[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1828228] Re: corosync fails to start in container (armhf) bump some limits

Thanks Robie, and I totally agree. I'll give a fast look in lxd cases and comment back here so we can take a decision. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu High Availability Team, which is subscribed to pacemaker in Ubuntu.

Re: [Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1828228] Re: corosync fails to start in container (armhf) bump some limits

Note that if this turns out to be challenging a "force-badtest" is likely to be acceptable to get the package migrated for now. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu High Availability Team, which is subscribed to pacemaker in Ubuntu.

[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1828228] Re: corosync fails to start in container (armhf) bump some limits

Quick clarifications on next steps: - corosync runs as root... so its unclear to me it would fail for prlimit64() inside a container if sys_resource is denied. for sure prlimit64() fails in 2 conditions: not root and no "cap_sys_resource" is configured for the binary (CAP_SYS_RESOURCE=+ep), which

[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1810926] Re: initscript status check is too fragile

Yeah I agree, service masking is a corner case and it's just making things more confusing. I also got misled by the haproxy_status function, which doesn't actually seem to ever be called (although I still think some return codes are wrong). My bug report stemmed from seeing on a production