> > Reading through the thread I assume the requirement is: > > > > 1) A User being able to create his own VFS-mount environment > > 2) being able to use the same VFS-mount environment from > > multiple login sessions. > > 3) Being able to switch some processes to some other > > VFS-mount environment. > > Excuse me, but could somebody give coherent rationale for such requirements? > _Especially_ for joining existing group by completely unrelated process - > something we don't do for any other component of process.
The user expects to have the see the same files in all sessions, whether those be local logins, remote logins, ftp/scp/etc sessions. If I'm remotely logged into server X from Y, and want to use scp to copy some file from X to Y or vica versa, I will want my private mounts to be visible from the scp. A single global namespace makes perfect sense here. Why do people want private namespaces? The usual reason given is that the global namespace should not be "polluted" with private mounts. Is that a good reason? I'm not sure. Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
