Hi Tim, I forgot to say that I like OpenVZ as it is. I really do.
My proposal has the objective to spread OpenVZ use. Think in the module issue as a candidate for long range goal. I can see "advantages" for OpenVZ. Does not mean that it is not good. Peter On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Tim Nelson <[email protected]> wrote: > ----- "Scott Dowdle" <[email protected]> wrote: >> Peter, >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > Why OpenVZ is not implemented as loadable Kernel modules? Is it >> > possible? >> > >> > Would not this make OpenVZ ultra flexible and may make it widely >> > available to new users? >> >> Some of OpenVZ is already implimented as modules. Just do an lsmod | >> grep vz on your OpenVZ host node. >> >> Speaking as a non-developer / non-programmer who is not familiar with >> the OpenVZ design / implementation... I believe that OpenVZ requires a >> lot of changes to many of the underlying subsystems... changes that >> you can't do via a module. The reason that KVM can get away with >> being a module (I believe) is that changes have been made in the >> mainline to accommodate KVM. The only way OpenVZ could do what it >> needs to do to become a standalone module like KVM is if all of the >> needed changes to the underlying subsystems were made to mainline... >> which isn't going to happen. >> > > OK, I'll bite. What makes OpenVZ so horrific that it will never be put into > mainline? > > --Tim > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users > -- Peter Senna Tschudin [email protected] gpg id: 48274C36 _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
