Re: [MirageOS-devel] Lifecycle

[Richard Mortier <richard.mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20 July 2016 at 11:12, Daniel Bünzli <daniel.buenzli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Le mercredi, 20 juillet 2016 à 09:44, Richard Mortier a écrit :
>
>> Yeah-- rather than mandate something like this as an API that *all*
>> unikernels (Mirage and potentially others) must support, I think I'd
>> rather see those unikernels that care implementing their own
>> mechanisms to explicitly do things like persist state.
>
> Nothing in what I said mandates that behaviour for all unikernels. It is 
> something a particular unikernel might want to do given hinted knowledge of a 
> restart on stop.
>

True; I guess I'm thinking about this in terms of what the APIs are
that different management stacks and unikernel platforms might need to
support, and thinking that fewer messages / narrower API is (a priori)
better. Obviously there's nothing stopping any individual unikernel
having a broader API.

-- 
Richard Mortier
richard.mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel