Re: The issues for agreeing on a virtualization/namespaces implementation.

[Hubertus Franke]

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Hubertus Franke (frankeh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
>
> > IMHO, there is only a need to refer to a namespace from the global context.
> > Since one will be moving into a new container, but getting out of one
> > could be prohibitive (e.g. after migration)
> > It does not make sense therefore to know the name of a namespace in
> > a different container.
>
>
> Not sure I agree.  What if we are using a private namespace for a
> vserver, and then we want to create a private namespace in there for a
> mobile application.  Since we're talking about nested namespaces, this
> should be possible.
>
> Now I believe Eric's code so far would make it so that you can only
> refer to a namespace from it's *creating* context.  Still restrictive,
> but seems acceptable.

That's what I meant .. as usually used the wrong word..
s/global context/spawing context/g .. because that's the only
place where you have a pid to refer to the newly created container !

> (right?)

Yes, seriii  .. ahmm serue
> -serge


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/