On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:10:50 +0200 Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 25.08.2015 um 18:41 schrieb Luca Bruno:
>
> > I've tried this patch and looks like adding another bug to me. Please
> > confirm what I'm experiencing. It's true, it does not remove cgroups
> > created by systemd, but then it doesn't clea
Am 25.08.2015 um 18:41 schrieb Luca Bruno:
> I've tried this patch and looks like adding another bug to me. Please
> confirm what I'm experiencing. It's true, it does not remove cgroups
> created by systemd, but then it doesn't cleanup cgroups that systemd
> created either.
>
> Example:
>
> 1) s
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 18:41:59 +0200 Luca Bruno wrote:
> I've tried this patch and looks like adding another bug to me. Please
> confirm what I'm experiencing. It's true, it does not remove cgroups
> created by systemd, but then it doesn't cleanup cgroups that systemd
> created either.
Correction,
Control: unarchive -1
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:43:30 +0100 Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> so the patch that got proposed at
>
>
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-September/023276.html
>
> actually makes a lot of sense: This makes systemd only clean up
> cgroups that it
Control: tag -1 -moreinfo
Pierre Mavro [2015-02-12 16:11 +0100]:
> I think this may not be a critical bug, however as this is the only way
> (as far as I know) to know/monitor the used resources of a container, I
> think it's important. Not just a cosmetical problem.
Ah, ok.
The patch is simple
Hi Martin,
So many questions...thanks for answers !
I think this may not be a critical bug, however as this is the only way
(as far as I know) to know/monitor the used resources of a container, I
think it's important. Not just a cosmetical problem.
To my level, it's hard to say if this issue is
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello again,
so the patch that got proposed at
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-September/023276.html
actually makes a lot of sense: This makes systemd only clean up
cgroups that it created by itself, and thus won't clean up empty ones
in other
Control: notfixed -1 218-1
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
Hello again,
Martin Pitt [2015-02-12 13:24 +0100]:
> I remember a similar problem when I worked on Ubuntu's "user LXC
> container" support/patch, but this issue got fixed with 217 or 218.
> Indeed I can't reproduce this report with the experimen
Control: tag -1 confirmed
Control: fixed -1 218-1
Hey Pierre,
Pierre Mavro [2015-02-10 15:45 +0100]:
> Let's say I've an LXC container called jessie running on jessie. The
> container is started and I can see the memory is correctly visible in
> the cgroup fs:
>
> $ ls /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/lxc/
Am 10.02.2015 um 15:45 schrieb Pierre Mavro:
> Package: systemd
> Version: 215-10
> Severity: critical
> Justification: breaks unrelated software
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> I encounter a problem with LXC running with systemd. Following the
> documentation (https://wiki.debian.org/LXC), I updated gr
10 matches
Mail list logo
