lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/9] namespaces: Introduction
Date
On Thu, 18 May 2006 10:34:30 -0700, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
wrote:

>I see two ways of justifying a mainline merge of things such as this

>a) We make an up-front decision that Linux _will_ have OS-virtualisation
> capability in the future

After using OpenVZ for a short time, I wonder how I ever managed
without it. For application development and testing, having a little
sandbox with only a few PIDs running makes it easier to debug things.


> and just start putting in place the pieces for that, even if some
> of them are not immediately useful. I suspect that'd be acceptable,
> although I worry that we'd get partway through and some issues would
> come up which are irreconcilable amongst the various groups.

From a user's POV, I want it ASAP. As for conflicts, why not cross
that bridge when you come to it?


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-18 21:27    [W:0.164 / U:3.976 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site