I can't think of any real use cases where you would specifically want A)
without B).
You misrepresent my approach.
[...]
Second I am not trying to just implement a form of virtualizing PIDs.
Heck I don't intend to virtualize anything. The kernel has already
virtualized everything I require. I want to implement multiple
instances of the current kernel global namespaces. All I want is
to be able to use the same name twice in user space and not have
a conflict.
if you want not virtualize anything, what is this discussion about? :)
can you provide an URL to your sources? you makes lot's of statements
about that your network virtualization solution is better/more complete,
so I'd like to see your solution in whole rather than only words.
Probably this will help.
I disagree with a struct container simply because I do not see what
value it happens to bring to the table. I have yet to see a problem
that it solves that I have not solved yet.
again, source would help to understand your solution and problem you
solved and not solved yet.
In addition I depart from vserver and other implementations in another
regard. It is my impression a lot of their work has been done so
those projects are maintainable outside of the kernel, which makes
sense as that is where those code bases live. But I don't think that
gives the best solution for an in kernel implementation, which is
what we are implementing.
These soltuions are in kernel implementations actually.
Kirill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
