Re: Single process controlling all cgroups sounds like looking in right direction but wrong solution.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/15/2013 07:32:16 AM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Peter Dolding (oiaohm@xxxxxxxxx):
> I followed the Maintainers File. https://www.kernel.org/doc/linux/MAINTAINERS
> CONTROL GROUPS (CGROUPS)
> M:	Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx>
> M:	Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> L:	containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Odd, my version has

L:      containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:      cgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The cgroups entry was added in November 2011 according to git-blame.
I don't know why the kernel.org version is so old.

Because when kernel.org got broken into they did a major barn-door-locking that took away everyone's account until you could get your key signed by senior kernel developers in person, and since I don't go to a lot of conferences I didn't manage that until February of this year.

Then when I got my account back, I found out that the ability to rsync over ssh had gone away and instead they've replaced shell access with a home-grown tool called "kup" (because as well all know, the way to secure a system is for non-security people to write their own tools from scratch). And unfortunately, that tool is basically "git access and afterthoughts".

It's theoretically possible to copy files through kup, one at a time, after individually cryptographically signing each file. It's also possible to list directories through kup. So what I need to do is write a shell script that traverses my local kdocs directory, lists the contents on the website, makes two trees, compares the trees, figures out which files need updating, signs each file and uploads it.

I.E. laboriously reimplementing a sad immitation of rsync through this insane bespoke tool.

It's on my todo list...

Rob

(P.S. yes I asked: the kernel developers do not care in the slightest that when the server changed out from under the users, their new tool does not match my existing workflow. And it's their server, they can do what they like. I'm just annoyed at the "department of homeland security" levels of disproportionate response, and that containers are still not considered worth using here.)
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers




[Index of Archives]     [Cgroups]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux