[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Virtualization of UTS
>> This patch introduces utsname namespace in system, which allows to have
>> different utsnames on the host.
>> Introduces config option CONFIG_UTS_NS and uts_namespace structure for this.
> Ok. It looks like we need to resolve the sysctl issues before we merge
> either patch, into the stable kernel.
I disagree with you. Right now we can have sysctl and proc for init
namespaces only.
And when sysctl and proc are virtualized somehow, we can fix all these.
I simply don't expect /proc and sysctl to be done quickly. As we have
very different approaches. And there is no any consensus. Why not to
commit working/agreed parts then?

> We also need to discuss the system call interface, as without one
> the functionality is unusable :)
I also don't see why it can be separated. There is an API in namespaces,
and how it is mapped into syscalls is another question. At least it
doesn't prevent us from commiting virtualization itself, agree?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-24 20:38    [W:0.073 / U:1.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site