL to for examp
Hi,
> my lxc management script uses lxc-stop just for an emergency action
> called "fored-stop" and it will be also applied, if a normal "stop"
> (alias "halt") action will timeout after 5min. For this normal
> shutdown (or reboot) of a container, I'm sending just a SIGPWR (or
> SIGINT) to the con
On 05/25/2012 04:17 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> Hi Stéphane,
>
>> - stop: Is run after the container died
>> [...]
>> Potential other hooks include pre-start and post-stop
> What would be the difference between stop and post-stop, if stop also
> runs _after_ the container died?
>
> Gr.
>
> M
Dear Christian,
my lxc management script uses lxc-stop just for an emergency action called
"fored-stop" and it will be also applied, if a normal "stop" (alias "halt")
action will timeout after 5min. For this normal shutdown (or reboot) of a
container, I'm sending just a SIGPWR (or SIGINT) to th
Hi,
Currently, lxc-stop sends SIGKILL to the init process of the container,
which causes all the other processes in the container to also receive
a SIGKILL. I don't think that is a good course of action, since sending
SIGKILL to for example a database server can lead to potential data
loss.
A muc
Hi Stéphane,
> - stop: Is run after the container died
> [...]
> Potential other hooks include pre-start and post-stop
What would be the difference between stop and post-stop, if stop also
runs _after_ the container died?
Gr.
Matthijs
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-
13 matches
Mail list logo
