Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
It is good to see these patches are starting to come together.
Be patient a good review is going to take me a little bit.
A couple of immediate things I see that would be nice to address before
we aim at merging these patches upstream.
-
On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 06:57:13PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Herbert Poetzl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
IMHO not the best idea, mainly because both OpenVZ
and Linux-VServer will end up either duplicating
the pid code or using the incomplete (broken) version
which probably gives the
Serge E. Hallyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If we're going to put the resource stuff in, then I agree let's rename.
If we stick to this being a namespace proxy (my preference) then calling
it nsproxy is more accurate.
Sounds like a reasonable criteria.
(I can't keep up with that thread so
Herbert Poetzl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
IMHO not the best idea, mainly because both OpenVZ
and Linux-VServer will end up either duplicating
the pid code or using the incomplete (broken) version
which probably gives the pid space a bad start ...
I'd prefer to focus on fixing up the
