Replying to myself...
> > > Do you have any further response on this point?
> > > (There was none in your last message?)
> >
> > I personally don't think it's worth makign UNSHARE_NEWNS just because
> > it's a flag that acts differently from the other CLONE_xxx flags.
>
> See my comments above. (And in case it wasn't clear, I meant
> make a complete set of UNSHARE_* flags that mirror the
> corresponding CLONE_* flags.)
(By the way, I meant that the flag should preferably be called
UNSHARE_NS, not UNSHARE_NEWNS -- as noted in an earlier message
in this thread, CLONE_NEWNS was itself a bad name.)
I had another thought about why using names of the form
UNSHARE_* might be worthwhile. It just might be that in the
future, someone might want to add a flag that has nothing
to do with clone(). I mean some flag that somehow performs
some other modification of the behaviour or unshare(), or
perhaps unshares something that isn't shared/unshared by
clone(). (The first possibility seems more likely than
the second.) In that case, it would make litte sense to
name the flag(s) CLONE_xxx.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
maintainer of Linux man pages Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7
Want to help with man page maintenance?
Grab the latest tarball at
ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/linux-local/manpages/,
read the HOWTOHELP file and grep the source
files for 'FIXME'.
-
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]
