From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC][2.6 patch] Allow creation of new namespaces during mount system call Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 10:05:04 +0100 Message-ID: <20050511090504.GD24841@infradead.org> References: <20050420094558.GB10167@mail.shareable.org> <20050420102711.GR13052@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050420120340.GC10167@mail.shareable.org> <20050420123945.GS13052@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <1114015886.4920.120.camel@localhost> <20050420170921.GT13052@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <1114021996.4920.168.camel@localhost> <20050420220429.GB21150@mail.shareable.org> <20050430085656.GA23513@infradead.org> <20050430150111.GB4362@mail.shareable.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Ram , Al Viro , Eric Van Hensbergen , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:11179 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261942AbVEKJF2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2005 05:05:28 -0400 To: Jamie Lokier Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050430150111.GB4362@mail.shareable.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 04:01:11PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > > The question is whether private user-mounts should, by default, behave > > > more like environment variables or more like files. > > > > I think you're a little confused. > > No, I'm not. > > Here's a perhaps more illustrative example. My bookmarks in > ~/.ncftp/bookmarks are not per session, they're per user. They're first a global resource - the file exist everywhere. The only think that makes it per-user is how ncftp interprets them. By looking into looking into /tmp/$SID/ncftp/bookmarks it could be made per-session. (although that'd be totally useless of course) > Rephrasing the question: The question is whether private user-mounts > should, by default, behave more like environment variables or more > like bookmarks. > > It's a user interface question, not a technical question. Understand? It's very much a technical/philosophical question. The user interface isn't a thing that just happens out of thin air, there must be an implementation behind it. And in UNIX our traditional model for this kinds of things is to be per- session, initialized by per-user values. At this point we have an user interface, and it's a well-understood one that works very well for similar things.