Quoting Herbert Poetzl ([email protected]): > > 3) How do we refer to namespaces and containers when we are not members? > > - Do we refer to them indirectly by processes or other objects that > > we can see and are members? > > the process will be an unique identifier to the > namespace, but it might not be easy to use it, so > IMHO it might at least make sense to ... Especially from userspace. If I want to start a checkpoint on a container, but I have to use the process to identify the container/namespace, well I can't uniquely specify the process by pid anymore... -serge - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- From: Hubertus Franke <[email protected]>
- Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- References:
- [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: Kirill Korotaev <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: Sam Vilain <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: Hubertus Franke <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- From: Hubertus Franke <[email protected]>
- The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- From: Herbert Poetzl <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 1/4] Virtualization/containers: introduction
- Prev by Date: Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- Next by Date: Re: FYI: RAID5 unusably unstable through 2.6.14
- Previous by thread: Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- Next by thread: Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.
- Index(es):
 |