--On Monday, October 04, 2004 09:02:32 -0700 Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin, quoting Andrew: >> >> appropriately modified CKRM, and a suitable controller. >> >> So not CKRM as-is ... > > Yes - by now we all agree that CKRM as it is doesn't provide some things > that cpusets provides (though of course CKRM provides much more that > cpusets doesn't.) > > Andrew would ask, if I am channeling him correctly, how about CKRM as it > could be? What would it take to modify CKRM so that it could subsume > (embrace and replace) cpusets, meeting all the requirements that in the > end we agreed were essential for cpusets to meet, rendering cpusets > redundant and no longer needed? Well, or just merge the two somehow into one cohesive system, I'd think. One doesn't need to completely subsume the other ;-) M. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
