On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:36:09 -0400
Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:03:43 -0400
> Stéphane Graber wrote:
...
> > The command line parameter (-g) is comma separate however. So commas
> > should be documented as invalid for a group name and so is "any" which
> > is a special group matc
On 05/31/2013 02:08 AM, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi Stéphane,
>
> On 05/30/13 17:39, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>>
>> If we were to use groups for everything, we'd end up having to reserve
>> "disabled", "autostart", "last-state".
>>
>> And then make those 3 conflict so that a container couldn't be in m
Hi Stéphane,
On 05/30/13 17:39, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>
> If we were to use groups for everything, we'd end up having to reserve
> "disabled", "autostart", "last-state".
>
> And then make those 3 conflict so that a container couldn't be in more
> than one of those at any given time.
>
> This seem
On 05/30/2013 11:28 AM, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi Stéphane,
>
> On 05/30/13 15:33, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>>
>> That's already covered by my proposal and I believe covered in the use
>> cases listed within it.
>>
>> "lxc-stop -g any"
>>
>> That'll stop all containers that are in the "any" group. "
Hi Stéphane,
On 05/30/13 15:33, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>
> That's already covered by my proposal and I believe covered in the use
> cases listed within it.
>
> "lxc-stop -g any"
>
> That'll stop all containers that are in the "any" group. "any" is
> documented as being a special group that contain
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 09:33 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On 05/30/2013 02:35 AM, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> >
> > If its not too late for a suggestion:
> >
> > lxc-stop could provide an option -A to shutdown/stop all
> > containers, independent from their autostart flag. Worst
On 05/30/2013 02:35 AM, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> If its not too late for a suggestion:
>
> lxc-stop could provide an option -A to shutdown/stop all
> containers, independent from their autostart flag. Worst
> case scenario (almost) is that a disk has an IO error and
> the config fi
Hi folks,
If its not too late for a suggestion:
lxc-stop could provide an option -A to shutdown/stop all
containers, independent from their autostart flag. Worst
case scenario (almost) is that a disk has an IO error and
the config files cannot be read anymore.
For my own part, if I want to stop
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:50:32 -0500
> Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> > Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > > On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:03:43 -0400
> > > Stéphane Graber wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 05/28/2013 04:53 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > >
On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:50:32 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:03:43 -0400
> > Stéphane Graber wrote:
> >
> > > On 05/28/2013 04:53 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> > > >> Hey ev
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:03:43 -0400
> Stéphane Graber wrote:
>
> > On 05/28/2013 04:53 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> > >> Hey everyone,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart
On Tue, 28 May 2013 17:03:43 -0400
Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On 05/28/2013 04:53 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> >> Hey everyone,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
> >>
> >> Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what
On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 15:53 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> > Hey everyone,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
> >
> > Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what should be done to implement
> > autostarting containers
On 05/28/2013 04:37 PM, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 15:58 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>> Hey everyone,
>
>> Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
>
>> Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what should be done to implement
>> autostarting containers
On 05/28/2013 04:53 PM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
>>
>> Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what should be done to implement
>> autostarting containers in upstream LXC.
>>
Quoting Stéphane Graber (stgra...@ubuntu.com):
> Hey everyone,
>
> Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
>
> Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what should be done to implement
> autostarting containers in upstream LXC.
>
> Changes to the container config:
> - ADD: lxc.
On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 15:58 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> Hey everyone,
> Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
> Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what should be done to implement
> autostarting containers in upstream LXC.
Yes. I concur with virtually (excuse the p
Hey everyone,
Thanks for the feedback on my previous autostart proposal.
Here's a detailed bullet-point list of what should be done to implement
autostarting containers in upstream LXC.
Changes to the container config:
- ADD: lxc.start.auto (integer, 0 = disabled, 1 = enabled, default: 0)
- AD
Hey all...
On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 09:19 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On 05/28/2013 03:14 AM, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 May 2013 15:07:03 -0400
> > Stéphane Graber wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for a
> >> while is c
On Tue, 28 May 2013 09:57:13 -0400
"Michael H. Warfield" wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 09:29 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> > On 05/28/2013 05:11 AM, Jäkel, Guido wrote:
> > > Dear Stéphane,
> > >
> > > To my opinion, we have to deal with two independent things:
> > > System crash recovery an
On Mon, 27 May 2013 15:07:03 -0400
Stéphane Graber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for
> a while is container autostart.
>
> For 1.0 I'd like us to agree on an upstream implementation of this so
> distros no longer need to carry patches in l
On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 09:29 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On 05/28/2013 05:11 AM, Jäkel, Guido wrote:
> > Dear Stéphane,
> >
> > To my opinion, we have to deal with two independent things: System crash
> > recovery and container startup/shutdown dependencies
> >
> >> Another problem with this
On 05/28/2013 05:11 AM, Jäkel, Guido wrote:
> Dear Stéphane,
>
> To my opinion, we have to deal with two independent things: System crash
> recovery and container startup/shutdown dependencies
>
>> Another problem with this implementation is that the autostart flag is
>> lost when migrating the
On 05/28/2013 03:14 AM, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Mon, 27 May 2013 15:07:03 -0400
> Stéphane Graber wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for a
>> while is container autostart.
> ...
>
>> So I therefore have two proposals on how to implement t
Le lundi 27 mai 2013 à 15:07 -0400, Stéphane Graber a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for a
> while is container autostart.
>
> For 1.0 I'd like us to agree on an upstream implementation of this so
> distros no longer need to carry patches in
Dear Stéphane,
To my opinion, we have to deal with two independent things: System crash
recovery and container startup/shutdown dependencies
>Another problem with this implementation is that the autostart flag is
>lost when migrating the container to another host. One needs to manually
>remove t
On Mon, 27 May 2013 15:07:03 -0400
Stéphane Graber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for a
> while is container autostart.
...
> So I therefore have two proposals on how to implement this, let me know
> what you prefer:
> 1)
> - Keep things a
On 05/27/2013 03:07 PM, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for a
> while is container autostart.
>
> For 1.0 I'd like us to agree on an upstream implementation of this so
> distros no longer need to carry patches in lxc-destroy/lx
Hello,
One feature that distros have been hacking together on their side for a
while is container autostart.
For 1.0 I'd like us to agree on an upstream implementation of this so
distros no longer need to carry patches in lxc-destroy/lxc-list/... to
properly list/remove the autostart flag.
The c
29 matches
Mail list logo
