> I'm not seeing how this is any different than the > basic proposal outline > that James presented to start this discussion. It
Ok let me explain the difference: It different in terms of we are not introducing softwaer domanins as a new concept of software management but allowing user do his local installation without obligation from us to maintain it. All mainanance for user-installed packages are his own problem, our commitment is to maintain system consistency. And we just substituting current tar-balling practice with something bit better, supporting users playing with software - which they already doing. Software domain sounds much more complicated then just - user installing some new software for evaluation. For software domain etc if we saying that we support them we will have to provide good isolation levev which on my opinion same as we have already for zones and was introduced in zones partially for the reason to install and use different software isolated. So I think that scale of this are very different. As well as inplementation effort. > doesn't answer any of > my concerns about presenting a more comprehensive > view of the system > software, though. The point is that we separate two different things - user level nstallation and software domain, and target first one with minor changes to existing solutions and target another one using alredy existing solutions zones. So we are not presenting any more comprehensive view of the system software, avoiding introduction of new comlexity dimentions. Software domain is just a use case or one of zone application and will be nice to hear from zone team suggestions on how we can use zones for this, because as I remember it was one of the reason for zones to exist. vassun This message posted from opensolaris.org
