Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 11:38:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 11:38:16 -0500 Received: from 5-106.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.163.106]:57990 "EHLO 5-106.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 11:38:15 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 14:45:12 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Patrick Finnegan cc: Andi Kleen , Jeff Dike , Subject: Re: uml-patch-2.5.49-1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1019 Lines: 25 On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Patrick Finnegan wrote: > That's just one example... the idea is that you want maximal separation > between the guest OS's apps and the host OS. Sort of like "VM" on IBM's > series of mainframe architecures. [snip] That's a nice idea, but in practice you also want efficient execution of processes in the virtual machines and a virtual host implementation that's flexible and easy to maintain. As usual, you can't have everything so you'll have to make choices here and there. The end result will be a useful compromise between all the different ideas... Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://guru.conectiva.com/ Current spamtrap: october@surriel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/