On 03/01/2012 07:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 18:19 +0100, Michal Schmidt wrote:
Dne 23.2.2012 15:13, Peter Zijlstra napsal:
My utter disregard for cgroups comes from having to actually implement a
controller for them, its a frigging nightmare. The systemd retards
mandating all this nonsense for booting a machine is completely bonghit
inspired and hasn't made me feel any better about it.
systemd requires only CONFIG_CGROUPS=y. It does not need any controllers.
And that makes it better how?
Because it is not involved in the controllers nightmare you have.
systemd does not require "all this nonsense".
The insults are entirely unnecessary.
I think not, booting a machine should depend on the smallest possible
subset of features. Doing anything else is completely bonkers.
Your disagreement does not justify calling the people on the other side
retards.
Your statement about the smallest feature subset could use some
clarification. Should we make sure everything works fine without, say,
CONFIG_UNIX?
And what exactly do you mean by booting? Obviously not booting into a
full desktop environment, because that requires a lot of features.
If on the other hand you are satisfied with booting into a getty with
not many services around, in this sense systemd will boot without
CONFIG_CGROUPS. It's recommended not to do that and nobody actively
tests this setup, but at least systemd will not abort. So it can be used
to check if the kernel boots and to run some tests.
Michal
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
