On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 14:26 -0700, Matt Helsley wrote: > I think shells implementing job control do it in the parent (shell) > rather than the child (job) purely out of convention. It might be good
They usually do it in both the parent and child. > to follow a similar convention even if lxc is not, strictly speaking, > a > shell. > This could be done but it isn't really needed as the parent and child have a synchronization point anyway to setup the container. Cheers. -- Gregory Kurz gk...@fr.ibm.com Software Engineer @ IBM/Meiosys http://www.ibm.com Tel +33 (0)534 638 479 Fax +33 (0)561 400 420 "Anarchy is about taking complete responsibility for yourself." Alan Moore. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
