Xpl++ wrote:
> Paul Menage ??????:
>> ...
>>
>> A compromise might be to keep "tasks" unprefixed, and say that future
>> names get the "cgroup." prefix; in this case I'd be inclined to add
>> the prefix to notify_on_release and release_agent on the grounds that
>> there's much less chance of breaking anyone with those files since (I
>> suspect) they're much less used.
>>   
> This makes most sense to me. It won't break any existing software 
> (most likely) while it seems reasonable to leave 'tasks' unprefixed as 
> this is something that any software using any subsystem of cgroup 
> would be using anyway and it is not that much associated with a 
> particulat subsystem.
>

And it makes most sense to me too, though I still doubt name collision 
will be a problem.

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers