On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, at 10:54 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Because microservice containers are a valid goal, and allowing them
to be more minimal while still pulling in glibc etc. is useful (from
the start of this thread).
Note that PID 1 is in more ways different than just reaping
processes... For example for PID 1, SIGTERM usually is a request for
reexecution, and SIGINT a request for reboot, while for non-PID1
processes these are requests for termination and cancelling...
I don't think anyone really cares about the traditional PID 1 signal
handling in a Kubernetes cluster, it's just not used for administration.
Well, that's certainly a opinion on this. I certainly disagree.
It
would essentially mean giving up on much what makes up an OS
though, in particular, about half of whatthe packaging guidelines say
what packages shall use and rely on.
Indeed, the current packaging model is designed for a world
where all software is installed on the host. For a lot of
software (postgres, nginx), we need to support both.
But there's also a lot of software that is container-only, and
I expect this to increase. This will be part of Dockerfile and
other container formats that we include as part of Fedora.
If you want to replace systemd functionality with Docker
functionality
Let's be clear - from my perspective systemd's design is awesome
for the *real* pid 1. AFAIK no one here is talking about changing anything
related to that. We're just talking about supporting microservice
containers without a pid 1 in the container namespace.