From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] Containerize syslog Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:16:06 -0600 Message-ID: <87sj7wwg21.fsf@xmission.com> References: <50A9EAD8.9090501@gmail.com> <20121119143702.GB4620@mail.hallyn.com> <50ACA05F.7080005@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" , serge.hallyn@canonical.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Rui Xiang Return-path: Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:59697 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753719Ab2KZPQt (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:16:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: <50ACA05F.7080005@gmail.com> (Rui Xiang's message of "Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:35:27 +0800") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Rui Xiang writes: > On 2012-11-19 22:37, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >> I understand that user namespaces aren't 100% usable yet, but looking >> long term, is there a reason to have the syslog namespace separate >> from user namespace? > > Actually we don't have strong preference. We'll think more about it. Hope we can make > consensus with Eric. I hope I am not hard to work with. My primary concern is reasonable looking code and good long term maintainable semantics. I really don't care in which namespace where we file the kernel log statements. I care much more about which kernel log print statements we want filed differently. Eric