On 2013/5/29 21:47, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> Right, so other failures later on *could* still cause this.
> Shall we do something like
>
> {
> // Wait on any unterminated children
> int status, ret;
> while ((ret = waitpid(-1, &status, 0)) > 0);
>
Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com):
> On 2013/5/24 20:49, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com):
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I found a tricky problem in LXC, once I made a mistake in config, set
> >>
> >> lxc.cgroup.cpuset.cpus = -1
> >>
> >> ofcourse start would f
On 2013/5/24 20:49, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com):
>> Hi,
>>
>> I found a tricky problem in LXC, once I made a mistake in config, set
>>
>> lxc.cgroup.cpuset.cpus = -1
>>
>> ofcourse start would fail, but then "lxc-ls --active" showed the container
>> is active
25.05.2013 04:34, Qiang Huang wrote:
> On 2013/5/24 20:49, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>>
>> Could you tell us exactly which version this is, and exactly how you
>> created the container? When I do it in ubuntu saucy (roughly 0.9.0 lxc),
>> the cgroup gets correctly removed.
The same issue has biten me s
On 2013/5/24 20:49, Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> Could you tell us exactly which version this is, and exactly how you
> created the container? When I do it in ubuntu saucy (roughly 0.9.0 lxc),
> the cgroup gets correctly removed.
>
>
My lxc version is 0.9.0(latest commit e9831f83532184), host os is
Quoting Qiang Huang (h.huangqi...@huawei.com):
> Hi,
>
> I found a tricky problem in LXC, once I made a mistake in config, set
>
> lxc.cgroup.cpuset.cpus = -1
>
> ofcourse start would fail, but then "lxc-ls --active" showed the container
> is active.
>
> error message is:
> # lxc-start -n hq111
