Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Disable the subreaper on exec #993

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 19, 2016

Conversation

crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

This keeps the flag but makes it hidden so that existing clients do not
encounter an error if we were to have removed the flag.

Linked to #971

Signed-off-by: Michael Crosby crosbymichael@gmail.com

This keeps the flag but makes it hidden so that existing clients do not
encounter an error if we were to have removed the flag.

Signed-off-by: Michael Crosby <crosbymichael@gmail.com>
@@ -115,7 +116,7 @@ func execProcess(context *cli.Context) (int, error) {
return -1, err
}
r := &runner{
enableSubreaper: !context.Bool("no-subreaper"),
enableSubreaper: false,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remove this line as it because false is already the default value ?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ya, just thought i would make it explicit. it was not omitted but set that way for a reason

@cyphar
Copy link
Member

cyphar commented Aug 19, 2016

LGTM. This still doesn't solve the whole problem though. I'm going to clean up #976 (after #975) over the weekend.

Approved with PullApprove

@dqminh
Copy link
Contributor

dqminh commented Aug 19, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@dqminh dqminh merged commit c520720 into opencontainers:master Aug 19, 2016
@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member Author

@cyphar ya, that is why I didn't put Fixes ;)

@sandyskies
Copy link

@crosbymichael This doesn't fix the exec reparent problem, still child process of the exec process,PPID becomes 0 , after exec process exits.

@cyphar
Copy link
Member

cyphar commented Jan 23, 2017

@sandyskies Yup, we know. Which is why #976 exists (as we discussed above).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants