On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Scott Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I mentioned, I would begin the article with something similar to the > beginning of the custom kernel article, with dire warnings. However, if > you and/or the other powers that be feel it is almost advocating > something that has risks, I certainly understand that.
Well, if there is a lot of interest in having container-type of virtualization. It might be interesting to see which of the various alternatives (linux-vserver or openvz) looks best, and see if we can provide it through e.g. the plus repository. Of course, this would require a volunteer who is willing to maintain such a set of patches against the kernel. But if someone is willing to do this, it can profit from CentOS quality assurance, and guarantee good compatibility with CentOS. Take care, Daniel _______________________________________________ CentOS-docs mailing list CentOS-docs@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
