Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs | Date | Wed, 07 Jan 2004 09:55:39 -0800 |
| |
Mike Waychison wrote:
> This is clearly not 'all of userspace'. Autofs is an exception. As is > /etc/mtab. The way I see it, automounting is a 'mount facility', as are > namespaces. The two should be made to work together. Yes, mount(8) > should probably be fixed one way or another as well due to /etc/mtab > breakage. Why? Because it too is a mount facility. > > There are a couple problems inherent with namespaces. Most of these are > mount facilities that are broken such as mentioned above. They *should* > be fixed to work nicely.
For that one needs to know how the namespaces are used, not just how they are implemented. There was a long discussion on this on #kernel yesterday, by the way.
> Other parts of userspace get confused with namespaces, eg: cron and atd. > These programs clearly need infrastructure added that somehow allows > for arbitrary namespace joining/saving. If you have suggestions for how > we can solve this issue, please do let me know. I'm stumped :\ I'd be > more than happy to discuss this with you.
Do they? In order for that to be a "clearly", I believe one needs to understand how namespaces are used in practice. It may not be desirable or even possible; this starts getting into a policy decision.
> One not-so-far fetched approach would be to associate cron/at jobs with > automount configurations so that a namespace can be re-constructed at > runtime.
I am not entirely sure what you mean with this, but it sounds incredibly dangerous to me.
-hpa
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |