Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>>Can we please suggest a syscall interface?
>>>
>>>
>
>Eric,
>
>Did you have any ideas for how you'd want to interface to look? Are
>you fine with the vserver approach?
>
>
Eric has said that his understanding was that syscall switches (ie,
syscalls with subcommands) were bad form.
I understand the concern, but I think while it's still in prototype
stages, that it's a sensible and pragmatic approach. Once individual
subcommands are "finalised" then they can be split out into a seperate
syscall, and any level of backwards compatibility can be maintained by
whoever needs it.
>>What was wrong with the method of the one I posted / extracted from the
>>Linux-VServer project? I mean, apart from the baggage which I intend to
>>remove for the next posting.
>>
>>
>
>Are you working on a next posting?
>
>
I've been a bit backlogged of late. I'll put some time towards it this
week, of course patches are always welcome and will find a home on utsl :).
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/
[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]
