Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030234AbVJEQlO (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:41:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030230AbVJEQlN (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:41:13 -0400 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.203]:13985 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030234AbVJEQlM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:41:12 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EJPYWE5sbqOjqmX61fPWOWfq6fVoUbfcO6T7UiFC2aodvneJvMbWhpnQJ9GQ+B7hhZtnALbBI141hHgZkf5aK9+fgv2uvtADuerwJ+B2j7cqYnAw1PMoQsBr+jBTCBBft7cK+8Bt4ytJ0pBQFAiy2Vn37NnJQaEgVOvHLKL1PFI= Message-ID: <3e1162e60510050941l55485cbdgf6135e314a015d8f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:41:10 -0700 From: David Leimbach Reply-To: David Leimbach To: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de> Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel? Cc: Nix , Marc Perkel , Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <4TiWy-4HQ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <4U0XH-3Gp-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <87k6gsjalu.fsf@amaterasu.srvr.nix> <3e1162e60510050755l590a696bx655eb0b7ac05aab6@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1932 Lines: 53 ss, is gone, so is the file. > > > Back on topic... > > > > The problem with private namespaces on Linux is that they really > > aren't so much. mount will update /etc/mtab for all to see and even > > Userspace problem.-) Sure is, which is why I think it's easier to fork a BSD to make it do what someone wants than to roll my own linux distribution :-). Perhaps that's a problem of perception and not a really good measurement of the amount of energy involved in either alternative. Sometimes it sure seems easier to keep the userspace stuff with the kernel. > > I think private namespaces could actually be made more-so but the rest > > of the system has to cooperate and I doubt that I have the energy to > > do the evangelism and requisite proofs of concept for Linux. It's far > > easier for me to just use Plan 9 and Inferno instead of trying to > > assimilate Linux, even though I think I'd prefer Linux if it were more > > like the former two. > > The plan is: > > 1) make namespaces joinable > 2) ??? > 3) profit > > No, that's wrong. The plan is (should be?): > > 1) make namespaces joinable in a sane way > 2) wait for the shared subtree patch > 3) make pam join the per-user-namespace > 4) make pam automount tmpfs on the private /tmp I'm not sure what you mean by a joinable namespace. I also am not sure I want them :-). I think of namespaces as being fundamental to the process model and that they are inherited from the parent and new ones are created in a sort of COW fashion [or at least have similar behavior]. You might want a session namespace instead of a joinable per-process namespace but I think that might be a slightly different point of view. Dave - 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/