yes, acceptable.
once, again, believe me, this is very required feature for
troubleshouting and management (as Eric likes to take about
maintanance :) )
IMHO there are certain things which _are_ requiredthese "nice to have" features often make one solution more usable than another.
and others which are nice to have but not strictly
required, just think "ptrace across pid spaces"
if IPC objects are shared between them, then they can only be migrated together.well, not the child pspace, but the parent, no?This is to support using pidspaces for vservers, and creating
migrateable sub-pidspaces in each vserver.
this doesn't help to create migratable sub-pidspaces.
for example, will you share IPCs in your pid parent and child pspaces?
if yes, then it won't be migratable;
nice! do you think I'm against building blocks?if no, then you need to create fully isolated spaces to the end andbecause we are not trying to implement a VPS only
again you end up with a question, why nested pspaces are required at
all?
solution for mainline, we are trying to provide
building blocks for many different uses, including
the VPS approach ...