> Yes sure, init can't kill itself with or without these changes. But, > I think this is supposed behaviour which we do not want to change? I agree. (Actually, I think init shouldn't be "protected" that way at all. You shoot downwards, you get your foot. But we are not talking about changing the global init behavior, and I do think that the container-init behavior should be as consistent as possible with what global init sees.) It's possible to meaningfully swallow a kill() signal because then nothing happens at all. The exec failure cases are special because all the damage is already done so there is no way to avoid dying, and SIGKILL is just making it more formal and graceful. Thanks, Roland _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
