Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> > Alexander Viro wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Well, it is necessary that the bindings are listed somewhere.
> > > > Personally, I would prefer a /proc/vfsbind or something like that, and
> > > > be done with it.
> > >
> > > Erm? They are already in /proc/mounts, for one thing...
> >
> > /proc/mounts is a bad location, I think; for one thing, the number of
> > actual mount at least used to be :) fairly limited. Also, /proc/mounts
> > is impossible to parse cleanly -- if you have mount points with spaces
> > or
> > \n or some such you can really wreck havoc (we need a standard escaping
> > algorithm for /proc, or insert null terminators.)
>
> Plan 9 folks did (in v3) something interesting: contents of /proc/<pid>/ns
> is essentially a script that would reproduce your namespace starting from
> the empty one. I'm not sure that it's such a great idea, but it may be
> worth thinking about...
>
I don't think it is, although having it contain what you need it to know
is probably good. Personally, though, I don't think that per-process
namespaces is a particularly good idea (we had a long discussion about
that at OLS.)
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:28 EST