On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 06:45 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > In particular, the following scenario should be perfectly valid: > > Machine 1 Machine 2 > Xen VM1.1 Xen VM2.1 > vserv 1.1.1 vserv2.1.1 > cont1.1.1.1 cont2.1.1.1 Precisely ... Xen and vserver are complementary, not contradictory. Sam. - 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/
- References:
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: Sam Vilain <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: Sam Vilain <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [Devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: Kirill Korotaev <[email protected]>
- Re: [Devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] Virtualization of IPC
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC] Virtualization steps
- Previous by thread: Re: [Devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- Next by thread: Re: [Devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] Some basic vserver infrastructure
- Index(es):
 |