On 3/7/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > - when you do sys_unshare() or a clone that creates new namespaces, > > then the task (or its child) will get a new nsproxy that has the rcfs > > subsystem state associated with the old nsproxy, and one or more > > namespace pointers cloned to point to new namespaces. So this means > > that the nsproxy for the task is no longer the nsproxy associated with > > any directory in rcfs. (So the task will disappear from any "tasks" > > file in rcfs?) > > it "should" disappear yes, although I haven't carefully studied the > unshare requirements yet.
That seems bad. With the current way you're doing it, if I mount hierarchies A and B on /mnt/A and /mnt/B, then initially all tasks are in /mnt/A/tasks and /mnt/B/tasks. If I then create /mnt/A/foo and move a process into it, that process disappears from /mnt/B/tasks, since its nsproxy no longer matches the nsproxy of B's root container. Or am I missing something? Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
