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:3.796 / U:0.048 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site