Re: [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

[Srivatsa Vaddagiri]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:43:46AM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> I still think the complaint was about terminology, not implementation.

I don't think that is what http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/12/426 conveyed!

> They just didn't want you calling them containers.

Yes that too.

> > Anyway, summarizing on "why nsproxy", the main point (I think) is about
> > using existing abstraction in the kernel.

s/abstraction/"implementation detail" then :)

> But nsproxy is not an abstraction, it's an implementation
> detail/optimization.  


-- 
Regards,
vatsa
-
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/